this doctrine, when rightly understood, affords. However far he may have progressed in the way of life, he sees, when he thoroughly knows the truth, that he has progressed not a step except as he has been drawn and overpersuaded by the indwelling grace and spirit of Christ, and that he shall absolutely go no further in the way to heaven unless the same gracious influence is continued in such a sense and to such an extent as to overcome all the temptations with which he is beset. His only hope is in the fact that God has promised to keep and preserve him. Nothing but God's faithfulness to his Son procured the conversion of any saint. Nothing but this same faithfulness has procured his perseverance for a day, and nothing else can render the salvation of any soul at all probable. What can a man be thinking about, or what can he know of himself, who does not know this? Unless the same grace that secures the conversion of the saints, secures their perseverance to the end, there is no hope for them. It is true that the promises to sinners and to saints are conditioned upon their faith and upon the right exercise of their own agency, and it is also true that grace secures the fulfillment of the conditions of the promises in every instance in which they are fulfilled, or they never would be fulfilled. We shall see that the promises of the Father to the Son secure the bestowment upon the saints of all grace to secure their final salvation.

It shocks and distresses me to hear professed christians talk of being saved at all except upon the ground of the anticipating, and persevering, and sin-overcoming, and hell-subduing grace of God in Christ Jesus. Why, I should as soon expect the devil to be saved as that any saint on earth will be, if left, with all the promises of God in his hands, to stand and persevere without the drawings, and inward teachings, and overcoming influences of the Holy Spirit. Shame on a theology that suspends the ultimate salvation of the saints upon the broken reed of their own resolutions in their best Their firmest resolutions are nothing unless they are formed and supported by the influence of the Spirit of grace going before and exciting and persuading to their formation and their continuance. This is every where taught in the bible; and who that has considered the matter, does not know that this is the experience of every saint? Where, then, is the ground of hope, if the doctrine in question be denied? "If the foundation be destroyed, what shall the righteous do?" Where, then, is the evil tendency of this

doctrine? It has no naturally evil tendency. Can the assurance of eternal salvation through the blood, and love, and grace of Christ, have a natural tendency to harden the heart of a child of God against his Father and his Savior? Can the revealed fact that he shall be more that a conqueror through Christ beget in him a disposition to sin against Christ? Impossible! This doctrine though liable to abuse by hypocrites, is nevertheless the sheet anchor of the saints in hours of conflict. And shall the children be deprived of the bread of life, because sinners will pervert the use of it to their own destruction? This doctrine is absolutely needful when conviction is deep and conflicts with temptation are sharp, to prevent despair. Its natural tendency is to slay and keep down selfishness, to forestall selfish efforts and resolutions, and to sustain the confidence of the soul at all times. It tends to subdue sin, to humble the soul under a sense of the great love and faithfulness of God in Christ Jesus; to influence the soul to live upon Christ and to renounce entirely and forever all confidence in the flesh. Indeed, its tendency is the direct opposite of that asserted in the objection. It is the abuse and not the natural tendency of this doctrine against which this objection is urged. But the abuse of a doctrine is no reason why it should be rejected.

2. But it is said that real saints do sometimes fall into at least temporary backsliding, in which cases the belief of this doctrine tends to lull them into carnal security and to prolong their backsliding, if not to embolden them to apostatize.

To this I reply,

(1.) That if real christians do backslide, they lose for the time being their evidence of acceptance with God, and withal they know that in their present state they can not be saved. This objection is levelled rather against that view of perseverance that says, "once in grace, always in grace;" that teaches the doctrine of perpetual justification upon condition of one act of faith. The doctrine as stated in these lectures holds out no ground of hope to a backslider except upon condition of return and perseverance to the end. Moreover the doctrine, as here taught, is that perseverance in holiness in the sense that subsequent to regeneration, holiness is at least the rule and sin only the exception, is an attribute of christian character. Every moment, therefore, a backslider remains in sin, he must have less evidence that he is a child of God.

But, as I said, he loses confidence in his own christianity, and in this state of backsliding he does not believe the doctrine of perseverance as a doctrine of revelation. It is absurd to say that while backslidden from God, he still has faith in his word, and believes this doctrine as a christian doctrine and upon the strength of the testimony of God. He does not in this state really believe the doctrine, and therefore it is not the tendency of the doctrine when believed that harms him, but a gross abuse and perversion of it. But the perversion of a doctrine is no objection to it. The real tendency of the doctrine is to break the heart of the backslider, to exhibit to him the great love, and faithfulness, and grace of God which tends naturally to subdue selfishness and to humble the heart. When backsliders are emboldened by this doctrine and rendered presumptuous it is never by any other than a gross perversion and abuse of it.

But still it is said that when christians backslide, they know if this doctrine is true that they shall not die in a backslidden state, and that therefore they are naturally rendered presumptuous by it. I answer, that the same objection lies against the doctrine of election, which can not be denied. Who does not know that sinners and backsliders say, If I am elected I shall be saved, and if not, I shall be lost. The event is certain at any rate, and if I am to use the means, I shall use the means; and if I am to neglect them, I shall neglect them. If I am one of the elect, I shall not die in sin; and if not, I shall, do what I may. The backslider says, I have been converted and am therefore one of the elect, for there is no evidence that any of the non-elect are ever converted; but the elect can not be lost or will not be lost at any rate: therefore I shall be reclaimed before I die. Now who does not see that all such refuges are refuges of lies? They are abuses of precious truth. The objection we are considering is based upon an overlooking of the all important distinction between the natural tendency and the abuse of a doctrine. If this doctrine has a natural tendency to mischief, it must be calculated to mislead a humble, honest, and prayerful mind in search of truth. It must tend to lead a true saint away from, instead of to, Christ. The fact that sinners and backsliders who for the time being are the chief of sinners will and do abuse and pervert it, is no better reason for rejecting this doctrine than it is for rejecting the doctrine of atonement, of justification by faith, or the doctrine of the free pardon of the greatest sinners upon condition of

repentance and faith. It is true that no person whom God foresees will be saved will die in sin. It is true that no elect person will die in sin; and, as I believe, all true saints are elect, nevertheless the natural tendency of this doctrine is any thing else than to beget presumption in the real saint; but on the contrary it has a natural and a powerful tendency to impress him with sin, with subduing views of the infinite love, compassion, faithfulness and grace of God, and to charm him away from his sins forever. If by any means he falls into temporary backsliding, he may abuse this as he may every other doctrine of the gospel; but let it be understood that he does not believe for the time being one of the doctrines of the gospel. Not believing them, he of course is not injured by their natural tendency, but only by a perverse abuse of them.

As well might a universalist croak and accuse you of preaching smooth things and of encouraging sinners to continue in sin by preaching that the vilest sinner may be forgiven as for you to object to this doctrine that backsliders are rendered presumptuous by it.

If one is more liable to abuse than the other, the difference is only in degree and not in kind. The backslider can not know that he was ever converted; for as a matter of fact, he has lost communion with God and has lost the present evidence of acceptance. He does not, therefore, rest in a real belief of this doctrine, but only in a perverse abuse of it.

Those who persist in such objections as this should reflect upon their own inconsistency in making a manifest perversion and abuse of this doctrine an objection to it when they hold other doctrines, equally liable to abuse and equally abused, in spite of such abuse. Let such persons see that they are practically adopting a principle and insisting upon its application in this case, which, if carried out, would set aside the whole gospel. They are thus playing into the hands of infidels and universalists, and giving the enemies of God occasion to blaspheme.

LECTURE LXXVI.

PERSEVERANCE OF SAINTS.

FARTHER OBJECTIONS ANSWERED.

3. It is objected that the bible speaks of the saints as if there were real danger of their being lost. It requires them to spend the time of their sojourning here in fear, and abounds with cautions and warnings and threatenings that are certainly out of place, and not at all to be regarded, if the salvation of the saints is a revealed certainty. How, it is inquired, can we fear, if God has revealed the certainty of our salvation? Is not fear in such a case a result of unbelief? Can God reveal to us the fact that we shall certainly be saved and then call on us or exhort us to fear that we shall not be saved? Can he require us to doubt his word and his oath? If God has revealed the certainty of the salvation of all true saints, can any saint fear that he shall not be saved without downright unbelief? and can God approve and even enjoin such fears? If a person is conscious of possessing the character ascribed to the true saints in the bible, is he not bound upon the supposition that this doctrine is true, to have and to entertain the most unwavering assurance that he shall be saved? Has he any right to doubt it or to fear that he shall not be saved?

I answer, that no true saint who has an evidence or an earnest of his acceptance with God, such as the true saint may have, has a right to doubt for a moment that he shall be saved, nor has he a right to fear that he shall not be saved. I also add that the bible no where encourages or calls upon the saints to fear that they shall not be saved, or that they shall be lost. It calls on them to fear something else, to fear to sin or apostatize lest they should be lost, but not that they shall sin and be lost. The following are specimens of the exhortations and warnings given to the saints:

Matt. 26: 41. Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.