Part 18 (1/2)
From the Same to the Same.
Portsmouth, Jan. 5, 1811.
_Rev. Sir_,--Having notified you in a postscript of my letter of Dec.
11th, that I had reserved three particulars in your ”friendly admonition” for the subject of another communication, I am disposed to embrace this opportunity to fulfil my engagement. The three particulars reserved are expressed, in your letter, in the following words:
”For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own l.u.s.ts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. You, my friend, once professed the true faith of the gospel--have you kept it? I think not. I fear you have fallen from it. You are now preaching a doctrine which pleases the world, but it makes against you according to scripture. The apostle John says in his 1st epistle 4th chapter 5th and 6th verses, They are of the world; therefore the world heareth them; we are of G.o.d; he that knoweth G.o.d, heareth us, he that is not of G.o.d, heareth not us; hereby know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.” I would not, dear sir, knowingly misapply your words, nor make a use of the above quotation contrary to their most plain and evident sense which I conceive is as follows:
1st. The doctrine which I believed before I believed as I do now, is the true gospel according to the testimony of the apostle John, in his 1st epistle, 4th chapter 5th and 6th verses.
2d. That in believing as I now do, I have fallen from that faith, and turned unto fables.
3d. My now preaching a doctrine which pleases the world is good proof that my doctrine is not of G.o.d, and that those who hear me are justly described by the apostle as heaping to themselves teachers having itching ears.
In the first place I shall agree with you in the supposition that when I first made a profession of religion, I believed the true gospel.
In the second place I shall endeavour to show that I have not fallen from that faith.
In the third place I will attempt to show that the evidence, which you think makes against me, is by no means sufficient to prove that the doctrine I now believe and preach is consistent with the _l.u.s.ts_ of the _world_ or contrary to the true faith of the gospel.
1st. The true faith of the gospel as expressed in 1 John, 4th, &c. is as follows--see verse 2, 3, ”Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of G.o.d; and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of G.o.d.”
The apostle here states in the most simple terms the true Christian faith, and brings it into such a short compa.s.s that none can mistake him. The belief that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is the true faith, and a denial of that fact is a false faith.
When I first professed religion I professed to believe that ”Jesus Christ is come in the flesh;” and this I am willing to say now is the true faith of the gospel, and the only article of faith which const.i.tuted a Christian believer in the opinion of the apostles; restricting this belief, at the same time, to Jesus of Nazareth, that he was the Christ.
2d. I as much believe now as I ever did that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. I have as clear evidences now as I ever had that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ. These things being facts, the conclusion is that I have not _fallen_ from the true christian faith.
3d. The above faith I preach, believing and testifying that G.o.d sent his Son to be the _Saviour_ of the _world_; and I have reason to bless G.o.d that such feeble means are at all prospered, and that as you observe, ”Great numbers of precious souls” adhere to the word, which I conceive is no evidence that the faith I preach is not of G.o.d, or that it is consistent with the l.u.s.ts of the world. We are informed in the word of G.o.d, that the _common people heard Christ gladly_. Who did not hear him gladly? Answer, the Scribes and Pharisees. Do you think, sir, that the common people's hearing Christ gladly was a justifiable evidence to the Pharisees that he was not the true Messiah? When many thousands of men, women, and children flocked from their cities into desert places to hear the gracious words which proceeded from the lips of him who spake as never man spake, was it a justifiable evidence that he and his doctrine were not of G.o.d? To bring this matter, if possible, nearer home, should you find your meeting house crowded with hearers who expressed in their countenances an approbation of the doctrine which you preach, would it be sufficient evidence to convince you that your doctrine was not of G.o.d?
That the testimony that G.o.d sent his Son to be the Saviour of the _world_ is not consistent with the _l.u.s.ts_ of the _world_, is shown by St. Paul to t.i.tus; ”For the grace of G.o.d which bringeth salvation to _all men_, hath appeared, teaching us, that denying unG.o.dliness and _worldly l.u.s.ts_, we should live soberly, righteously and G.o.dly in this present world.”
I have not the least doubt in my mind, that if you and I preached more like our blessed master than we do, people in general, would be more engaged to hear us, and our meeting houses would be more thronged than they are now.
Should you hear a shepherd complaining that the increase of his flock was small, or that it rather diminished, you would think _that_ evidence made against _him_.
I suppose the particular idea which you had in view, which const.i.tutes, in your mind, an _Apostasy_, is, that Jesus Christ, who was manifested in the flesh, will, pursuant to power given to him of his father, save all men from their sins, and reconcile all things unto himself. This idea, I acknowledge, I did not see clearly in, when I first made a profession of a belief in Christ; but now am fully persuaded in it. However, I cannot see why the adopting of this particular idea should be called an _Apostasy_.
I will, sir, mention some similar cases, not wis.h.i.+ng however, to be considered an equal subject to the personage whom I shall introduce.
The apostle Peter was a believer in the true faith of the gospel, that is, he believed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living G.o.d: and Jesus says to him, on that confession, that flesh and blood had not revealed it to him, but his Father. This belief Peter had before he believed that Christ should suffer on the cross and rise from the dead. After many trials and dreadful temptations in which this poor, dependent brother of ours experienced the fallibility of all human strength, he was privileged with positive evidence of the resurrection of Christ from the dead.--Here I ask, was this new acquisition in Peter's faith an apostasy? Was it not an advancement? You will agree with me in this.
Again, this same apostle, even after he was endowed with power from on high, and preached and healed in the name of Jesus, did not know that the Gentiles were fellow heirs and of the same body, and partakers of the promises of G.o.d, in Christ, by the gospel. It was not until the angel of the Lord appeared unto Cornelius and directed him to send for Peter, that G.o.d gave to that apostle the knowledge of the fact which he acknowledged to Cornelius, that G.o.d had shewed him that he should call _no man common_ or _unclean_. It is very evident that the apostle Peter had more extensive knowledge of the gospel of the grace of G.o.d in consequence of the vision of the sheet by the sea of Joppa than he had before; but would any real Christian, knowing all the circ.u.mstances, suppose that Peter had _apostatised_ from the true faith, because he believed that millions would be benefited by Christ more than were comprehended in his former belief? While they who were of the circ.u.mcision remained ignorant of the revelation given to Peter, we find they ”_contended_ with him, saying, thou wentest in to men uncirc.u.mcised, and didst eat with them.” But when Peter had ”rehea.r.s.ed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, they held their peace and glorified G.o.d, saying, then hath G.o.d also to the Gentiles, _granted repentance_ unto life.” Thus we see that the church in Jerusalem, who were of the circ.u.mcision, though believers in Christ were, until Peter's defence further enlightened them, ignorant of the extension of divine grace to the Gentiles through the gospel. But surely no real Christian would suppose that this enlargement of their faith in the great salvation was an _apostasy_ from the true faith!
With profound deference, sir, permit me to suggest, that should the foregoing observations present yourself, to your own mind, in a similar situation with those of the circ.u.mcision, yet they acknowledge you a believer in Christ, a minister of his word and a candidate for greater manifestation of that grace of G.o.d by which Jesus tasted death for every man.
I believe I may venture to say that unless the belief that _G.o.d is not the Saviour of all men_ can be maintained by positive scripture as an essential article of apostolic faith, I cannot be justly _admonished for falling_ from the true faith. May I not, with great propriety, call on my Rev. friend to show, if he can, that such an article of faith was ever required by Christ or his apostles as a term of christian fellows.h.i.+p and charity?
Let us look into the written word of G.o.d and see what is there required of us to believe. See Rom. x. 9, ”If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that G.o.d hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” Acts viii. 37, ”And Philip said if thou believest with all thine heart thou mayest.
And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of G.o.d.” Matt. x. 32. ”Whosoever, therefore, shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my father which is in heaven.” Luke xii. 8, ”Also I say unto you, whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of G.o.d.” Not to multiply quotations, permit me to query whether there be in those pa.s.sages, or in any other scripture on the same point any intimations given that the candidate must believe that this precious Saviour will not, through the peace made by the blood of his cross, reconcile all things to G.o.d? Are you fully satisfied, dear sir, that you are authorised to _admonish_ as an _apostate_, one who confesses with his mouth the Lord Jesus, and who believes in his heart that G.o.d hath raised him from the dead? Why did not Philip demand of the Eunuch a particular confession of a belief in _limited grace_ and _salvation_?
Was there not the same authority to require this article of faith then, as there is now? If Jesus hath promised, in his word, that he will confess before his Father in Heaven, whosoever confesseth him before men are you satisfied with the authority by which you denounce, disfellows.h.i.+p, and deny those little ones? The thought is truly solemn! I feel a _chill_ in every vein of my body, when I consider the vain traditions of a corrupted church, in which it has long been a religious habit to anathematise those who confess Christ before men, because they _cannot_ believe in certain tenets never required by Christ or his apostles!
Rev. Sir, I can say in the sincerity of my soul, that I believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the true Christ, I believe him to be the Son of the living G.o.d, who was delivered for our offences and was raised again for our justification. And though I feel myself the most unworthy of the subjects of salvation, yet I should be ungrateful not to acknowledge the goodness of G.o.d my Saviour. Whatever men may think or say of me, I know that my soul experiences joys unspeakable in sweet meditations on the glories and inexpressible beauties of my Redeemer; and the thought that I am owned as his child before the angels of G.o.d, is infinitely better than to receive the approbation of men who are disposed to judge without knowing the heart.