And majorities are no more to be depended upon than minorities, if there is in both cases a neglect of patient and prolonged waiting upon the Lord to know his will. Of what value is a "show of hands" unless his are stretched out "who holdeth the seven stars in his right hand?" Of what use is a viva voce choice, except the living voice of Christ be heard speaking by his Spirit? One may object that we are holding up an ideal which is impossible to be realized. It is a difficult ideal we admit, as {140} the highest attainments are always difficult; but it is not an impossible one. It is easier to recite our prayers from a book than to read them from the tables of a prepared heart, where the finger of the Spirit has silently written them; but the more difficult way is the more acceptable way to him who seeks for worshipers who "worship in Spirit and in truth." It is easier to get "the sense of the meeting" in choosing a pastor than to learn "the mind of the Spirit" by patient tarrying and humble surrender to God; but the more laborious way will certainly prove the more profitable way. The failure to take this way is, we are persuaded, the cause of more decay and spiritual death in the churches than we have yet imagined. From the watch-tower where we write we can look out on half a score of churches on which "Ichabod" has been evidently written, and the glory of which has long since departed. They were founded in prayer and consecration, "to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven." Why has their light been extinguished, though the lampstand which once bore it still remains, adorned and beautified with all that the highest art and architecture can suggest? Their history is known to him who walks among the golden candlesticks. What violence may have been done, by headstrong self-will, to him who is called "the Spirit of counsel and might"? What rejection of the truth which he, "the Spirit {141} of truth," has appointed for the faith of God's church till at last the word has been spoken: "Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost; as your fathers did, so do ye." Is it only Jewish worshipers to whom these words apply? Is it only a Jewish temple of which this sentence is true: "Behold your house is left unto you desolate"? The Spirit will not be entirely withdrawn from the body of Christ indeed, but there is the Church, and there are churches. A man may yet live and breathe when cell after cell has been closed by congestion till at last he only inhales and exhales with a little portion of one lung. Let him that readeth understand.

The Spirit is the breath of God in the body of his church. While that divine body survives and must, multitudes of churches have so shut out the Spirit from rule and authority and supremacy in the midst of them that the ascended Lord can only say to them: "Thou hast a name to live and art dead." In a word, so vital and indispensable is the ministry of the Spirit, that without it nothing else will avail. Some trust in creeds, and some in ordinances; some suppose that the church's security lies in a sound theology, and others locate it in a primitive simplicity of government and worship; but it lies in none of these, desirable as they are. The body may be as to its organs perfect and entire, wanting nothing; but simply because the Spirit has been {142} withdrawn from it, it has passed from a church into a corpse. As one has powerfully stated it: "When the Holy Spirit withdraws, . . . he sometimes allows the forms which he has created to remain. The oil is exhausted, but the lamp is still there; prayer is offered and the Bible read; church-going is not given up, and to a certain degree the service is enjoyed; in a word religious habits are preserved, and like the corpses found at Pompeii, which were in a perfect state of preservation and in the very position in which death had surprised them, but which were reduced to ashes by contact with the air, so the blast of trial, of temptation, or of final judgment will destroy these spiritual corpses."[3]

2. The Holy Spirit in the Worship and Service of the Church. Is there anything, from highest to lowest, which we are called to do in connection with the worship of God's house, of which the Holy Spirit is not the appointed agent? Believers are the instruments indeed through which he acts; but they have no function apart from his inspiration and guidance, any more than the organ-pipe has without the wind, which breathing through it causes it to resound. To make this clear, we may consider the several parts of the service of the church as we are accustomed to participate in it, and observe their relation to the divine Administrator.

{143}

(1) Preaching is by general consent an important factor of the work of the ministry, both for the pastor and for the evangelist. In what consists its inspiration and authority? We "have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven" (1 Peter 1: 12), is Peter's simple story of the apostolic method. And the words direct our thought to the Spirit not as instrumental but as inspiring. "In the Holy Ghost," the words mean literally. The true preacher does not simply use the Spirit; he is used by the Spirit. He speaks as one moving in the element and atmosphere of the Holy Ghost, and mastered by his divine power.

In this fact the sermon differs immeasurably from the speech, and the preacher from the orator. How distinctly Paul emphasizes this contrast in his letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 2: 4). The sole substance of his preaching he declares to be "Jesus Christ and him crucified," and the sole inspiration of his preaching, the Holy Ghost: "And my speech was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power." What did good Philip Henry mean by his resolve "to preach Christ crucified in a crucified style"? More perhaps than he thought or knew. "He shall testify of me," is Jesus' saying concerning the promised Paraclete. The Comforter bears witness to the Crucified. No other theme in the pulpit can be sure of commanding his co-operation. {144} Philosophy, poetry, art, literature, sociology, ethics, and history are attractive subjects to many minds, and they who handle such themes in the pulpit may set them forth with alluring words of human genius; but there is no certainty that the Holy Ghost will accompany their presentation with his divine attestation. The preaching of the Cross, in chastened simplicity of speech, has the demonstration of the Spirit pledged to it, as no secular, or moral, or even formal religious discourse has. And when Paul writes to the Thessalonians: "Our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance" (1 Thess. 1: 5), we need only to be reminded that "our gospel" meant but one thing to Paul, the setting forth of Jesus Christ crucified in the midst of the people, and we have found the secret of evangelical power. Ought it not therefore to be the supreme question with the preacher, what themes can assuredly command the witness of the Holy Spirit, rather than what topics will enlist the attention of the people? Let us set the popular preacher and the apostolic preacher side by side, and consider whose reward we would choose, universal admiration or "God also bearing witness, both with signs and wonders and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his will" (Heb. 2: 4)—the sermon greeted with applause and the clapping of hands, or "the word received with joy of {145} the Holy Ghost" (1 Thess. 1: 6)?—admiration of the preacher possessing all who listen to the discourse, or "the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word" (Acts 10: 44)? Language cannot express the vital moment of the question which we are here discussing. Our generation is rapidly losing its grip upon the supernatural; and as a consequence the pulpit is rapidly dropping to the level of the platform. And this decline is due, we believe, more than anything else, to an ignoring of the Holy Spirit as the supreme inspirer of preaching. We wish to see a great orator in the pulpit, forgetting that the least expounder of the word, when filled with the Holy Ghost, is greater than he. We want the gospel, forsooth; but in the strenuous demand that it be set forth according to the "spirit of the age" we ignore the supremacy of the "Spirit of God." And the method of discourse soon tells upon the matter. We cannot very long have the truth in the pulpit after we have lost "the Spirit of truth" therefrom. "When one possesses not the whole of life," says Vinet, "he possesses not the whole of truth."

In all that we have said we do not ignore the human element in preaching, nor undervalue good learning and sanctified mental training, as a furnishing for this high office. We only emphasize the extreme peril of making that supreme which God has made subordinate. As it is genius which raises the great {146} painter or poet far above the common man, so it is the Holy Spirit which lifts the preacher far above the man of genius. A gifted artist spoke wisely when one, thinking only of the implements of his profession, asked, "With what do you mix your paints?" "With brains, sir," he replied. The preacher who brought three thousand to believe on a crucified Christ, under a single sermon, anticipated the question of those who, with an eye upon the mere human accessories of his sermon, might ask after the secret of his power; and he unfolds that secret in a single terse sentence: "With the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven."

(2) Prayer is a most vital element in the worship of God's church. "Lord, teach us how to pray, as John also taught his disciples." Jesus complied literally with this request of his followers. As John, under the law, could only give rules and rudiments, not yet having come to the dispensation of grace and of the Spirit, so did Jesus give a form of prayer, a lesson in the "technique of worship." But only when he reaches the eve of his passion, when he announces the coming of the Comforter, does he lead his disciples into the heart and mystery of the great theme, teaching them to pray as John could not have taught his disciples. "Hitherto ye have asked nothing in my name," said Jesus, in his paschal discourse. But now that he was about to enter into his mediatorial office at God's right {147} hand, and to send forth the Comforter into the midst of his disciples, this joyful privilege was to be accorded to him: "Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name he will give it you"[4] (1 John 16: 23). The words are equivalent to "in me." The thought is not surely that of using the name of Jesus as a password or as a talisman, but of entering into his person and appropriating his will; so that when we pray, it shall be as though Jesus himself stood in God's presence and made intercession. Nor is it "as though"—it is the literal fact. We become identified with Christ through the Spirit, now sent down, and his will is wrought within us by the Holy Ghost, so that to ask what we desire of him is to ask what he desires for us. We are inwilled by his will, because inspired by his Spirit, who lives and breathes within us. Therefore we may know that we are always heard, since we are in him who can boldly say to the Father: "I know that thou always hearest me." It is Christ's mediatorship with the Father, and the Holy Ghost's mediatorship with us, that gives us this high privilege of praying in the name of Jesus, as it is written: "For through him we both have access in one Spirit unto the Father."

When therefore, under the fuller development of {148} doctrine as found in the epistles, we read of "praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit" (Eph. 6: 18), and of "praying in the Holy Ghost" (Jude 20), it is simply an admonition to use our privilege of asking in the name of Jesus. For to be in the Spirit is to be in Christ, united to his person, identified with his will, invested with his righteousness, so that we are as he is before the Father.

In that fullest exposition of the doctrine of the Spirit, given in the eighth of Romans, we see clearly that the ministry of the Comforter consists in his effectuating in us that which Christ is accomplishing for us on the throne. Especially is this true of prayer. In the Epistle to the Hebrews we read: "Wherefore also he is able to save to the uttermost them that draw near to God through him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them" (Heb. 7: 25, R. V.). In the Epistle to the Romans we read: "And in like manner the Spirit also helpeth our infirmity; for we know not how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered; and he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God" (Rom. 8: 26, 27, R. V.). These passages, read together, clearly show the Spirit doing the same thing in us which Christ in heaven {149} is doing for us. And, moreover, they reveal to us the method of the glorified Christ in helping those who know not what to pray for as they ought, teaching them, not by an outward form, but by an inward guidance. Indeed, the prayer inspired by the Holy Spirit is often so deep that it cannot be expressed in formal words, but reaches the ear of the Father only in unspeakable yearnings, in unuttered groanings. The keynote of all true intercession is the will of God. In the disciples' prayer, as taught them by the Master, this note is distinctly sounded: "Thy will be done on earth as in heaven." In the Saviour's garden-prayer it is heard again, as with strong crying and tears the Son of God exclaims: "Not my will but thine be done"; and in the revelation of the doctrine of prayer through an inspired apostle we read: "If we ask anything according to his will he heareth us." It is the Spirit's deepest work in the believer to attune his mind to this exalted key, as he "maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God." There is a promise which all disciples love to quote for their assurance in prayer: "If two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven" (Matt. 18: 19). The word translated "agree" is a very suggestive one. It is, sympsonesosin, from which our word "symphony" comes. If two shall accord {150} or symphonize in what they ask, they have the promise of being heard. But, as in tuning an organ all the notes must be keyed to the standard pitch, else harmony were impossible, so in prayer. It is not enough that two disciples agree with each other; they must both accord with a Third—the righteous and holy Lord—before in the scriptural sense they can agree in intercession. There may be agreement which is in most sinful conflict with the divine will: "How is it that ye have agreed together [synepsonethe, the same word] to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?" asks Peter (Acts 5: 9). Here is mutual accord, but guilty discord with the Holy Ghost. On the contrary it is the Spirit's ministry to attune our wills to the Divine; thus only can there be praying in the Holy Ghost.

We cannot therefore emphasize too strongly the administration of the Spirit in directing the worship of God's house. The use of liturgical forms is a relapse into legalism, a consent to be taught to pray as "John taught his disciples." True, there may be extemporaneous forms as well as written forms, praying by rote as well as praying by the book. Against both habits we simply interpose the higher teaching of the Spirit, as belonging especially to this dispensation, in which the Father seeketh worshipers who "worship in Spirit and in truth." To pray rightly is the highest of all attainments. And it is so because the secret lies {151} between these two opposites; a spirit supremely active while supremely passive, a heart prevailing with God because prevailed over by God. "O Lord," says a high saint, "my spirit was like a harp this morning, making melody before thee, since thou didst first tune the instrument by the Holy Spirit, and then didst choose the psalm of praise to be played thereon." Most solemn and suggestive words these have always seemed: "The Father seeketh such to worship him." Amid all the repetition of forms and the chanting of liturgies, how earnestly the Most High searches after the spiritual worshiper, with a heart inwardly retired before God, with a spirit so sensitive to the hidden motions of the Holy Ghost that when the lips speak they shall utter the effectual inwrought prayer that availeth much!

If any shall interpose the objection that what we are saying is too high to be practical, it may be well to confirm our position by the witness of experience. We are not speaking of pulpit prayers especially, in what we have said. The universal priesthood of believers, which the Scriptures so plainly teach, constitutes the ground for common intercession, for "the praying one for another" which is the distinctive feature of the Spirit's dispensation The prayer meeting, therefore, in which the whole body of believers participate, probably comes nearer the pattern of primitive Christian {152} worship than any other service which we hold. To apply our principle here, then, what method is found most satisfactory? Shall the service be arranged beforehand, this one selected to pray, and that one to exhort; and during the progress of the worship, shall such a one be called up to lead the devotions, and such a one to follow? In a word, shall the service be mapped out in advance and manipulated according to the dictates of propriety and fitness as it goes on? One, after many years of experience, can bear emphatic testimony to the value of another way—that of magnifying the office of the Holy Spirit as the conductor of the service, and of so withholding the pressure of human hands in the assembly that the Spirit shall have the utmost freedom to move this one to pray and that one to witness, this one to sing and that one "to say amen at our giving of thanks," according to his own sovereign will. Here we speak not theoretically but experimentally. The fervor and spirituality and sweet naturalness of the latter method has been demonstrated beyond a peradventure, and that too, after an extended trial of both ways, the first in ignorance of a better way, with constant labor and worry and fret, and the last with inexpressible ease and comfort and spiritual refreshment. Honor the Holy Ghost as Master of assemblies; study much the secret of surrender to him; cultivate a quick ear for hearing his inward voice and a ready tongue {153} for speaking his audible witness; be submissive to keep silence when he forbids as well as to speak when he commands, and we shall learn how much better is God's way of conducting the worship of his house than man's way.[5]

(3) The service of song in the house of the Lord is another element of worship whose relation to the Spirit needs to be strongly emphasized. Spiritual singing has a divinely appointed place in the church of Christ. Church music, in the ordinary sense of that phrase, has no such place, but is a human invention which custom has, with many, unhappily elevated into an ordinance. We often quote the exhortation of the apostle: "Be filled with the Spirit," without marking the practical service with which this fullness stands immediately connected: "Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord" (Eph. 5: 19). As immediately as prayer is connected with the Holy Ghost in this same epistle: "Praying at all seasons in the Spirit"; and our edification in the church: "Builded {154} together in the Spirit" (Eph. 2: 22, R. V.); and our spiritual energizing: "Strengthened with power through his Spirit" (Eph. 3: 16, R. V.); and our approach to God, "Access in one Spirit unto the Father" (2: 18, R. V.), so intimately is the worship of praise here connected with the Holy Ghost and made dependent on his power. Therefore it would seem too obvious to need arguing, that an unregenerate person is disqualified from ministering in the service of song in God's house. Scripturally this seems incontestable; and as to the teaching of experience, we should hardly know how to name any custom which has brought a sorer blight upon the life of the church, or a heavier repression upon its spiritual energy, than the habit, now so general, of introducing unsanctified, unconverted, and even notoriously worldly persons into the choirs of the churches.

Now the teaching of the text just cited is decisive, not only against such performers in choirs, but against the choirs themselves, if by the latter term is meant certain ones employed to dispense music for the delectation of the congregation. For observe how distinctly the mutual and inter-congregational character of Christian singing is here pointed out: "Speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs." The one feature of the worship of the church, which distinguishes it radically and totally from that of the {155} temple, is that it is mutual. Under the law there were priests and Levites to minister and people to be ministered to; under the gospel there is a universal spiritual priesthood, in which all minister and all are ministered to. Every act of service belonging to the Christian church is so described. There must be prayer, and the exhortation is, "Pray one for another" (James 5: 16). There must be confession, and the injunction is: "Confess your sins one to another" (James 5: 16, R. V.). There must be exhortation, and the command is: "Exhort one another" (Heb. 3: 13). There must be love, and we are enjoined to "love one another" (1 Peter 1: 22). There must be burden-bearing, and the exhortation is: "Bear ye one another's burdens" (Gal. 6: 2). There must be comforting, and the command is: "Wherefore comfort one another" (1 Thess. 4: 18). So with the worship of song. Its reciprocal character is emphasized, not only in the passage just quoted, but also in the Epistle to the Colossians: "Teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs" (Col. 3: 16). This is according to the clearly defined method of the Spirit in this dispensation. He establishes our fellowship with the Head of the church, and through him with one another. All blessing in the body is mutual, and the worship which is ordained to maintain and increase that blessing is likewise mutual.

{156}

As now the Spirit is the inspirer and director of the worship of God's church, he must have those who have been renewed and are indwelt by himself as the instruments through whom he acts; and by a teaching of Scripture too clear to be misunderstood all others are disqualified. How distinctly is this shown even in the types and symbols of the old dispensation. The holy anointing enjoined in Exodus for Aaron and his sons, is confessedly a type of the unction of the Holy Ghost. And mark the rigid and sacred limitations in its use: "And thou shalt anoint Aaron and his sons, and consecrate them that they may minister unto me in the priest's office. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying: This shall be a holy anointing oil unto me throughout your generation. Upon man's flesh it shall not be poured; neither shall ye make any other like it, after the composition of it; it is holy, and shall be holy unto you; whosoever compoundeth any like it, or whoso putteth any of it upon a stranger, shall even be cut off from his people" (Exod. 30: 30-33).

Now, of these minute directions and prescribed transactions we may say confidently that "they happened unto them for ensamples and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world [ages] are come" (1 Cor. 10: 11). The three rigid prohibitions here named touch just the errors which are most characteristic of the present {157} generation. "Upon man's flesh it shall not be poured"; honoring the natural man, and exalting human nature into that place which belongs only to the regenerate. This is the error of those who believe in the universal sonship of the race, and call the carnal man divine. "Whosoever putteth any of it upon a stranger." This is the sin of those who thrust into the ministry and service of the church persons who have never by the new birth through the Spirit been brought into the family of God, into the household of faith. "Whosoever compoundeth any like it." This is the artificial imitation of the Spirit's offices and ministration. Let the Christian reader pause and ponder well this last prohibition. In the story of the primitive church sample sins are given for our warning, as well as specimen graces for our emulation. One such sin, so subtle, so dangerous, and so constantly recurring in Christian history, having taken the name of its first author and being called "simony," has been handed down from generation to generation. "Because thou hast thought that the gift of God can be purchased with money" is the solemn indictment against one who had purposed to buy the power of the Holy Ghost. Many desire the gifts of the Spirit who little care for the Spirit himself. Divine music is greatly coveted. Why not, with our thousands of gold, buy this spiritual luxury? Bring the singing men and singing women from the {158} opera and from the concert hall; bid them compound a potion of sanctuary music, which shall entrance all ears and draw to the church those who could not be drawn thither by the plain attractions of the Cross. But what is the exhortation of Scripture? "By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to his name" (Heb. 13: 15). This kind of sacrifice costs—earnest prayer, deep communion, and the fullness of the Spirit; but no sum of gold, however large, is adequate for its purchase, nor can any musician's art, however ingenious, imitate it. Is there no approach to the sin of simony in those churches which spend thousands yearly in artistic music? And is not this attempted purchase of the Holy Ghost closely linked with the other sin of robbing God, considering how this lavish expenditure on artificial worship is almost always accompanied with meagre giving for the carrying out of the Great Commission? Our conclusion is, that the service of song has been committed to the church, and to the church alone, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Some of her number may be appointed to lead this service, if they themselves are under the leadership of the Spirit. But the church cannot commit this divine ministry to unsanctified hireling minstrels, without affront to the Spirit of God and serious peril to her own communion with God.

{159}

If again any object that we are setting up an exaggerated and impossible ideal, let the voice of experience be heard in evidence. Let pastors be called to testify of the added blessing and fervor which have come to their sanctuaries when this ideal has been approximately realized. Let history repeat its story of song driven in times of apostasy into some narrow stall of the church, and into the hands of a few trained monopolists of worship; and then, in eras of revival, of the bursting of the barriers and the people of God seizing once more their defrauded heritage and breaking forth, a great multitude, into "hallelujahs of the heart." The annals of the Lollards, and of the Lutherans, and of the Wesleyans, and of the Salvationists bear harmonious witness on this point, and are deeply instructive.

3. The Holy Spirit in the Missions of the Church. In the Gospels which contain the story of Christ's earthly life we have the record of the giving of the Great Commission: "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature." In the Acts, which contains the story of the life of the Spirit, we have the promise of the coming of the Executor of that Commission: "But ye shall receive power when the Holy Ghost is come upon you; and ye shall be my witnesses, both in Jerusalem and in Judea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1: 8, R. V.). Nowhere is the hand {160} of the Spirit more distinctly seen than in the origination and superintendence of missions. The field is the world, the sower is the disciple, and the seed is the word. The world can only be made accessible through the Spirit—"When he is come he will convict the world of sin"; the sower is energized only through the Spirit—"Ye shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you"; and the seed is only made productive through the quickening of the Spirit—"He that soweth unto the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap eternal life" (Gal. 6: 8, R. V.). In the simple story of the primitive mission, as recorded in the thirteenth of Acts, we see how every step in the enterprise was originated and directed by the presiding Spirit. We observe this:

(1) In the selection of missionaries: "The Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them" (13: 2).

(2) In their thrusting forth into the field: "So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia" (13: 4).

(3) In empowering them to speak: "Then Saul, who also is called Paul, filled with the Holy Ghost, said" (13: 9).

(4) In sustaining them in persecution: "And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Ghost" (13: 52).

(5) In setting the Divine seal upon their {161} ministry among the Gentiles: "And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us" (15: 8).

(6) In counseling in difficult questions of missionary policy: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us" (15: 28).

(7) In restraining the missionaries from entering into fields not yet appointed by the Lord: They "were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the gospel in Asia. . . They assayed to go into Bithynia but the Spirit suffered them not" (16: 6, 7).

Very striking is this record of the ever-present, unfailing, and minute direction of the Holy Ghost in all the steps of this divine enterprise. "But this was in apostolic days," it will be said. Yes; but the promise of the Spirit is that "He shall abide with you for the age." Unless the age has ended he is still here, and still in office, and still entrusted with the responsibility of carrying out that work which is dearest to the heart of our glorified Lord. Who can say that there is not need in these days of a return to primitive methods and of a resumption of the Church's primitive endowments? The Holy Spirit is not straitened in himself, but only in us. If the Church had faith to lean less on human wisdom, to trust less in prudential methods, to administer less by mechanical {162} rules, and to recognize once more the great fact that, having committed to her a supernatural work, she has appointed for her a supernatural power, who can doubt that the grinding and groaning of our cumbrous missionary machinery would be vastly lessened, and the demonstration of the Spirit be far more apparent?



[1] Of course Catholic writers claim that the pope is the "Vicar of Christ" only as being the mouth-piece of the Holy Ghost. But the Spirit has been given to the church as a whole, that is to the body of regenerated believers, and to every member of that body according to his measure. The sin of sacerdotalism is, that it arrogates for a usurping few that which belongs to every member of Christ's mystical body. It is a suggestive fact that the name kleros, which Peter gives to the church as the "flock of God," when warning the elders against being lords over God's heritage, now appears in ecclesiastical usage as the clergy, with its orders of pontiff and prelates and lord bishops, whose appointed function it is to exercise lordship over Christ's flock.

[2] By the candlesticks being seven instead of one, as in the tabernacle, we are taught that whereas in the Jewish dispensation, God's visible church was one, in the Gentile dispensation there are many visible churches; and that Christ himself recognizes them alike.—Canon Garratt, "Commentary on the Revelation," p. 32.

[3] "The Work of the Holy Spirit in Man," by Pastor G. F. Tophel, p. 66.

[4] It was impossible up to the time of the glorification of Jesus to pray to the Father in his name. It is a fullness of joy peculiar to the dispensation of the Spirit to be able to do so.—Alford.

[5] It were well for us to give more heed to the voice of Christian history as related to such questions as these. The rise of "sporadic sects" like the "Quietists," the "Mystics," the "Friends," and the "Brethren," with their emphasis on "the still voice" and "the inward leading," is very suggestive. If we may not go so far as some of these go in the insistence on speaking only as sensibly moved by the Spirit we may be admonished of the hard, artificial man-made worship which made their protest necessary.



{163}

VIII

THE INSPIRATION OF THE SPIRIT



{164}

"Have you visited the Cathedral of Freyburg, and listened to that wonderful organist, who with such enchantment draws the tears from the traveler's eyes while he touches, one after another, his wonderful keys, and makes you hear by turns the march of armies upon the beach, or the chanted prayer upon the lake during the tempest, or the voices of praise after it is calm? Well, thus the Eternal God, embracing at a glance the key-board of sixty centuries, touches by turns, with the fingers of his Spirit, the keys which he had chosen for the unity of his celestial hymn. He lays his left hand upon Enoch, the seventh from Adam, and his right hand on John, the humble and sublime prisoner of Patmos. From the one the strain is heard: 'Behold the Lord cometh with ten thousand of his saints'; from the other: 'Behold he cometh with clouds.' And between the notes of this hymn of three thousand years there is eternal harmony, and the angels stoop to listen, the elect of God are moved, and eternal life descends into men's souls."—Gaussen's Theopneustia.



{165}

VIII

THE INSPIRATION OP THE SPIRIT

Inspiration signifies inbreathing. Both the scribe and the Scripture, both the man of God and the word of God were divinely inbreathed. In that memorable meeting of the risen Lord and his disciples within the closed doors, we read that "He breathed on them and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whosesoever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them; whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained" (John 20: 22, R. V.). Well may the question of the scribes concerning Jesus now arise in our hearts concerning his disciples: "Who can forgive sins but God only?" And the answer should be: "True; God alone can forgive sins. And it is only because the Spirit of God, who is God, is in the apostles, endowing them with his divine prerogatives, that they are able to exercise this high authority."

We are persuaded, however, that this commission was not given to all Christians, though all have the Spirit. In a note in Olshausen's Commentary the matter seems to be correctly stated: "To the apostles was granted the power, absolute and unconditioned, of binding and loosing, just as to them was {166} given the power of publishing truth unmixed with error. For both they possessed miraculous spiritual endowments." Only we should say "sovereign" rather than "miraculous" endowments. "The Spirit breatheth where he wills, and thou hearest his voice," said Jesus.[1] While miraculous gifts were not confined to the apostles, Christ may have committed to these, and to these alone, the sovereign prerogative of forgiving sins; gifts of healing, on the other hand, the working of miracles, prophecy, the discerning of spirits, and tongues, being distributed throughout the church; "but all these worketh one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as he will" (1 Cor. 12: 11, R. V.). In a word, the action of the Holy Ghost was supremely sovereign in the assignment of spiritual offices, and when Jesus breathed on his apostles the Holy Ghost, and gave them authority {167} to remit sins, he separated them unto a prerogative of which others, indwelt by the same Spirit, might have known nothing. It is very generally held that the order of apostles ceased with the death of those who had seen the Lord and companied with him until the day that he was received up. But the reason for this cessation has been too little considered. May we not believe that the apostles and their companions were commissioned to speak for the Lord until the New Testament Scriptures, his authoritative voice, should be completed? If so, in the apostolate we have a provisional inspiration; in the gospel a stereotyped inspiration; the first being endowed with authority ad interim to remit sins, and the second having this authority in perpetuam. The New Testament, as the very mouthpiece of the Lord, pronounces forgiveness upon all in every generation who truly repent and believe on the Son of God; and preachers in every age, with the Bible in their hand, are authorized to do the same declaratively. But when it is urged, as by Catholic writers, that this infallibility for teaching and absolution, which was committed to the apostles, has descended through a succession of ministers called the clergy, the answer seems to be, that this authority has not been perpetuated in any body of men apart from the Scriptures, but was transferred to the New Testament and lodged there for all time. Historically, at least, it seems to have been {168} the fact, that as the apostles and prophets of the new dispensation disappeared, the Gospels and Epistles took their place, and that henceforth the divine authoritative voice of the Spirit could be distinctly recognized only in the written word. As coal has been called "fossil sunlight," so the New Testament may be called fossil inspiration, the supernatural illumination which fell upon the apostles being herein stored up for the use of the church throughout the ages.[2]

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God [theopneustos—God-breathed], and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (3 Tim. 3: 16). As the Lord breathed the Spirit into certain men, and thereby committed to them his own prerogative of forgiving sin, so he breathed his Spirit into certain books and endowed them with his infallibility in teaching truth. God did not choose to inspire all good books, though he has chosen to

{169} inbreathe one book, thereby separating it and setting it apart from all other books.[3] The phrase, "the Bible is simply literature," which some are using to-day, as a suggestion against bibliolatry, is not true. Literature is the letter; Scripture is the letter inspired by the Spirit. What Jesus said in justification of his doctrine of the new birth is equally applicable to the doctrine of inspiration: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Educate, develop, and refine the natural man to the highest possible point, and yet he is not a spiritual man till, through the new birth, the Holy Ghost renews and indwells him. So of literature; however elevated its tone, however lofty its thought, it is not Scripture. Scripture is literature indwelt by the Spirit of God. The absence of the Holy Ghost from any writing constitutes the impassable gulf between it and Scripture. Our Lord, in speaking of his own doctrine, uses the same language, to show its separateness from common teaching which he employs above to mark the distinction of the new man. He says: "It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing; the words that I have spoken unto {170} you are spirit and are life" (John 6: 63, R. V.). Words they were, and in that respect, literature; but words divinely inbreathed and therefore Scripture. In fine, the one fact which makes the word of God a unique book, standing apart in solitary separateness from all other writings, is that which also parts off the man of God from common men—the indwelling of the Holy Ghost. Therefore we may say truly of the Bible, not merely that it was inspired, but it is inspired; that the Holy Ghost breathes within it, making it not only authoritative in its doctrine but life-giving in its substance, so that they who receive its promises by faith "have been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God which liveth and abideth" (1 Peter 1: 23, R. V.).

Thus far in this volume we have been dwelling upon the various works and offices of the Paraclete. Now we come to consider that the Holy Spirit not only acts but speaks. Let us listen to the repeated affirmations of this fact. Seven times our glorified Lord says, speaking in the Apocalypse: "He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches" (Rev. 2: 7). The Paraclete on earth answers to the Paraclete above, so that to the voice from Heaven saying: "Write, blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth," the response is heard: "Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labors," etc. (Rev. 14: 13). {171} This accords with the general tenor of Scripture as to its own Author. In referring to the Old Testament, Peter says: "This Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus" (Acts 1: 16). And again: "David himself said by the Holy Ghost" (Mark 12: 36), our Lord thus plainly recognizing the voice of the Spirit in the voice of the psalmist. So again: "The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me" (2 Sam. 23: 2, 3), and "Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith, To-day if ye will hear his voice" (Heb. 3: 7).

And what is it to speak? Is it not to express thought in language? The difference between thinking and saying is simply the difference of words. Therefore, if the Holy Ghost "saith," we are to find in the words of Scripture the exact substance of what he saith. Hence verbal inspiration seems absolutely essential for conveying to us the exact thought of God. And while many affect to ridicule the idea as mechanical and paltry, the conduct and method of scholars of every shade of belief show how generally it is accepted. For, why the minute study of the words of Scripture carried on by all expositors, their search after the precise shade of verbal significance, their attention to the {172} minutest details of language, and to all the delicate coloring of mood and tense and accent? The high scholars who speak lightly of the theory of literal inspiration of the Scriptures by their method of study and exegesis are they who put the strongest affirmation on the doctrine which they deny. Then we cannot forget what we imply when we say that language is the expression of thought. Words determine the size and shape of ideas. As exactly as the coin answers to the die in which it is struck, does the thought answer to the word by which it is uttered. Vary the language by the slightest modification, and you by so much vary the thought.

As ultra spiritualism interprets Paul's words "a spiritual body," to mean a ghost, when the accent is as strongly on the soma as on the pneumatichon, his real thought evidently being that of a body spiritualized; so some, remembering that "the letter killeth," would etherealize Scripture by telling us that the divine idea is the chief thing, and the language quite secondary. But wisely and well has Martin Luther reminded us that "Christ did not say of his Spirit, but of his words, they are spirit and life."

To deny that it is the Holy Ghost who speaks in Scripture, is an intelligible position; but admitting that he speaks, we can only understand his thoughts by listening to his words. True, he may beget within us emotions too deep for expression, as when {173} "The Spirit himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered" (Rom. 8: 26). But the idea which is really intelligible is the idea that is embodied in speech. For finite minds, at least, words are the measure of comprehensible thoughts. Evidently Jesus claims for his teaching not only inspiration, but verbal inspiration, when he says that his words are "spirit and life." And to this agrees the saying of Paul, in speaking of the inspiration of the Holy Ghost: "But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God, that we might know the things which are freely given to us of God, which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, comparing spiritual things with spiritual" (1 Cor. 2: 10-13).

And what if one objects that this theory makes inspiration purely mechanical, and turns the writers of Scripture into stenographers, whose office is simply to transcribe the words of the Spirit as they are dictated? It must be confessed that there is much in Scripture to support this view of the case. Should we see a student who, having taken down {174} the lecture of a profound philosopher, was now studying diligently to comprehend the sense of the discourse which he had written, we should understand simply that he was a pupil and not a master; that he had nothing to do with originating either the thoughts or the words of the lecture, but was rather a disciple whose province it was to understand what he had transcribed, and so be able to communicate it to others. And who can deny that this is the exact picture of what we have in the following passage from Scripture: "Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you, searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow; unto whom it was revealed," etc. (1 Peter 1: 10, 11). Here were inspired writers, studying the meaning of what they themselves had written. If they were prophets on the manward side, they were evidently pupils on the Godward side. With all possible allowance for the human peculiarities of the writers, they must have been reporters of what they heard, rather than the formulators of that which they had been made to understand. How nearly this also describes the attitude of Christ,—a hearer that he might be a teacher: "All things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you" (John 15: 15); {175} a reporter that he might be a revealer: "I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me" (John 17: 8).

In these days scholars are very jealous for the human element in inspiration; but the sovereign element is what most impresses the diligent student of this subject. "The Spirit breatheth where he wills." Concerning regeneration by the Holy Ghost, we are carefully told that it is "not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God"; and concerning inspiration by the Spirit, the teaching is equally explicit: "For no prophecy ever came by the will of man, but men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter 1: 21, R. V.).

The style of Scripture is, no doubt, according to the traits and idiosyncracies of the several writers, as the light within the cathedral takes on its various hues from passing through the stained windows; but to say that the thoughts of the Bible are from the Spirit, and the language from men, creates a dualism in revelation not easy to justify; so that we must quote with entire approval the words of an eminent writer upon this subject: "The opinion that the subject-matter alone of the Bible proceeded from the Holy Spirit, while its language was left to the unaided choice of the various writers, amounts to that fantastic notion which is the grand fallacy of many theories of inspiration; namely, that two spiritual agencies were in operation, one of which {176} produced the phraseology in the outward form, while the other created within the soul the conceptions and thoughts of which such phraseology was the expression. The Holy Spirit, on the contrary, as the productive principle, embraces the entire activity of those whom he inspires, rendering their language the word of God."[4]

If it be urged that the quotations which the New Testament makes from the Old are rarely ipsissima verba, the language being in many instances greatly changed, it should be noted in reply how significant even these changes often are. If the Holy Spirit directed in the writing of both books, he would have a sovereign right to alter the phraseology, if need be, from the one to the other. In the opinion of many scholars the change of "the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob," in Isa. 59: 20, to "There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer," in Rom. 11: 26, is an inspired and intentional change.[5] So of the citation from Amos 9: 11, "In that day will I raise up the tabernacle that is fallen," as given in Acts 15:16, "After these things I will return, and I will build again the tabernacle of David which is fallen"; the modification of the language seems designed, in order to make clear its significance in its present setting. Many other examples might be given of {177} a reshaping of his own words by the divine Author of Scripture. On the other hand, the constant recurrence of the same words and phrases in books of the Bible most widely separated in the time and circumstances of their composition, strongly suggests identity of authorship amid the variety of penmanship. The individuality of the writers was no doubt preserved, only that their individuality was subordinated to the sovereign individuality of the Holy Spirit. It is with the written word as with the incarnate Word. Because Christ is divine, he is more truly human than any whom the world has ever seen; and because the Bible is supernatural, it is natural as no other book which was ever written; its divinity lifts it above those faults of style which are the fruits of self-consciousness and ambition. Whether we read the Old Testament story of Abraham's servant seeking a bride for Isaac, or the New Testament narrative of the walk of the risen Christ with his disciples to Emmaus, the inimitable simplicity of the diction would make us think that we were listening to the dialect of the angels who never sinned in thought, and therefore cannot sin in style, did we not know rather that it is the phraseology of the Holy Spirit.[6]

{178}

An eminent German theologian has written a sentence so profoundly significant that we here reproduce it in Italics: "We can in fact speak with good reason of a language of the Holy Ghost. For it lies in the Bible plainly before our eyes, how the Divine Spirit, who is the agent of revelation, has fashioned for himself a quite peculiar religious dialect out of the speech of that people which forms its theatre."[7] So true do we hold this saying to be, that it seems to us quite impossible that the exact meaning of many of the terms of the New Testament Greek should be found in a Lexicon of classic Greek. Though the verbal form is the same in both, the inbreathed spirit may have imparted such new significance to old words, that to employ a secular dictionary for translating the sacred oracles, were almost like calling an unregenerate man to interpret the mysteries of the regenerate life. Do we not know how modern progress and discovery have even put new meanings into many English words, so that one must be in "the spirit of the age" in order to comprehend them?[8] Thus {179} likewise, even in the work of verbal criticism, it is essential that one possess the spirit of Christ in order to translate the words of Christ.

As to the question of the "inerrancy of Scripture," as the modern phrase is, we may well pass by many minor arguments, and emphasize the one great reason for holding this view, viz.: If it is God the Holy Ghost who speaks in Scripture, then the Bible is the word of God, and like God, infallible. A recent brilliant writer has challenged us to show where the Bible anywhere calls itself "The word of God."[9] The most elementary student of the subject can, with the aid of a concordance, easily point out the passages which so describe it. But we dwell on the fact that is not only called o logos tou theon, "the Word of God," but ta logia tou theou, "the oracles of God." This collective name of the Scriptures is most significant. We need not inquire of the heathen as to the meaning which they put upon the words as the authoritative utterances of their gods; let the usage of Scripture make its own impression: "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what is the profit of circumcision? Much every way; first of all, that they were intrusted with the oracles of God" (Rom. 3: 2, R. V.).[10]

This comprehensive expression is very helpful {180} to our faith. When critics are assailing the books of the Old Testament in detail, the Holy Spirit authenticates them for us in their entirety. As Abigail prayed for a soul "bound in the bundle of life" with the Lord, so here an apostle gives us the books of the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms bound together in one bundle of inspired authority. Stephen, in like manner, speaks of his nation as "those who received the lively oracles (of God) to give unto us" (Acts 7: 38); and Peter says, "If any man speak let him speak as the oracles of God" (1 Peter 4: 11). And not only this; the same apostles who submitted to the authority of the Old Testament as the oracles of God, themselves claimed to write as the oracles of God in the New Testament. "If any man," says Paul, "think himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord" (1 Cor. 14: 37). "We are of God," writes John. "He that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us" (1 John 4: 16). These claims are too great to be put forth concerning fallible writings. Admitting their premises, the Jews were right in charging Jesus with blasphemy, in that being a man {181} he made himself God. If Christ is not God, he is not even a good man. And if the Scriptures are not inerrant, they are worse than errant; since, being literature, they make themselves the word of God.

And what if it be said that there are irreconcilable contradictions in this book which calls itself the oracles of God? Two things may be said: First, it should be expected that under "the scientific method" such contradictions should appear and constantly multiply. The Bible is a sensitive plant, which shuts itself up at the touch of mere critical investigation. In the same paragraph in which it claims that its very words are the words of the Holy Spirit, it repudiates the scientific method as futile for the understanding of those words: "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,"—and insists on the spiritual method as alone adequate,—"but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit" (1 Cor. 2: 9, 10). Not only does the Bible not yield roses to the critic, it yields the thorns and briars of hopeless contradiction. "Intellige ut credos verbum meum," said Augustine to the rationalists of his day, "sed crede ut intelligas verbum Dei." "Understand my word, that you may believe it; believe God's word, that you may understand it." Faith holds not only the keys of all the creeds, but of all the contradictions. He who starts out and proceeds under the conviction that the Bible is the {182} infallible word of God, will find discrepancies constantly turning into unisons under his study. And this remark leads to the second observation: that the contradictions of man may really be the harmonies of God. An uncultivated listener, hearing an oratorio of one of the great masters, would detect discords again and again in the strains; and as a matter of fact, what are called "accidentals" in music are discords, but discords inserted to heighten the harmony. Thus, as one after another of the alleged discrepancies of Scripture having been noted and made to jar upon the ear have then been reconciled, with what an emphatic and heightened harmony have the words of the psalmist, speaking by the Holy Ghost, fallen on our ear: "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple"! There seems to the critic to be historic error in the statement of Stephen that Jacob was buried at Sychem (Acts 7: 16) instead of in the field of Machpelah before Mamre, as recorded in Gen. 50: 13, just as it was once thought that Luke had made a mistake, not to be explained away, in his reference to Cyrenius in chapter 2: 1, 2. But as the latter contradiction has disappeared, only confirming the veracity of Scripture by the investigation which it has called forth, so may the former. And so also with such alleged discrepancies as that between the record in {183} one place that King Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses, and in another forty thousand; or that of the statement in one passage that King Josias began to reign at eight years of age, and in another, at eighteen. What if we freely admit that we cannot reconcile these statements? That does not prove that they are not reconcilable. The history of solved contradictions has certainly shown this, that as "the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God stronger than men," so the discords of God are more harmonious than men.

We may say, in closing this chapter, that almost the highest proof of the infallibility of Scripture is the practical one, that we have proved it so; that as the coin of the State has always been found able to buy the amount represented on its face, so the prophecies and the promises of Holy Scripture have yielded their face value to those who have taken pains to prove them. If they have not always done so, it is probable that they have not yet matured. Certainly there are multitudes of Christians who have so far proved the veracity of Scripture that they are ready to trust it without reserve in all that it pledges for the world yet unseen and the life yet unrealized. "Believe that thou mayest know," then, is the admonition which Scripture and history combine to enforce. In the farewell of that rare saint, Adolph Monod, these golden words occur: {184} "When I shall enter the invisible world, I do not expect to find things different from what the word of God represented them to me here. The voice I shall then hear will be the same I now hear upon the earth, and I shall say, 'This is indeed what God said to me; and how thankful I am that I did not wait till I had seen in order to believe.'"



[1] John 3: 8. "The wind bloweth where it listeth." Without pronouncing dogmatically, it must be said that the translation of Bengel and some others—"The Spirit breatheth where he wills, and thou hearest his voice"—has reasons in its favor which are well-nigh irresistible; e.g., If to pneuma here is the wind, it has one meaning in the first part of the sentence and another meaning in the second; and that meaning too, one which it bears in no other instance of the more than two hundred and seventy uses of the word in the New Testament. It is not the word used in Acts 2: 2, as might be expected if it signified wind. Then it seems unnatural to ascribe volition to the wind, thelei. On the contrary, if the words apply to the Spirit, the saying is in entire harmony with other Scriptures, which affirm the sovereignty of the Holy Ghost in regeneration (John 1: 13) and in the control and direction of those who are the subjects of the new birth (2 Cor. 12: 4-11).

[2] The proof that the inspiration of the apostles and scribes of the New Testament was not transmitted to successors is thus stated by Neander: "A phenomenon singular in its kind is the striking difference between the writings of the apostles and those of the apostolic fathers, so nearly their contemporaries. In other instances transitions are wont to be gradual, but in this instance we observe a sudden change. There is no gentle gradation here, but all at once an abrupt transition from one style of language to another—a phenomenon which should lead us to acknowledge the fact of a special agency of the Divine Spirit in the souls of the apostles and of a new creative element in the first period."—Church History, II., 405.

[3] There are the strongest reasons for rejecting the rendering of this passage as given in the Revised Version: "Every Scripture inspired of God is also profitable", etc. The reader will find the objections to this rendering powerfully and conclusively set forth in Tregelles on Daniel. Note, p. 267.

[4] Lee on the "Inspiration of the Holy Scripture," pp. 32, 33.

[5] See Lange's "Commentary" in loco.

[6] I am satisfied only with the style of Scripture. My own style and the style of all other men cannot satisfy me. If I read only three or four verses I am sure of their divinity on account of their inimitableness. It is the style of the heavenly court.—Oetinger.

[7] Rothe, "Dogmatics," p. 238.

[8] For example, Shakespeare, and Milton, and Dryden, employ the words "car" and "engine" and "train" in their writings; but living before the age of steam and railways they knew nothing of the meaning which these terms convey to us. And it is possible that Homer and Plato knew as little of the meaning of such words as aion and parakletos, as found in the revelation of Jesus Christ, by whom "the ages were framed" and the Comforter sent down.

[9] Dr. R. F. Horton, in "Verbum Dei."

[10] The apostle in calling the Old Testament Scriptures the "oracles of God," clearly recognizes them as divinely inspired books. The Jewish church was the trustee and guardian of these oracles till the coming of Christ. Now the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are committed to the guardianship of the Christian Church.—Dr. Philip Schaff.



{185}

IX

THE CONVICTION OF THE SPIRIT



{186}

"The Comforter in every part of his threefold work glorifies Christ. In convincing of sin he convinces us of the sin of not believing on Christ. In convincing us of righteousness, he convinces us of the righteousness of Christ, of that righteousness which was made manifest in Christ going to the Father, and which he received to bestow on all such as should believe in him. And lastly, in convincing of judgment, he convinces us that the prince of the World was judged in the life and by the death of Christ. Thus throughout, Christ is glorified; and that which the Comforter shows to us relates in all its parts to the life and work of the incarnate Son of God."—Julius Charles Hare.



{187}

IX

THE CONVICTION OF THE SPIRIT

"And when he is come he will convict the world in respect of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment" (John 16: 8, R. V.). It is too large a conclusion which many seem to draw from these words, that since the day of Pentecost the Spirit has been universally diffused in the world, touching hearts everywhere, among Christians and heathen, among the evangelized and the unevangelized alike, and awakening in them a sense of sin. Does not our Lord say in this same discourse concerning the Comforter: "Whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not neither knoweth him"? (John 14: 17) With these words should be associated the limitation which Jesus makes in the gift of the Paraclete: "If I depart I will send him unto you." Christ's disciples were to be the recipients and distributors of the Holy Ghost, and his church the mediator between the Spirit and the world. "And when he is come (to you) he will reprove the world." And to complete the exposition, we may connect this promise with the Great Commission, "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature," and conclude that when the {188} Lord sends his messengers into the world, the Spirit of truth goes with them, witnessing to the message which they bear, convincing of the sin which they reprove, and revealing the righteousness which they proclaim. We are not clear to affirm that the conviction of the Spirit here promised goes beyond the church's evangelizing, though there is every reason to believe that it invariably accompanies the faithful preaching of the word.

It will help us then to a clear conception of the subject, if we consider the Spirit of truth as sent unto the Church, testifying of Christ, and bringing conviction to the world.

As there is a threefold work of Christ, as prophet, priest, and king, so there is a threefold conviction of the Spirit answering thereto: "And he, when he is come, will convict the world in respect of sin and of righteousness and of judgment; of sin, because they believe not on me; of righteousness, because I go to the Father and ye behold me no more; of judgment, because the prince of this world hath been judged" (John 16: 8-12, R. V.). It is concerning the testimony of Christ as he spake to men in the days of his flesh; and concerning the work of Christ now carried on in his intercession at God's right hand; and concerning the sentence of Christ when he shall come again to be our judge, that this witness of the Spirit has to do.

"He shall convince the world of sin." Why is he {189} needed for this conviction since conscience is present in every human breast, and is doing his work so faithfully? We reply: Conscience is the witness to the law; the Spirit is the witness to grace. Conscience brings legal conviction; the Spirit brings evangelical conviction; the one begets a conviction unto despair, the other a conviction unto hope.

"Of sin, because they believe not on me," describes the ground of the Holy Spirit's conviction. The entrance of Christ into the world rendered possible a sin hitherto unknown: "If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin; but now they have no cloak for their sin" (John 15: 22). Evil seems to have required the presence of incarnate goodness, in order to its fullest manifestation. Hence the deep significance of the prophecy spoken over the cradle of Jesus: "Behold this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against, that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed" (Luke 2: 34, 35). All the most hideous sins of human nature came out during the betrayal and trial and passion of our Lord. In that "hour and power of darkness" these sins seem indeed to have been but imperfectly recognized. But when the day of Pentecost had come, with its awful revealing light of the Spirit of truth, then there was great contrition in Jerusalem—a contrition the sting of {190} which we find in the charge of Peter: "Jesus of Nazareth, whom ye have taken and by wicked hands have crucified and slain." Was not that deep conviction, following the gift of the Spirit, in which three thousand were brought to repentance in a single day, a conviction of sin because they had not believed on Christ?

For our reproof the Holy Ghost presents another side of the same fact, calling us to repentance, not for having taken part in crucifying Christ, but for having refused to take part in Christ crucified; not for having been guilty of delivering him up to death, but for having refused to believe in him who was "delivered for our offenses and raised again for our justification." Wherever, by the preaching of the gospel, the fact of Christ having died for the sins of the world is made known, this guilt becomes possible. The sin of disbelieving on Christ is, therefore, the great sin now, because it summarizes all other sins. He bore for us the penalties of the law; and thus our obligation, which was originally to the law, is transferred to him. To refuse faith in him, therefore, is to repudiate the claims of the law which he fulfilled and to repudiate the debt of infinite love which, by his sacrifice, we have incurred. Nevertheless, the Spirit of truth brings home this sin against the Lord, not to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved. In a word, as has been well said, "it is not {191} the sin-question but the Son-question" which we really raise now in preaching the gospel. "Christ having perfectly satisfied God about sin, the question now between God and your heart is: Are you perfectly satisfied with Christ as the alone portion of your soul? Christ has settled every other to the glory of God." In dealing with the guilty Jews, it was the historical fact which the Holy Ghost urged for their conviction: "Ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and killed the Prince of Life" (Acts 3: 14, 15). In dealing with us Gentiles, it is rather the theological or evangelical fact: "Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God" (1 Peter 3: 18), and you are condemned that you have not believed on him and confessed him as Saviour and Lord. It is the same sin in the last instance, but viewed upon its reverse side, if we may say it. In the one case it is the guilt of despising and rejecting the Son of God; in the other, it is the guilt of not believing in him who was despised and rejected of men. Yet if submissively yielded to, the Spirit will lead us from this first stage of revelation to the second, since what Andrew Fuller said of the doctrines of theology is equally true of the convictions of the Spirit, that "they are united together like chain-shot, so that whichever one enters the heart the other must certainly follow."

"Of righteousness, because I go to the Father and {192} ye see me no more." Not until he had been seated in the heavenly places had Christ perfected righteousness for us. As he was "delivered for our offenses and raised again for our justification," so must he be enthroned for our assurance. It is necessary to see Jesus standing at the right hand of God, in order to know ourselves "accepted in the Beloved." How beautiful the culmination of Isaiah's passion-prophecy wherein, accompanying the promise that "he shall bear the sin of many," is the prediction that "by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many"! But he must be shown to be righteous, in order that he may justify; and this is what his exaltation does. "It was the proof that him whom the world condemned, God justified—that the stone which the builders rejected, God made the Headstone of the corner—that him whom the world denied and lifted up on a cross of shame in the midst of two thieves, God accepted and lifted up in the midst of the throne."[1]

The words "and because ye see me no more," which have perplexed the commentators, seem to us {193} to give the real clue to the meaning of the whole passage. So long as the High Priest was within the veil, and unseen, the congregation of Israel could not be sure of their acceptance. Hence the eager anxiety with which they waited his coming out, with the assurance that God had received the propitiation offered on their behalf. Christ, our great High Priest, has entered into the Holy of Holies by his own blood. Until he comes forth again at his second advent, how can we be assured that his sacrifice for us is accepted? We could not be, unless he had sent out one from his presence to make known this fact to us. And this is precisely what he has done in the gift of the Holy Ghost. "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Heb. 1: 3). There he will remain throughout the whole duration of the great day of atonement, which extends from ascension to advent. But in order that his church may have immediate assurance of acceptance with the Father, through his righteous servant, he sends forth the Paraclete to certify the fact; and the presence of the Spirit in the midst of the church is proof positive of the presence of Jesus in the midst of the throne; as is said by Peter on the day of {194} Pentecost; "Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear" (Acts 2: 33).

Now the Lord's words seem plain to us. Because he ascends to the Father, to be seen no more until his second coming, the Spirit meantime comes down to attest his presence and approval with the Father as the perfectly righteous One. How clearly this comes out in Peter's defense before the Council: "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins; and we are witnesses of these things, and so also is the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him" (Acts 5: 30-32). Why this two-fold witness? The reason is obvious. The disciples could bear testimony to the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ, but not to his enthronement; that event was beyond the ken of human vision; and so the Holy Ghost, who had been cognizant of that fact in heaven, must be sent down as a joint-witness with the apostles, that thus the whole circle of redemption-truth might be attested. Therein was the promise of Jesus in his last discourse literally fulfilled: "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth which {195} proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me; and ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning" (John 15: 26, 27).

As we have said, it is not only the enthronement of Christ in righteous approval with the Father that must be certified, but the acceptance of his sacrificial work as a full and satisfying ground of our reconciliation with the Father. And the Spirit proceeding from God is alone competent to bear to us this assurance. Therefore in the Epistle to the Hebrews, after the reiterated statement of our Lord's exaltation at the right hand of God, it is added: "For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified, whereof the Holy Ghost is also a witness to us" (Heb. 10: 14, 15). In a word, he whom we have known on the cross as "the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world," must now be known to us on the throne as "the Lord our righteousness." But though the angels and the glorified in heaven see Jesus, once crucified, now "made both Lord and Christ," we see him not. Therefore it is written that "no man can say Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 12: 3, R. V.). So also we are told that "if any man sin we have a Paraclete with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1 John 2: 1); but we can only know Christ as such through that "other Paraclete" sent forth from the Father. It was promised that "when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall {196} not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, these shall he speak" (John 16: 13, R. V.). Hearing the ascriptions of worthiness lifted up to Christ in heaven, and beholding him who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, now "crowned with glory and honor," he communicates what he sees and hears to the church on earth. Thus, as he in his earthly life, through his own outshining and self-evidencing perfection, "was justified in the spirit"; so we, recognizing him standing for us in glory, and now "of God made unto us righteousness," are also "justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God" (1 Cor. 6: 11).

Thus, though unseen by the church during all the time of his high-priestly ministry, our Lord has sent to his church one whose office it is to bear witness to all he is and all he is doing while in heaven, that so we may have "boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him," and that so we may come boldly to the throne of grace, "the Holy Ghost this signifying"—what he could not under the old covenant—"that the way into the holiest of all" (Heb. 9: 8) has been made manifest.

And yet—strange paradox—in this identical discourse in which Jesus speaks to his disciples of seeing him no more, he says: "Yet a little while and the world seeth me no more, but ye see me; because I live ye shall live also" (John 14: 19); words {197} which by common consent refer to the same time of Christ's continuance within the veil. But it is now by the inward vision, which the world has not, that they are to behold him. And they are to behold him for the world, since Christ said of him: "Whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him." And yet it is "to convince the world" "of sin and of righteousness and of judgment" that the Spirit was to be sent. How shall we make it plain? When the sun retires beyond the horizon at night, the world, our hemisphere, sees him no more; yet the moon sees him, and all night long catches his light and throws it down upon us. So the world sees not Christ in the gracious provisions of redemption which he holds for us in heaven, but through the illumination of the Comforter the church sees him; as it is written: "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man the things which God hath prepared for them that love him; but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit" (1 Cor. 2: 9, 10). And the Church seeing these things, communicates what she sees to the world. Christ is all and in all; and the Spirit receives and reflects him to the world through his people.

The moon above, the church below, A wondrous race they run; But all their radiance, all their glow, Each borrows of its sun.

{198}

"Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged." Here, we believe, is a still farther advance in the revelation of the gospel, and not a retreat to the doctrine of a future judgment, as some would teach. For we repeat our conviction, that in this entire discourse the Holy Spirit is revealed to us as an evangel of Grace, and not as a sheriff of the Law. Hear the Apostle Peter once more, as, pointing to him who had been raised from the dead and seated in the heavenlies, he says: "By him every one that believeth is justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses" (Acts 13: 39, R. V.). Justification, in the evangelical sense, is but another name for judgment prejudged and condemnation ended. In the enthroned Christ every question about sin is answered, and every claim of a violated law is absolutely met; and though there is no abatement in the demands of the decalogue, yet because "Christ has become the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth," now "grace reigns through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord." Strange paradox set forth in Isaiah's passion psalm: "By his stripes we are healed," as though it were told us that sin's smiting had procured sin's remission. And so it is. If the Holy Spirit shows us the wounds of the dying Christ for condemning us, he immediately shows us the wounds of the exalted Christ for comforting us. {199} His glorified body is death's certificate of discharge, the law's receipt in full, assuring us that all the penalties of transgression have been endured, and the Sin-bearer acquitted.

The meaning of this last conviction seems plain therefore: "Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged." Recall the words of Jesus as he stood face to face with the cross: "Now is the judgment of this world; now shall the prince of this world be cast out" (John 12: 31). "The accuser of the brethren" is at last non-suited and ejected from court. The death of Christ is the death of death, and of the author of death also. "That through death he might destroy him that hath the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who, through fear of death, were all their lifetime subject to bondage" (Heb. 2: 14, 15). If the relation of Satan to our judgment and condemnation is mysterious, this much is clear, from this and several passages, that Christ by his cross has delivered us from his dominion. We must believe that Jesus spoke the literal truth when he said: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life" (John 5: 24, R. V.). On the cross Christ judged sin and acquitted those who believe on him; and in heaven he defends them against every re-arrest by a violated law. {200} "There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 8: 1). Thus the threefold conviction brings the sinner the three stages of Christ's redemptive work, past judgment and past condemnation into eternal acceptance with the Father.

In striking antithesis with all this, we have an instance in the Acts of the threefold conviction of conscience, when Paul before Felix "reasoned of righteousness, and temperance, and the judgment to come" (Acts 24: 25). Here the sin of a profligate life was laid bare as the apostle discoursed of chastity; the claims of righteousness were vindicated, and the certainty of coming judgment exhibited; and with the only effect that "Felix trembled." So it must ever be under the convictions of conscience,—compunction but not peace. We have also an instructive contrast exhibited in Scripture, between the co-witness of the Spirit and the co-witness of conscience. "The Spirit himself beareth witness (summarturei) that we are the children of God" (Rom. 8: 16). Here is the assurance of sonship, with all the divine inward persuasion of freedom from condemnation which it carries. On the other hand is the conviction of the heathen, who have only the law written in their hearts: "Their conscience bearing witness (summarturouses), their thoughts one with another accusing, or else excusing them, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men" {201} (Rom. 2: 15, 16). Conscience can "accuse," and how universally it does so, abundant testimony of Christian missionaries shows; and conscience can "excuse," which is the method that guilty thoughts invariably suggest; but conscience cannot justify. Only the Spirit of truth, whom the Father hath sent forth into the world, can do this. The work of the two witnesses may be thus set in contrast:

Conscience Convinces— The Comforter Convinces— Of sin committed; Of sin committed; Of righteousness impossible; Of righteousness imputed; Of judgment accomplished. Of judgment impending.

Happily these two witnesses may be harmonized, as they are by that atonement which reconciles man to himself, as well as reconciles man to God. Very significantly does the Epistle to the Hebrews, in inviting our approach to God make, as the condition of that approach, the "having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience." As the High Priest carried the blood into the Holy of Holies in connection with the old dispensation, so does the Spirit take the blood of Christ into the inner sanctuary of our spirit in the more wondrous economy of the new dispensation, in order that he may "cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God" (Heb. 9: 14). Blessed is the man who is thus made at one with himself while made at one with God, so that he can say: "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also {202} bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost" (Rom. 9: 11). The believer's conscience dwelling in the Spirit, even as his life is "hid with Christ in God," both having the same mind and bearing the same testimony—this is the end of redemption and this is the victory of the atoning blood.



[1] For as the ministry of Enoch was sealed by his reception into heaven, and as the ministry of Elijah was also abundantly proved by his translation, so also the righteousness and innocence of Christ. But it was necessary that the ascension of Christ should be more fully attested, because upon his righteousness, so fully proved by his ascension, we must depend for all our righteousness. For if God had not approved him after his resurrection, and he had not taken his seat at his right hand, we could by no means be accepted of God.—Cartwright.



{203}

X

THE ASCENT OF THE SPIRIT



{204}

"The Apostle Paul evidently saw the redemption of the bodies of the saints and their manifestation as the sons of God and with them the redemption of the whole creation from its present bondage to be the complete harvest of the Spirit, whereof the church doth now possess only the first-fruits, that is, the first ripe grains which could be formed into a sheaf and presented in the temple as a wave-offering unto the Lord. 'That Holy Spirit of Promise which is the earnest of our inheritance,' saith the same apostle—the earnest, like the first-fruit, being only a part of that which is to be earned . . . yet a sufficient surety that the whole shall in the fullness of the times, be likewise ours."—Edward Irving.



{205}

X

THE ASCENT OF THE SPIRIT

"He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens." So writes the apostle concerning the Paraclete who is now with the Father, "Jesus Christ the righteous" (Eph. 4: 9). And what is true of the one is true of that "other Paraclete," the Holy Ghost, who was sent down to abide with us during this age. When he has accomplished his temporal mission in the world he will return to heaven in the body which he has fashioned for himself—that "one new man," the regenerate church, gathered out from both Jews and Gentiles during this dispensation. For what is the rapture of the saints predicted by the apostle when, at the sound of the trumpet and the resurrection of the righteous dead, "we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air?" (1 Thess. 4: 17). It is the earthly Christ rising to meet the heavenly Christ; the elect church, gathered in the Spirit and named o christos, (1 Cor. 12: 12,) taken up to be united in glory with "Christ, the Head of the church, himself the Saviour of the body" {206} (Eph. 5: 23, R. V.). In the council at Jerusalem this is announced as the distinctive work of the Spirit in this dispensation "to gather out a people for his name." It was not by accident and as a term of derision that the first believers received their name; but "the disciples were divinely called Christians first in Antioch" (Acts 11: 26). This was the name pre-ordained for them, that "honorable name" by which they are called (James 2: 7). When, therefore, this out-gathering shall have been accomplished, and the people for his name shall be completed, they will be translated to be one with him in glory, as they were one with him in name, the Head taking the body to himself, "as Christ also, the church" (Eph. 5: 29). And this translation of the church is to be effected by the Holy Spirit who dwells in her. "But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you" (Rom. 8: 11). It is not by acting upon the body of Christ from without, but by energizing it from within, that the Holy Ghost will effect its glorification. In a word, the Comforter, who on the day of Pentecost, came down to form a body out of flesh, will at the Parousia return to heaven in that body, having fashioned it like unto the body of Christ, that it may be presented to him "not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, . . . holy {207} and without blemish" (Eph. 5: 27). Is it meant to be implied in what is here said that the Comforter is to leave the world at the time of the advent, to return no more? By no means. And yet what is meant needs to be very explicitly set forth.