Perkins:

Sect. 2.
Of Certainty
of salvation.

The second property of conscience is an infallible certainty of the pardon of sin and life everlasting. That this point may be cleared, I will handle the question between us and the Papists touching the certainty of salvation. And that I may precede in order, we must distinguish the kinds of certainty. First of all certainty is either infallible or conjectural: Conjectural, which is not so evident, because it is grounded only upon likelihoods. The second all Papists grant, but the first they deny in the matter of salvation. Again, certainty is either of faith, or experimental, which Papists call moral. Certainty of faith, whereby anything is certainly believed: and it is either general or special. General certainty, is to believe assuredly that the word of God is truth itself, and this both we and Papists allow. Special certainty, is by faith to apply the promise of salvation to ourselves, and to believe without doubt, that remission of sins by Christ and life everlasting belong unto us. This kind of certainty we hold and maintain, and Papists with one consent deny it; acknowledging no assurance but by hope. Moral certainty, is that which precedes from sanctification and good works, as signs and tokens of truth faith. This we both allow, yet with some difference. For they esteem all certainty that comes by works to be uncertain and often to deceive: but we do otherwise, if the works be done in uprightness of heart.

The question is, whether a man in this life may ordinarily without revelation, be infallibly certain of his own salvation, first of all and principally by faith, and then secondly, by such works as are inseparable companions of faith. We hold this for a clear and evident principle of the word of God, and contrariwise the Papists deny it wholly. I will therefore prove the truth by some arguments, and then answer the common objections.¹

Arg. 1. That which is the Spirit of God does first of all testify in the heart and conscience of any man, and then afterward confirm, is to be believed of the same man as infallibly certain: but the Spirit of God first of all does testify to some men, namely true believers, that they are the sons of God: and afterward confirms the same unto them. Therefore men are infallibly to believe their own adoption. Now that the Spirit of God does give this testimony to the conscience of man, the Scripture is more than plain, Rom. 8:15, “You have received the spirit of adoption where we cry, ‘Abba Father.’ The same Spirit bears witness with our spirit, that we are the sons of God.” Answer is made that this testimony of the Spirit is given only by an experiment or feeling of an inward delight or peace, which breeds in us not an infallibly but conjectural certainty. And I answer again, that this exposition is flat against the text. For the Spirit of adoption is said here not to make us think or speak, but to cry “Abba, Father”: and crying to God as to a father argues courage, confidence, and boldness. Again the same spirit of adoption is opposed to the spirit of bondage causing fear: and therefore it must needs be a Spirit giving assurance or liberty, and that means driving away distrustful fears. And the end, no doubt why the Holy Ghost comes into the heart as a witness of adoption is, that the truth in this case hidden and therefore doubtful, might be cleared and made manifest. If God himself have appointed that a doubtful truth among men, shall be confirmed and put out of doubt by the mouth of two or three witnesses, it is absurd to think that the testimony of God himself knowing all things, and taking upon him to be a witness, should be conjectural.

Read the rest of this entry »

Spencer:

As a member of society, you delight to render even justice to everyone, in all your various intercourse–intercourse of trade–intercourse of science, of literature, of society, of religion. But you have more delight, as a good member of society, in being able to go beyond the mere measure of justice, and, even at some personal sacrifices, in doing something to dry up the streams of human misery; your kindness wipes away the orphan’s tear, and carries gladness to the heart beating such unequaled throbs under the weeds of the widow. In all these duties you may be equally perfect, but you are not equally happy. This illustrates what we mean by the peculiar preferences of God. His delight is in the exercise of his Mercy. He delights, indeed, in justice, holiness, faithfulness; and he has an infinite delight in them; that is, his delight accords with the infinity of his nature, and is perfect in relation to the importance of the attribute he exercises. But in Mercy he peculiarly delights. This is his own repeated testimony. He is not willing that any should perish. He affirms that he has no pleasure at all in the death of him that dies. All that he has seen fit to teach us in his Word, respecting his own infinite and holy feelings, gives preeminence to his Mercy. Mercy, indeed, has its methods–its way of wisdom–its rules: if it had not, it would lose its nature and become something else. The poet failed in that so much admired conception,

“A God all mercy is a God unjust.”

That is truth, but it is not all the truth–it is too feeble for the fact. Such a God would be something more than unjust; and the licentiousness of the attribute among a world of sinners would turn the mercy into unkindness itself. Still, the Divine Being has peculiar delight in the exercise of his Mercy. God loves to forgive sinners. He loves to save them. He loves to adopt them into his family. He loves to cheer them with his promises. And never did a saint on earth have so much delight in receiving the grace of God, as the infinitely gracious God has in bestowing it. Much as you may find in the Bible to teach the infinitude of all the attributes of the Deity, and their preciousness to him, you cannot fail to see the justice of the idea that he speaks in most singular style of his Mercy. The delight which he has in it, the singular and peculiar delight, demonstrates that kind of preeminence which we have affirmed belongs to it. It is Mercy that unfolds to us the heart of the God of heaven! It is Mercy which he most of all things delights to exercise. His glory, his infinite and eternal blessedness, stand in peculiar connection with this. Justice, judgment, the vengeance he takes upon the wicked, even he himself denominates his strange work (Isaiah, xxviii. 21). It is not what God likes. Mercy is more natural to him. It is more like God. Even when Mercy is refused–rejected –spurned; and judgment is compelled to act on the wicked, Mercy goes out upon the Mount of Olives to shed her tears over the devoted city! He wept over it: Oh, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Ichabod Spencer, The Mercy of God, in Sermons of the Rev. Ichabod Spencer (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication. 1855), 1:269-271. [Some spelling modernized and underlining mine.]

Spencer:

God no Pleasure in the Death of the Wicked

(Shown From the Nature of Religion.)

As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death or the wicked.–Ezekiel xxxiii.11.

WE said, on a former occasion, when we addressed you from these words, that there were, with some people, three matters of difficulty in religion, against which this text is uttered:–

I. The Purposes of the Deity.

II. The Nature of Religion.

III. The Condition of Man.

From all these sources an unbeliever is sometimes accustomed to draw conclusions unfavorable to his salvation. The partial view he takes, as well as the erroneous opinions he entertains, is apt to sustain the misfortune of his conclusions. He beholds, in the purposes of the Deity, as he believes or half-believes, an insuperable obstacle to his salvation. In the Nature of Religion–that religion which the Bible teaches him is necessary to his salvation–he finds difficulties which he is unable, as he imagines, to overcome. The condition in which he finds himself, as a sinner, is made to plead his excuse for neglect of salvation, and speaks to him a comfortable solace, even while he continues in his sins. These are his difficulties–these the sources of his objection–these his errors.

To the first of these, the Purposes of God, we have already attended. The second, the Nature of Religion, occupies us in the present hour.

Those whose minds have surmounted one difficulty in religion often meet with another. Driven from one stronghold of error, we are apt to betake ourselves to another. Such creatures we are. One mistake is corrected, but we are not safe. One delusion is dispelled, but another delusion rises before us. Thus we are beset with hinderances. When we have learnt that the Purposes of the Deity do not infringe upon our liberty, and oblige us to be lost, the Nature of Religion comes up to lend to our mistake a lame apology.

Nor can we be surprised at these frequent difficulties, when we find them in our own mind, or in the minds of other people. What is there that is valuable, whose acquisition is not attended with some trouble? The riches you covet cost you many a day of laborious diligence, and many a weary pain. The learning you value has been acquired only by laborious study, careful attention, diligence, and self-denial. There is scarcely anything of value, whose acquisition is perfectly easy and unattended with difficulty. Difficulties will arise, either from the nature of the object sought, or the imperfection of the creature that seeks.

It is in the latter method that the difficulties of our salvation assail us. Our obstacles lie in our own nature–in that inherent wickedness which we love to foster, and are unwilling to eradicate.

But, if we are inclined, after all, to murmur that Religion–a thing so indispensable–is beset with so many difficulties, let us hush the murmur with two reflections –the one humbling to our pride, the other complimentary to our nature.

Read the rest of this entry »

Marshall:

Direction X.

That we may be prepared by the comforts of the Gospel to perform sincerely the duties of the Law, we must get some assurance of our salvation in that very faith whereby Christ himself is received into our hearts; therefore one must endeavor to believe on Christ confidently, persuading and assuring ourselves in the act of believing, that God freely gives to us an interest in Christ and his salvation according to his gracious promise.

Explication.

It is evident that these comforts of the gospel, that are necessary to an holy practice, cannot be truly received without some assurance of our interest in Christ and his salvation; for some of those comforts consist in a good persuasion of our reconciliation with God, and of our future heavenly happiness, and of strength both to will and to do what which is acceptable to God through Christ, as has been before shown: Hence it will clearly follow, that this assurance is very necessary to enable us for the practice of holiness, as those comforts that must go before the duties of the law in order of nature, as the cause goes before the effect, though not in any distance of time. My present work is to show, what this assurance is that is so necessary unto holiness, and which I have here asserted, that we must act in that very faith whereby we receive Christ himself into our hearts, even in justifying faith. This doctrine seems strange to many that profess themselves Protestants of late days, whereas it was formerly highly owned by the chief Protestants whom God made use of to restore the purity of the gospel, and to maintain it against the Papists for many years, they commonly taught that faith was a persuasion or confidence of our own salvation by Christ, and that we must be sure to apply Christ and his salvation to ourselves in believing. And this doctrine was one of the great engines whereby they prevailed to overthrow the Popish superstition, whereunto doubtfulness of salvation is one of the principal pillars. But many of the successors of those Protestants have deserted them, and left their writings to be shamefully insulted over by the Papists, and this innovation has been of longer standing among us than several other parts of our new divinity, and maintained by those hat profess to abhor that corrupt doctrine which the Papist have built upon such principles. Modern divines may think they stand upon the shoulders of their predecessors, whose labors they enjoy, and that they can see farther than they, as the school-men might have like thoughts of the ancient fathers; but for all this they may not be able to see so far, if the eyes of their predecessors were better enlightened by the Spirit of God to understand the mystery of the gospel, and why may we not judge that it is so in the present case? The eyes of men in these late years has been blinded in this point of assurance by many false imaginations. They think that because salvation is not promised to us absolutely, but upon condition of believing on Christ for it; therefore we must first believe directly on Christ for our salvation, and after that we must reflect our minds upon our faith, and examine it by several marks and signs, especially by the fruit of sincere obedience; and if upon this examination we find out certainly that it is true saving faith, then and not before we may believe assuredly that we in particular shall be saved. On this account they say that our salvation is by direct, and our assurance by the reflex¹ act of faith, and that many have true faith, and shall be saved that never have any assurance of their salvation as long as they live in this world, they find by Scripture and experience, that many precious saints of God are frequently troubled with doubts, whither they shall be saved, and whither their faith and obedience be sincere, so that they cannot see assurance in themselves. Therefore they conclude that assurance must not be accounted absolutely necessary to justifying faith and salvation, lest we should make the hearts of doubting saints sad and drive them to despair. They account that former Protestants were guilty of a manifest absurdity, in making assurance to be of the nature and definition of saving faith, because all that hear the gospel are bound to saving faith, and yet they are not bound absolutely to believe that they themselves shall be saved, for then many of them would be bound to believe that which is not declared in the gospel concerning them in particular, yea that which is a plain lie, because the gospel shows that many of those that are called are not chosen to salvation, and that perish forever, Mat. 20:16. No wonder if the appearance of so great an absurdity move many to imagine that saving faith is a trusting or resting on Christ as the only sufficient means of salvation without any assurance; or that it is a desiring and venturing to trust, or rely upon him in a mere state of suspense and uncertainty concerning our salvation, or with a probable opinion or conjectural hope of it at best.

Read the rest of this entry »