Chapter VII: Part 7

5. Now, what is the matter of dispute concerning this? Not, whether there be a witness or testimony of the Spirit? Not, whether the Spirit does testify with our spirit, that we are the children of God? None can deny this, without flatly contradicting the scripture, and charging a lie upon the God of truth. Therefore that there is a testimony of the Spirit, is acknowledged by all parties.

6. Neither is it questioned, whether there is an _indirect_ witness or testimony, that we are the children of God. This is nearly, if not exactly the same with _the testimony of a good conscience towards God_; and is the result of reason, or reflection on what we feel in our own souls. Strictly speaking, it is a conclusion drawn partly from the word of God, and partly from our own experience. The word of God says, every one who has the fruit of the Spirit is a child of God. Experience, or inward consciousness tells me, that I have the fruit of the Spirit. And hence I rationally conclude, therefore I am a child of God. This is likewise allowed on all hands, and so is no matter of controversy.

7. Nor do we assert, that there can be any real testimony of the Spirit, without the fruit of the Spirit. We assert, on the contrary, that the fruit of the Spirit immediately springs from this testimony: not always indeed in the same degree, even when the testimony is first given. And much less afterwards; neither joy nor peace are always at one stay. No, nor love: as neither is the testimony itself always equally strong and clear.

8. But the point in question is, whether there be any _direct testimony_ of the Spirit at all? Whether there be any other testimony of the Spirit, than that which arises from a consciousness of the fruit?

III. 1. I believe there is, because that is the plain, natural meaning of the text, _the Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God_. It is manifest, here are two witnesses mentioned, who together testify the same thing, the Spirit of God, and our own spirit. The late Bishop of _London_ in his sermon on this text, seems astonished that any one can doubt of this, which appears upon the very face of the words. Now, “_The testimony of our own spirit_, says the Bishop is one, which is the consciousness of our own sincerity:” or, to express the same thing a little more clearly, the consciousness of the fruit of the Spirit. When our spirit is conscious of this, of love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, it easily infers from these premises, that we are the children of God.

2. It is true, that great man supposes the other witness to be “The consciousness of our own good works.” This, he affirms, is _the testimony of God’s Spirit_. But this is included in the testimony of our own spirit: Yea, and in sincerity, even according to the common sense of the word. So the Apostle. _Our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity we have had our conversation in the world_: where it is plain, sincerity refers to our words and actions, at least as much as to our inward dispositions. So that this is not another witness, but the very same that he mentioned before: the consciousness of our good works being only one branch of the consciousness of our sincerity. Consequently here is only one witness still. If therefore the text speaks of two witnesses, one of these is not the consciousness of our good works, neither of our sincerity: all this being manifestly contained in _the testimony of our spirit_.

3. What then is the other witness? This might easily be learned, if the text itself were not sufficiently clear, from the verse immediately preceding. _Ye have received, not the Spirit of bondage_, but _the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father_. It follows, _The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God_.

4. This is farther explained by the parallel text, _Gal._ iv. 6. _Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying Abba, Father._ Is not this something _immediate_ and _direct_, not the result of reflection or argumentation? Does not this Spirit cry _Abba, Father, in our hearts_, the moment it is given? Antecedently to any reflection upon our sincerity, yea, to any reasoning whatsoever? And is not this the plain, natural sense of the words, which strikes any one, as soon as he hears them? All these texts then, in their most obvious meaning, describe a direct testimony of the Spirit.

5. That _the testimony of the Spirit of God_, must in the very nature of things, be antecedent to _the testimony of our own spirit_, may appear from this single consideration. We must be holy in heart and life, before we can be conscious that we are so. But we must love God before we can be holy at all, this being the root of all holiness. Now we cannot love God, ’till we know he loves us: _we love him, because he first loved us_. And we cannot know his love to us, ’till his Spirit witnesses it to our spirit. ’Till then we cannot believe it: we cannot say, _the life which I now live, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me_.

Then, only then we feel
Our interest in his blood,
And cry with joy unspeakable,
Thou art my Lord, my God.

Since therefore the testimony of his Spirit must precede the love of God and all holiness, of consequence it must precede our consciousness thereof.

6. And here properly comes in, to confirm this scriptural doctrine, the experience of the children of God: the experience not of two or three, not of a few, but of a great multitude which no man can number. It has been confirmed, both in this and in all ages by _a cloud of_ living and dying _witnesses_. It is confirmed by _your_ experience and _mine_. The Spirit itself bore witness to my spirit, that I was a child of God, gave me an _evidence_ hereof, and I immediately cried, _Abba, Father_! And this I did, (and so did you) before I reflected on, or was conscious of any fruit of the Spirit. It was from this testimony received, that love, joy, peace, and the whole fruit of the Spirit flowed. First I heard,

Thy sins are forgiven! Accepted thou art!
I listened, and heaven Sprung up in my heart.

7. But this is confirmed, not only by the experience of the children of God, thousands of whom can declare, that they never did know themselves to be in the favour of God, ’till it was directly witnessed to them by his Spirit: but by all those who are convinced of sin, who feel the wrath of God abiding on them. These cannot be satisfied with any thing less than a direct testimony from his Spirit, that he is _merciful to their unrighteousness, and remembers their sins and iniquities no more_. Tell any of these, “You are to know you are a child, by reflecting on what he has wrought in you, on your love, joy and peace:” and will he not immediately reply, by all this I know, I am a child of the devil. I have no more love to God than the devil has: my carnal mind is enmity against God. I have no joy in the Holy Ghost: my soul is sorrowful even unto death. I have no peace: my heart is a troubled sea: I am all storm and tempest. And which way can these souls possibly be comforted, but by a divine testimony, (not that they are good, or sincere, or conformable to the scripture in heart and life, but) that God _justifieth the ungodly_: him that ’till the moment he is justified, is all ungodly, void of all true holiness? _Him that worketh not_, that worketh nothing that is truly good, ’till he is conscious that he is accepted, _not for_ any _works of righteousness which he hath done_, but by the mere, free mercy of God? Wholly and solely for what the Son of God hath done and suffered for him? And can it be any otherwise, if _a man is justified by faith, without the works of the law_? If so, what inward or outward goodness can he be conscious of, antecedent to his justification? Nay, is not the _having nothing to pay_, that is, the being conscious that _there dwelleth in us no good thing_, neither inward nor outward goodness, essentially, indispensably necessary, before we can be _justified freely, thro’ the redemption that is in Jesus Christ_? Was ever any man justified since his coming into the world, or can any man ever be justified, ’till he is brought to that point,

“I give up every plea, beside
Lord, I am damned――But thou hast died!”

8. Every one therefore who denies the existence of such a testimony, does in effect deny justification by faith. It follows, that either he never experienced this, either he never was justified, or that he has forgotten, (as St. _Peter_ speaks,) τοῦ καθαρισμοῦ τῶν πάλαι ἁμαρτιῶν, _the purification from his former sins_, the experience he then had himself, the manner wherein God wrought in his own soul, when his former sins were blotted out.

9. And the experience even of the children of the world, here confirms that of the children of God. Many of these have a desire to please God: some of them take much pains to please him. But do they not, one and all, count it the highest absurdity, for any to talk of “_knowing_ his sins are forgiven?” Which of _them_ even pretends to any such thing? And yet many of them are conscious of their own sincerity. Many of them undoubtedly have, in a degree, the testimony of their own spirit, a consciousness of their own uprightness. But this brings them no consciousness, that they are forgiven, no knowledge that they are the children of God. Yea, the more sincere they are, the more uneasy they generally are, for want of knowing it: plainly shewing that this cannot be known, in a satisfactory manner, by the bare testimony of our own spirit, without God’s directly testifying, that we are his children.

IV. But abundance of objections have been made to this; the chief of which it may be well to consider.

1. It is objected first, “Experience is not sufficient, to prove a doctrine which is not founded on scripture.” This is undoubtedly true; and it is an important truth; but it does not affect the present question. For it has been shewn, that this doctrine is founded on scripture. Therefore experience is properly alledged to confirm it.

2. “But madmen, French prophets and enthusiasts of every kind have imagined they experienced this witness.” They have so. And perhaps not a few of them did, although they did not retain it long. But if they did not, this is no proof at all, that others have not experienced it: as a madman’s _imagining_ himself a king, does not prove, that there are no _real_ kings.

“Nay many who pleaded strongly for this, have utterly decried the bible.” Perhaps so; but this was no necessary consequence: thousands plead for it, who have the highest esteem for the bible.

“Yea, but many have fatally deceived themselves hereby, and got above all conviction.”

And yet a scriptural doctrine is no worse, tho’ men abuse it to their own destruction.

3. “But I lay it down as an undoubted truth, the fruit of the Spirit is the witness of the Spirit.” Not undoubted; thousands doubt of, yea flatly deny it: but to let that pass. “If this witness be sufficient, there is no need of any other. But it is sufficient, unless in one of these cases, 1. The _total absence_ of the fruit of the Spirit.” And this is the case, when the direct witness is first given: 2. “The _not perceiving it_. But to contend for it in this case, is to contend for being in the favour of God, and not knowing it.” True, not knowing it at that time any otherwise, than by the testimony which is given for that end. And this we do contend for: we contend, that the direct witness may shine clear, even while the indirect one is under a cloud.

4. It is objected, secondly, “The design of the witness contended for, is to prove that the profession we make is genuine. But it does not prove this.” I answer, the proving this, is not the design of it. It is antecedent to our making any profession at all, but that of being lost, undone, guilty, helpless sinners. It is designed to assure those to whom it is given, that they are the children of God; that they are _justified freely by his grace, thro’ the redemption that is in Jesus Christ_. And this does not suppose, that their preceeding thoughts, words and actions, are conformable to the rule of scripture. It supposes quite the reverse, namely, That they are sinners all over, sinners both in heart and life. Were it otherwise, God would _justify the godly_; and _their own works_ would be _counted to them for righteousness_. And I cannot but fear that a supposition of our being justified by works, is at the root of all their objections. For who ever cordially believes, that God _imputes_ to all that are justified, _righteousness without works_, will find no difficulty in allowing the witness of his Spirit, preceding the fruit of it.

5. It is objected, thirdly, “One evangelist says, _your heavenly Father will give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him_. The other evangelist calls the same thing _good gifts_; abundantly demonstrating, that the Spirit’s way of bearing witness, is by giving good gifts.” Nay, here is nothing at all about _bearing witness_, either in one text, or the other. Therefore ’till this demonstration is better demonstrated, I let it stand as it is.

6. It is objected, fourthly, “The scripture says, _the tree is known by its fruits. Prove all things. Try the spirits. Examine yourselves._” Most true: therefore let every man who believes he _hath the witness in himself, try_ whether it be of God; if the fruit follow, it is, otherwise it is not. For certainly _the tree is known by its fruit_: Hereby we _prove_, if it be of God. “But the direct witness is never referred to in the book of God.” Not as standing alone, not as a single witness, but as connected with the other: As giving a _joint testimony_, testifying _with our spirit_, that we are children of God. And who is able to prove, that it is not _thus_ referred to, in this very scripture, _Examine yourselves whether ye be in the faith: prove your ownselves. Know ye not yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?_ It is by no means clear, that they did not know this, by a _direct_ as well as a _remote_ witness. How is it proved, that they did not know it, first, by an inward consciousness, and then by love, joy and peace?

7. “But the testimony arising from the internal and external change, is constantly referred to in the bible.” It is so. And we constantly refer thereto, to confirm the testimony of the Spirit.

“Nay, all the marks _you_ have given, whereby to distinguish the operations of God’s Spirit from delusion, refer to the change wrought in us and upon us.” This likewise is undoubtedly true.

8. It is objected, fifthly, that “The direct witness of the Spirit, does not secure us from the greatest delusion. And is that a witness fit to be trusted, whose testimony cannot be depended on? That is forced to fly to something else, to prove what it asserts?” I answer. To secure us from all delusion, God gives us two witnesses that we are his children. And this they testify conjointly. Therefore _what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder_. And while they are joined, we cannot be deluded: their testimony can be depended on. They are fit to be trusted in the highest degree, and need nothing else to prove what they assert.

“Nay, the direct witness only asserts, but does not prove any thing.” By two witnesses shall every word be established. And when the Spirit _witnesses with our Spirit_, as God designs it to do, then it fully proves that we are children of God.

9. It is objected, sixthly, “You own the change wrought is a sufficient testimony, unless in the case of severe trials, such as that of our Saviour upon the cross. But none of us can be tried in that manner.” But you or I may be tried in such a manner, and so may any other child of God, that it will be impossible for us to keep our filial confidence in God, without the direct witness of his Spirit.

10. It is objected, lastly, “The greatest contenders for it, are some of the proudest and most uncharitable of men.” Perhaps some of the _hottest_ contenders for it, are both proud and uncharitable. But many of the _firmest_ contenders for it, are eminently meek and lowly in heart: and indeed in all other respects also,

True followers of their lamb-like Lord.

The preceding objections are the most considerable that I have heard, and I believe contain the strength of the cause. Yet I apprehend whoever calmly and impartially considers those objections and the answers together, will easily see, that they do not destroy, no, nor weaken the evidence of that great truth, that the Spirit of God does _directly_, as well as _indirectly_ testify, that we are children of God.

V. 1. The sum of all is this. The testimony of the Spirit is an inward impression on the souls of believers, whereby the Spirit of God directly testifies to their spirit, that they are children of God. And it is not questioned, whether there is a testimony of the Spirit? But whether there is any _direct testimony_? Whether there is any other than that which arises from a consciousness of the fruit of the Spirit? We believe there is: because this is the plain natural meaning of the text, illustrated both by the preceding words, and by the parallel passage in the epistle to the _Galatians_: because, in the nature of the thing, the testimony must precede the fruit which springs from it, and because this plain meaning of the word of God is confirmed by the experience of innumerable children of God: yea, and by the experience of all who are convinced of sin, who can never rest, ’till they have a direct witness: and even of the children of the world, who not having the witness in themselves, one and all declare, none can _know_ his sins forgiven.

2. And whereas it is objected, that experience is not sufficient to prove a doctrine unsupported by scripture: that madmen and enthusiasts of every kind, have imagined such a witness: that the design of that witness is to prove our profession genuine, which design it does not answer: that the scripture says, _The tree is known by its fruit; examine yourselves; prove your ownselves_; and mean time the direct witness is never referred to in all the book of God: that it does not secure us from the greatest delusions: and, lastly, that the change wrought in us is a sufficient testimony, unless in such trials as Christ alone suffered. We answer, 1. Experience is sufficient to _confirm_ a doctrine, which is grounded on scripture: 2. Tho’ many fancy they experience what they do not, this is no prejudice to real experience: 3. The design of that witness is, to assure us we are children of God. And this design it does answer. 4. The true witness of the Spirit is known by its fruit, love, peace, joy; not indeed preceding, but following it: 5. It cannot be proved, that the direct, as well as the indirect witness, is not referred to in that very text, _Know ye not your ownselves that Jesus Christ is in you_? 6. The Spirit of God _witnessing with our spirit_ does secure us from all delusion: and, lastly, we are all liable to trials, wherein the testimony of our own spirit is not sufficient; wherein nothing less than the direct testimony of God’s Spirit can assure us that we are his children.

3. Two inferences may be drawn from the whole. The first, let none ever presume to rest, in any supposed testimony of the Spirit, which is separate from the fruit of it. If the Spirit of God does really testify that we are children of God, the immediate consequence will be the fruit of the Spirit, even, _love_, _joy_, _peace_, _long-suffering_, _gentleness_, _goodness_, _fidelity_, _meekness_, _temperance_. And however this fruit may be clouded for a while, during the time of strong temptation, so that it does not appear to the tempted person, while _Satan_ is _sifting him as wheat_, yet the substantial part of it remains, even under the thickest cloud. It is true, joy in the Holy Ghost may be withdrawn, during the hour of trial. Yea, the soul may be _exceeding sorrowful_, while _the hour and power of darkness_ continue. But even this is generally restored with increase, till we rejoice _with joy unspeakable and full of glory_.

4. The second inference is, let none rest in any supposed fruit of the Spirit without the witness. There may be foretastes of joy, of peace, of love, and those not delusive, but really from God, long before we have the witness in ourselves, before the Spirit of God witnesses with our spirits, that we have _redemption in the blood of Jesus, even the forgiveness of sins_. Yea there may be a degree of long-suffering, of gentleness, of fidelity, meekness, temperance, (not a shadow thereof, but a real degree, by the preventing grace of God) before we are _accepted in the Beloved_, and consequently before we have a testimony of our acceptance. But it is by no means advisable to rest here; it is at the peril of our souls if we do. If we are wise we shall be continually crying to God, until his Spirit cry in our heart, _Abba, Father_! This is the privilege of all the children of God, and without this we can never be assured that we are his children. Without this we cannot retain a steddy peace, nor avoid perplexing doubts and fears. But when we have once received this _Spirit of adoption_, this _peace which passes all understanding_, and which expells all painful doubt and fear, will _keep our hearts and minds in Christ Jesus_. And when this has brought forth its genuine fruit, all inward and outward holiness, it is undoubtedly the will of him that calleth us, to give us always what he has once given. So that there is no need, that we should ever more be deprived, of either the testimony of God’s Spirit, or the testimony of our own, the consciousness of our walking in all righteousness and true holiness.

NEWRY, _April 4, 1767_.

SERMON XII.

THE WITNESS OF OUR OWN SPIRIT.

2 COR. i. 12.

_This is our rejoicing, the testimony of our conscience, that in
simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by
the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world._

1. SUCH is the voice of every true believer in Christ, so long as he abides in faith and love. _He that followeth me_, saith our Lord, _walketh not in darkness_: And while he hath the light, he rejoiceth therein. _As_ he _hath received the Lord Jesus Christ, so_ he _walketh in him_. And while he walketh in him, the exhortation of the apostle takes place in his soul day by day, _Rejoice in the Lord always, and again I say, rejoice_.

2. But that we may not build our house upon the sand, (lest when the rains descend, and the winds blow, and the floods arise and beat upon it, it fall, and great be the fall thereof) I intend, in the following discourse, to shew, what is the nature and ground of a Christian’s joy. We know, in general, It is that happy peace, that calm satisfaction of spirit, which arises from such a testimony of his conscience, as is here described by the apostle. But in order to understand this the more throughly, it will be requisite to weigh all his words: whence will easily appear, both what we are to understand by _conscience_, and what, by the _testimony_ thereof; and also, how he that hath this testimony rejoiceth evermore.

3. And, first, what are we to understand by _conscience_? What is the meaning of this word that is in every one’s mouth? One would imagine, it was an exceeding difficult thing, to discover this, when we consider, how large and numerous volumes have been from time to time wrote on this subject: and how all the treasures of ancient and modern learning have been ransack’d, in order to explain it. And yet it is to be fear’d, it has not received much light from all those elaborate enquiries. Rather, have not most of those writers puzzled the cause; _darkening counsel by words without knowledge_; perplexing a subject, plain in itself, and easy to be understood? For set aside but hard words, and every man of an honest heart will soon understand the thing.

4. God has made us thinking beings, capable of perceiving what is present, and of reflecting or looking back on what is past. In particular, we are capable of perceiving, whatsoever passes in our own hearts or lives; of knowing whatsoever we feel or do; and that either while it passes, or when it is past. This we mean when we say, man is a _conscious_ being: he hath a _consciousness_ or inward perception both of things present and past relating to himself, of his own tempers and outward behaviour. But what we usually term _conscience_, implies, somewhat more than this. It is not barely, the knowledge of our present, or the remembrance of our preceding life. To remember, to bear witness either of past or present things, is only one, and the least office of conscience. Its main business is to excuse or accuse, to approve ♦or disapprove, to acquit or condemn.

5. Some late writers indeed have given a new name to this, and have chose to stile it, a _moral sense_. But the old word seems preferable to the new, were it only on this account, that it is more common and familiar among men, and therefore easier to be understood. And to Christians it is undeniably preferable on another account also; namely, because it is scriptural; because it is the word which the wisdom of God hath chose to use in the inspired writings.

And according to the meaning wherein it is generally used there, particularly in the epistles of St. _Paul_, we may understand by conscience, a faculty or power, implanted by God in every soul that comes into the world, of perceiving what is right or wrong in his own heart or life, in his tempers, thoughts, words and actions.

6. But what is the _rule_ whereby men are to judge of right and wrong? Whereby their conscience is to be directed? The rule of Heathens, (as the apostle teaches elsewhere) is _the law written in their hearts. These_, saith he, _not having the_ (outward) _law, are a law unto themselves: who shew the work of the law_ (that which the outward law prescribes) _written in their heart_, by the finger of God; _their conscience also bearing witness_, whether they walk by this rule, or not; _and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing, or even excusing_, acquitting, defending them, (ἤ καὶ ἀπολογουμένων) _Rom._ ii. 14, 15. But the Christian rule of right and wrong is the word of God, the writings of the Old and New Testament: all that the prophets and _holy men of old_ wrote, _as they were moved by the Holy Ghost: all_ that _scripture_ which was _given by inspiration of God, and_ which _is_ indeed _profitable for doctrine_, or teaching the whole will of God; _for reproof_ of what is contrary thereto; _for correction_ of error, _and for instruction_ (or training us up) _in righteousness_, 2 Tim. iii. 16.

This is _a lantern unto_ a Christian’s _feet, and a light in all_ his _paths_. This alone he receives as his rule of right or wrong, of whatever is really good or evil. He esteems nothing good, but what is here enjoined, either directly or by plain consequence. He accounts nothing evil but what is here forbidden, either in terms, or by undeniable inference. Whatever the scripture neither forbids nor enjoins, (either directly, or by plain consequence) he believes to be of an indifferent nature, to be in itself neither good nor evil: this being the whole and sole outward rule, whereby his conscience is to be directed in all things.

7. And if it be directed thereby in fact, then hath he _the answer of a good conscience toward God_. A _good conscience_ is what is elsewhere termed by the apostle, a _conscience void of offence_. So, what he at one time expresses thus, _I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day_, Acts xxiii. 1. he denotes at another, by that expression, _Herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God and toward man_, ch. xxiv. 16. Now in order to this, there is absolutely required, first, a right understanding of the word of God, of his _holy and acceptable and perfect will_ concerning us, as it is revealed therein. For it is impossible we should walk by a rule, if we do not know what it means. There is, secondly, required (which how few have attained?) a true knowledge of ourselves: a knowledge both of our hearts and lives, of our inward tempers and outward conversation: seeing, if we know them not, it is not possible that we should compare them with our rule. There is required, thirdly, an agreement of our hearts and lives, of our tempers and conversation, of our thoughts and words and works with that rule, with the written word of God. For without this, if we have any conscience at all, it can be only an evil conscience. There is, fourthly, required, an inward perception, of this agreement with our rule. And this habitual perception, this inward consciousness itself, is properly a _good conscience_; or (in the other phrase of the apostle) _a conscience void of offence, toward God and toward man_.

8. But whoever desires to have a conscience thus void of offence, let him see that he lay the right foundation. Let him remember, _other foundation_ of this _can no man lay, than that which is laid, even Jesus Christ_. And let him also be mindful, that no man buildeth on him but by a living faith; that no man is a partaker of Christ, until he can clearly testify, _The life which I now live, I live by faith in the Son of God_; in him who is now _revealed_ in my heart; who _loved me, and gave himself for me_. Faith alone is that evidence, that conviction, that demonstration of things invisible, whereby the eyes of our understanding being opened, and divine light poured in upon them, we _see the wondrous things of_ God’s _law_, the excellency and purity of it; the height and depth and length and breadth thereof, and of every commandment contained therein. It is by faith, that beholding _the light of the glory of God, in the face of Jesus Christ_, we perceive, as in a glass, all that is in ourselves, yea, the inmost motions of our souls. And by this alone can that blessed love of God be _shed abroad in our hearts_, which enables us so to love one another as Christ loved us. By this, is that gracious promise fulfilled, unto all the _Israel_ of God, _I will put my laws into their minds, and write_ (or engrave) _them in their hearts_, Heb. viii. 10. Hereby producing in their souls, an entire agreement with his holy and perfect law, and _bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ_.

And as an evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit, so a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit. As the heart therefore of a believer, so likewise his life is thoroughly conformed to the rule of God’s commandments. In a consciousness whereof, he can give glory to God, and say, with the apostle, _This is our rejoicing, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world_.

9. _We have had our conversation._ The apostle in the original, expresses this by one single word (ἀνεστράφημεν). But the meaning thereof is exceeding broad, taking in our whole deportment, yea, every inward as well as outward circumstance, whether relating to our soul or body. It includes every motion of our heart, of our tongue, of our hands and bodily members. It extends to all our actions and words; to the employment of all our powers and faculties; to the manner of using every talent we have received, with respect either to God or man.

10. _We have had our conversation in the world_; even in the world of the ungodly: not only among the children of God (that were, comparatively, a little thing:) but among the children of the devil, among those that _lie in wickedness_, ἐν τῷ πονηρῷ, _in the wicked one_. * What a world is this! How throughly impregnated with the spirit it continually breathes! As our God is good and doth good, so the God of this world, and all his children, are evil, and do evil, (so far as they are suffered) to all the children of God. Like their father, they are always lying in wait, or _walking about, seeking whom they may devour_: using fraud or force, secret wiles or open violence, to destroy those who are not of the world: continually warring against our souls, and by old or new weapons and devices of every kind, labouring to bring them back into the snare of the devil, into the broad road that leadeth to destruction.

11. _We have had our_ whole _conversation in_ such _a world, in simplicity and godly sincerity_. First, _in simplicity_. This is what our Lord recommends, under the name of a _single eye. The light of the body_, saith he, _is the eye. If therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light._ The meaning whereof is this. What the eye is to the body, that the intention is, to all the words and actions. If therefore this eye of thy soul be single, all thy actions and conversation, shall be _full of light_, of the light of heaven; of love and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost.

We are then simple of heart, when the eye of our mind is singly fixt on God: when in all things we aim at God alone, as our God, our portion, our strength, our happiness, our exceeding great reward, our all, in time and eternity. This is simplicity; when a steddy view, a single intention of promoting his glory, of doing and suffering his blessed will, runs thro’ our whole soul, fills all our heart, and is the constant spring of all our thoughts, desires and purposes.

12. _We have had our conversation in the world_, secondly, _in godly sincerity_. The difference between simplicity and sincerity seems to be chiefly this: simplicity regards the intention itself, sincerity, the execution of it. And this sincerity relates not barely to our words, but to our whole conversation, as described above. It is not here to be understood in that narrow sense, wherein St. _Paul_ himself sometimes uses it, for speaking the truth, or abstaining from guile, from craft and dissimulation. But in a more extensive meaning, as actually hitting the mark which we aim at by simplicity. Accordingly it implies in this place, that we do in fact speak and do all to the glory of God; that all our words are not only pointed at this, but actually conducive thereto; that all our actions flow on in an even stream, uniformly subservient to this great end: and that in our whole lives, we are moving strait toward God, and that continually; walking steddily on in the highway of holiness, in the paths of justice, mercy and truth.

13. This sincerity is termed by the apostle, godly sincerity, or the sincerity of God, (εἰλικρίνεια Θεοῦ,) to prevent our mistaking or confounding it with the sincerity of the Heathens: (for they had also a kind of sincerity among them, for which they professed no small veneration) likewise to denote the object and end of this, as of every Christian virtue; seeing whatever does not ultimately tend to God, sinks among _the beggarly elements of the world_. By styling it, the sincerity of God, he also points out the author of it, the _Father of lights, from whom every good and perfect gift descendeth_: which is still more clearly declared in the following words, _Not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God_.

14. _Not with fleshly wisdom._ As if he had said, We cannot thus converse in the world, by thy natural strength or understanding, neither by any naturally-acquired knowledge or wisdom. We cannot gain this simplicity, or practise this sincerity, by the force either of good sense, good nature, or good breeding. It overshoots all our native courage and resolution, as well as all our precepts of philosophy. The power of custom is not able to train us up to this, nor the most exquisite rules of human education. Neither could I _Paul_ ever attain hereto, notwithstanding all the advantages I enjoyed, so long as I was _in the flesh_, in my natural state, and pursued it only by _fleshly_, natural _wisdom_.

And yet surely, if any man could, _Paul_ himself might have attained thereto by that wisdom. For we can hardly conceive any, who was more highly favoured with all the gifts both of nature and education. Besides his natural abilities, probably not inferior to those of any person then upon the earth, he had all the benefits of learning, studying at the university of _Tarsus_, afterwards brought up at the feet of _Gamaliel_, the person of the greatest account both for knowledge and integrity, that was then in the whole _Jewish_ nation. And he had all the possible advantages of religious education, being a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee, trained up in the very straitest sect or profession, distinguished from all others by a more eminent strictness. And herein he had _profited above many_ others, _who were his equals in years, being more abundantly zealous_ of whatever he thought would please God, and _as touching the righteousness of the law blameless_. But it could not be, that he should hereby attain this simplicity and godly sincerity. It was all but lost labour; in a deep, piercing sense of which he was at length constrained to cry out, _The things which were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord._ Phil. iii. 7, 8.

15. It could not be that ever he should attain to this, but by the _excellent knowledge of Jesus Christ_, our Lord: or _by the grace of God_; another expression of nearly the same import. By _the grace of God_ is sometimes to be understood, that free love, that unmerited mercy, by which I a sinner, thro’ the merits of Christ, am now reconciled to God. But in this place it rather means, that power of God the Holy Ghost, which _worketh in us both to will and to do, of his good pleasure_. As soon as ever the grace of God, in the former sense, his pardoning love is manifested to our soul, the grace of God, in the latter sense, the power of his Spirit, takes place therein. And now we can perform, thro’ God, what to man was impossible. Now we can order our conversation aright. We can do all things in the light and power of that love, thro’ Christ which strengtheneth us. We now have _the testimony of our conscience_, which we could never have by fleshly wisdom, _that in simplicity and godly sincerity we have our conversation in the world_.

16. This is properly the ground of a Christian’s joy. We may now therefore readily conceive, how he that hath this testimony in himself, _rejoiceth evermore. My soul_, may he say, _doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit rejoiceth in God my Saviour_. I rejoice in him, who of his own unmerited love, of his own free and tender mercy, _hath called me into this state of salvation_, wherein thro’ his power I now stand. I rejoice because his Spirit beareth witness to my spirit, that I am bought with the blood of the Lamb, and that believing in him, “I am a member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven.” I rejoice because the sense of God’s love to me, hath by the same Spirit wrought in me to love him, and to love for his sake every child of man, every soul that he hath made. I rejoice, because he gives me to feel in myself _the mind that was in Christ_: simplicity, a single eye to him, in every motion of my heart; power always to fix the loving eye of my soul on him who _loved me, and gave himself for me_, to aim at him alone, at his glorious will, in all I think or speak or do: purity, desiring nothing more but God, _crucifying the flesh with its affections and lusts, setting my affections on things above, not on things of the earth_: holiness, a recovery of the image of God, a renewal of soul after his likeness: and godly sincerity, directing all my words and works, so as to conduce to his glory. In this I likewise rejoice, yea and will rejoice, because my conscience beareth me witness in the Holy Ghost, by the light he continually pours in upon it, that I _walk worthy of the vocation wherewith_ I am _called_: that I _abstain from all appearance of evil, fleeing from sin as from the face of a serpent_; that as I have opportunity, I do all possible good, in every kind, to all men; that I follow my Lord in all my steps, and do what is acceptable in his sight. I rejoice because I both see and feel, through the inspiration of God’s holy Spirit, that all my works are wrought in him, yea and that it is he who worketh all my works in me. I rejoice in seeing, thro’ the light of God which shines in my heart, that I have power to walk in his ways, and that thro’ his grace, I turn not therefrom, to the right hand or to the left.

17. Such is the ground and the nature of that joy, whereby an adult Christian rejoiceth evermore. And from all this we may easily infer, first, That this is not a _natural_ joy. It does not arise from any natural cause: not from any sudden flow of spirits. This may give a transient start of joy. But the Christian _rejoiceth always_. It cannot be owing to bodily health or ease; to strength and soundness of constitution. For it is equally strong in sickness and pain; yea perhaps far stronger than before. Many Christians have never experienced any joy, to be compared with that which then filled their soul, when the body was well nigh worn out with pain, or consumed away with pining sickness. Least of all can it be ascribed to outward prosperity, to the favour of men, or plenty of worldly goods. For then chiefly, when their faith has been tried as with fire, by all manner of outward afflictions, have the children of God rejoiced in him, _whom unseen they loved_, even _with joy unspeakable_. And never surely did men rejoice like those, who were used as _the filth and off-scouring of the world_; who wandered to and fro, being in want of all things; in hunger, in cold, in nakedness: who _had trials_, not only _of cruel mockings_, but _moreover of bonds and imprisonments_: Yea, who at last _counted not their lives dear unto themselves, so_ they _might finish their course with joy_.

18. * From the preceding considerations, we may, secondly, infer, That the joy of a Christian does not arise from any _blindness of conscience_, from his not being able to discern good from evil. So far from it, that he was an utter stranger to this joy, till the eyes of his understanding were opened! That he knew it not, until he had spiritual senses, fitted to discern spiritual good and evil. And now the eye of his soul waxeth not dim. He was never so sharp-sighted before. He has so quick a perception of the smallest things, as is quite amazing to the natural man. As a mote is visible in the sun-beam, so to him who is walking in the light, in the beams of the uncreated Sun, every mote of sin is visible. Nor does he close the eyes of his conscience any more. That sleep is departed from him. His soul is always broad awake: no more slumber or folding of the hands to rest! He is always standing on the tower, and hearkning what his Lord will say concerning him: and always rejoicing in this very thing, in _seeing him that is invisible_.

19. * Neither does the joy of a Christian arise, thirdly, from any _dulness_ or _callousness of conscience_. A kind of joy, it is true, may arise from this, in those whose _foolish hearts are darkened_; whose heart is callous, unfeeling, dull of sense; and consequently, without spiritual understanding. Because of their senseless, unfeeling hearts, they may rejoice even in committing sin: And this they may probably call _liberty_! which is indeed mere drunkenness of soul: a fatal numbness of spirit, the stupid insensibility of a seared conscience. On the contrary, a Christian has the most exquisite sensibility; such as he could not have conceived before. He never had such a tenderness of conscience as he has had, since the love of God has reigned in his heart. And this also is his glory and joy; that God hath heard his daily prayer.

“O that my tender soul might fly
The first, abhorr’d approach of ill:
Quick, as the apple of an eye
The slightest touch of sin to feel.”

20. To conclude. Christian joy, is joy in obedience: joy in loving God and keeping his commandments. And yet not in keeping them, as if we were thereby to fulfil the terms of the _covenant of works_; as if by any works or righteousness of ours, we were to _procure_ pardon and acceptance with God. Not so: we are already pardoned and accepted, through the mercy of God in Christ Jesus――Not as if we were by our own obedience to _procure_ life, life from the death of sin. This also we have already through the grace of God. _Us hath he quickened, who were dead in sin._ And now we are _alive to God, through Jesus Christ our Lord_. But we rejoice in walking, according to the _covenant_ of _grace_, in holy love and happy obedience. We rejoice in knowing, That _being justified through his grace_, we have _not received that grace of God in vain_; That God having freely (not for the sake of our willing or running, but through the blood of the Lamb) reconciled us to himself, we run in the strength which he hath given us, the way of his commandments. He hath _girded us with strength unto the war_, and we gladly _fight the good fight of faith_. We rejoice, through him who liveth in our hearts by faith, to _lay hold of eternal life_. This is our rejoicing: that as our _father worketh hitherto_, so (not by our own might or wisdom, but through the power of his Spirit freely given in Christ Jesus) we also work the works of God. And may he work in us, whatsoever is well-pleasing in his sight! To whom be the praise for ever and ever!

☞ _It may easily be observed, that the preceding discourse,
describes the experience of those that are strong in faith.
But hereby those that are weak in faith may be discouraged:
to prevent which the following discourse may be of use._

SERMON XIII.

ON SIN IN BELIEVERS.

2 COR. v. 17.

_If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature._

I. 1. IS there then sin in him that is in Christ? Does sin _remain_ in one that _believes in him_? Is there any sin in them that are _born of_ God, or are they wholly delivered from it? Let no one imagine this to be a question of mere curiosity: or that it is of little importance whether it be determined one way or the other. Rather it is a point of the utmost moment, to every serious Christian: the resolving of which very nearly concerns both his present and eternal happiness.

2. And yet I do not know, that ever it was controverted in the primitive church. Indeed there was no room for disputing concerning it, as all Christians were agreed. And so far as I have ever observed, the whole body of antient Christians who have left us any thing in writing, declare with one voice, that even believers in Christ, till they are _strong in the Lord and in the power of his might_, have need to _wrestle with flesh and blood_, with an evil nature, as well as _with principalities and powers_.

3. And herein our own church, (as indeed in most points) exactly copies after the primitive; declaring (in her ninth article) “Original sin is the corruption of the nature of every man whereby man is in his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth contrary to the Spirit. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea, in them that are regenerated; whereby the lust of the flesh called in greek φρόνημα ♦σαρκὸς, is not subject to the law of God. And altho’ there is no condemnation for them that believe, yet this lust hath of itself the nature of sin.”

4. The same testimony is given by all other churches: not only by the _Greek_ and _Romish_ church, but by every _reformed_ church in _Europe_, of whatever denomination. Indeed some of these seem to carry the thing too far: so describing the corruption of heart in a believer, as scarce to allow that he has dominion over it, but, rather is in bondage thereto. And by this means they leave hardly any distinction, between a believer and an unbeliever.

5. To avoid this extreme, many well-meaning men, particularly those under the direction of the late count _Zinzendorf_, ran into another; affirming, that ♦“All true believers, are not only saved from the _dominion_ of sin, but from the _being_ of inward as well as outward sin, so that it no longer, _remains_ in them. And from them, about twenty years ago many of our countrymen imbibed the same opinion, that even the corruption of nature _is no more_, in those who believe in Christ.

6. It is true, that when the _Germans_ were pressed upon this head, they soon allowed, (many of them at least) that “sin did still remain _in the flesh_, but not _in the heart_ of a believer.” And after a time, when the absurdity of this was shewn, they fairly gave up the point: allowing, that sin did still _remain_, though not _reign_ in him that is born of God.

7. But the _English_ who had received it from them (some directly, some at second or third hand) were not so easily prevailed upon, to part with a favourite opinion. And even when the generality of them were convinced it was utterly indefensible, a few could not be persuaded to give it up, but maintain it to this day.

II. 1. For the sake of these who really fear God and desire to know _the truth as it in Jesus_, it may not be amiss, to consider the point with calmness and impartiality. In doing this, I use indifferently the words _regenerate_, _justified_ or _believers_: since tho’ they have not precisely the same meaning, (the first implying an inward, _actual_ change, the second a _relative_ one, and the third, the means whereby both the one and the other are wrought:) yet they come to one and the same thing; as every one that _believes_ is both _justified_ and _born of God_.