Page images
PDF
EPUB

Therefore, nothing can be meant by the faith of Abraham, but faith of the same nature and kind. Again, another distinguishing Scripture note of saving faith is, that it is faith unfeigned. 1 Tim. i. 5. "Now the end of the commandment is charity, out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned." 2 Tim. i. 5. "When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice ; I am persuaded that in thee also." Now this is an epithet that denotes the nature of a thing, and not the degree of it. A thing may be unfeigned, and yet be but to a small degree. To be unfeigned, is to be really a thing of that nature and kind which it pretends to be; and not a false appearance, or mere resemblance of it. Again, another note of distinction between saving faith and common faith, plainly implied in Scripture, is, that it differs from the faith of devils. It is implied in James ii. 18, 19. "Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: Shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou dost well: The devils also believe and tremble." Here it is first implied, that there is a difference between saving faith and common, that may be shewn by works; a difference in the cause, that may be shewn by the effects; and then it is implied this difference lies in something wherein it differs from the faith of devils; otherwise there is no force in the apostle's reasoning. But this difference cannot lie in the degree of the assent of the understanding; for the devils have as high a degree of assent as the real Christian. The difference then must lie in the

peculiar nature of the faith.

3. That the difference between common faith and sav ing faith does not lie in the degree only, but in the nature and essence of it, appears by this; that those who are in a state of damnation are spoken of as being wholly destitute of it, as wholly without that sort of faith that the saints have. They are spoken of as those that believe not, and having the gospel hid from them, being blind with regard to this light; as 2 Cor. iv. 3, 4. "But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them

that are lost: In whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." Now, can these things be said with any propriety, of such as are lost in general, if many of them as well as the saved, have the same sort of faith of the same gospel, but only in a less degree, and some of them falling short in degree, but very little, perhaps one degree in a million? How can it be proper to speak of the others, so little excelling them in the degree of the same light, as having the light of the knowledge of the glory of God shining unto them, and beholding as with open face the glory of the Lord, as is said of all true believers in the context? While those are spoken of as having the gospel hid from them, their minds blinded, lest the light of the glorious gospel should shine unto them, and so as being lost, or in a state of damnation? Such interpretations of Scripture are unreasonable.

The

4. That the difference between saving faith and common faith is not in degree, but in nature and kind, appears from this, that, in the Scripture, saving faith, when weakest, and attended with very great doubts, yet is said never to fail. Luke xxii. 31, 32. "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat : But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not; and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren," faith of Peter was attended with very great doubts concerning Christ and his cause. Now, if the distinction between saving faith and other faith be only in the degree of assent, whereby a man was brought fully to assent to the truth, and to cease greatly to question it; then Peter's faith would have failed. He would have been without any saving faith. For he greatly questioned the truth concerning Christ and his kingdom, especially when he denied him. Other disciples did so too; for they all forsook him and fled. Therefore it follows, that there is something peculiar in the very nature of saving faith, that remains in times even of greatest doubt, and even at those times distinguishes it from all common faith.

I now proceed, II. To shew that it does not consist only in the difference of effects. The supposition that I would disprove is this, That there is no difference between saving faith and common faith as to their nature: All the ofference lies in this, that in him that is in a state of salvation, faith produces another effect; it works another way; it produces a settled determination of mind, to walk in a way of universal and persevering obedience. In the unregenerate, although his faith be the same with that of the regenerate, and he has the same assent of his understanding to the truths of the gospel, yet it does not prove effectual to bring him to such a resolution and answerable practice. In opposition to this notion, I would observe,

1. That it is contrary to the reason of mankind, to suppose different effects, without any difference in the cause. It has ever been counted to be good reasoning from the effect to the cause; and it is a way of reasoning that common sense leads mankind to. But if, from a different effect, there is no arguing any difference in the cause, this way of reasoning must be given up. If there be a difference in the effect, that does not arise from some difference in the cause, then there is something in the effect that proceeds not from its cause, viz. that diversity; because there is no diversity in the cause to answer it: Therefore, that diversity must arise from nothing, and consequently is no effect of any thing; which is contrary to the supposition. So this hypothesis is at once reduced to a contradiction. If there be a difference in the effect, that difference must arise from something; and that which it arises from, let it be what it will, must be the cause of it. And if faith be the cause of this diversity in the effect, as is supposed, then I would ask, what is there in faith, that can be the cause of this diversity, seeing there is no diversity in the faith to answer it? To say that the diversity of the effect arises from likeness or sameness in the cause, is a gross and palpable absurdity; and is as much as to say, that difference is produced by no difference: Which is the same thing as to say, that nothing produces some thing,

Shew me thy faith with

2. If there were a difference in the effects of faith, but no difference in the faith itself, then no difference of faith could be shewed by the effects. But that is contrary to Scripture, and particularly to James ii. 18. "Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: out thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works." The apostle can mean nothing else by this, than that I will shew thee by my works that I have a right sort of faith. I will shew thee that my faith is a better faith than that of those who have no works. I will shew thee the difference of the causes, by the difference of the effect. This the apostle thought good arguing. Christ thought it was good arguing to argue the difference of the tree from the difference of the fruits; Matth. xii. 33. "A tree is known by its fruit." How can this be, when there is no difference in the tree? When the nature of the tree is the same, and when, indeed, though there be a difference of the effects, there is no difference at all in the faith that is the cause? And if there is no difference in the faith that is the cause, then certainly no difference can be shewn by the effects. When we see two human bodies, and see actions performed and works produced by the one, and not by the other, we determine that there is an internal difference in the bodies themselves: We conclude that one is alive, and the other dead; that one has an operative nature, an active spirit in it, and that the other has none; which is a very essential difference in the causes themselves. Just so we argue an essential difference between a saving and common faith, by the works or effects produced; as the apostle in that context observes, in the last verse of the chapter, "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also,"

I come now, in the second place, to shew wherein saving faith differs essentially from common faith: And shall endeavor to prove what I lay down from the Scripture, which will give farther evidence to the truth of the doctrine.

There is, in the nature and essence of saving faith, a receiving of the object of faith, not only in the assent of the judgment, but with the heart, or with the inclination and will

of the soul. There is in saving faith, a receiving of the truth, not only with the assent of the mind, but with the consent of the heart; as is evident by 2 Thess, ii. 10. "Received not the love of the truth that they might be saved." And the apostle, describing the nature of saving faith, from the exam ple of the ancient patriarchs, Heb. xi. describes their faiththus, verse 13. These all died in faith, not having receiv ed the promises; but, having seen them afar off, were per suaded of them, and embraced them." And so the Evangel ist John calls faith a receiving of Christ; John i. 12. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." Here, the apostle expressly declares, that he whom he means by a receiver, was the same with a believer on Christ, or one that has saving faith. And what else can be meant by receiv ing Christ, or accepting him, than an accepting him in heart? It is not a taking him with the hand, or any external taking or accepting him, but the acceptance of the mind. The acceptance of the mind is the act of the mind towards an object as acceptable, but that in a special manner, as the act of the inclination or will. And it is farther evident, that sav ing faith has its seat not only in the speculative understanding or judgment, but in the heart or will; because otherwise, it is not properly of the nature of a virtue, or any part of the moral goodness of the mind: For virtue has its special and immediate seat in the will; and that qualification, that is not at all seated there, though it be a cause of virtue, or an effect of it, yet is not properly any virtue of the mind, nor can properly be in itself a moral qualification, or any fulfilment of a moral rule. But it is evident, that saving faith is one of the chief virtues of a saint, one of the greatest virtues prescribed in the moral law of God. Matth. xxiii. 23. "Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for ye pay tithe of mint, and anise, and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: These ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone." It is a prin cipal duty that God required, John vi. 28, 29. «Then said they unto him, What shall we do that we may work the works

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »