Section 3.

SECTION 3.

What thoughts our Lord, St. John, St. Paul, and St. James entertained of fallen believers — A parallel between the backsliders delineated by St. Peter, and those who are described by St. Jude — A horrible destruction awaits them, for denying the Lord that bought them, and for turning the grace of God into lasciviousness.

IT is impossible to do the doctrine of perseverance justice, without considering what Christ and the apostles say of apostates. Even in their days the number of falling and fallen believers was so great, that a considerable part of the last epistles seems to be nothing but a charge against apostates, an attempt to reclaim Pharisaic and Antinomian backsliders, and a warning to those who yet stood, not to “fall away after the same example of unbelief and conformity to this present world.” Begin we by an extract from Christ’s epistles to the Churches of Asia. Though the “Ephesians hated the deeds of the Nicolaitans,” yet, after St. Paul’s death, they so far inclined to lukewarmness, that they brought upon themselves the following reproof: — “I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love. Remember, therefore, whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do thy first works, or else I will remove thy candlestick.” The Church at Pergamos was not in a better condition; witness the severe charge that follows: — “Thou hast them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumbling block before the children of Israel, &c, to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. Repent, or else I will fight against thee with the sword of my mouth.” The contagion reached the faithful Church of Thyatira, as appears from these words: — “Thou sufferest that woman Jezebel to seduce my servants to commit fornication. But unto, &c, as many as have not this doctrine, and have not known the depths of Satan, I will put upon you none other burden.” In Sardis “a few names only had not defiled their garments;” the generality of Christians there had, it seems, “a name to live and were dead:” but the fall of the Laodiceans was universal. Before they suspected it, they had all, it seems, slidden back into the smooth, downward road that leads to hell. “I know thy works,” says Christ, “I would thou weft cold or hot. So then, because thou art lukewarm, I will spue thee out of my mouth.” Like those who stand complete merely in notions of imputed righteousness, “thou sayest, I am rich, &c, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and poor, and blind, and naked,” Revelation 2:3. Can we read this sad account of the declension and falling away of the saints without asking the following questions:

(1.) If backsliding and apostasy were the bane of the primitive Church, according to our Lord’s doctrine; and if he did not promise to any of those backsliders that victorious, almighty grace would certainly bring them back; what can we think of Zelotes’ doctrine, which promises infallible perseverance, and insures finished salvation to every backsliding, apostatizing believer?

(2.) If the primitive Church, newly collected by the Spirit, and sprinkled by the blood of Christ, guided by apostolic preachers, preserved by the salt of persecution, and guarded by miraculous powers, through which apostates could be “given to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,” (witness the case of Ananias, Sapphira, and the incestuous Corinthian:) if the primitive Church, I say, with all these advantages, was in such danger by the falling away of the saints, as to require all those reproofs and threatenings from Christ himself; is it not astonishing that whole bodies of Protestant believers should rise in our degenerate days to such a pitch of unscriptural assurance, as to promise themselves, and one another, absolute, infallible perseverance in the Divine favour? And (3.) If the apostate Nicolas, once “a man of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom,” but afterward (it seems) the ringleader of the Nicolaitans; — if Nicolas, I say, went about to “lay a stumbling block before” Christians, by teaching them that fornication would never endanger their finished salvation; does Zelotes mend the matter, when he insinuates withal, that fornication, yea, adultery, and, if need be, murder, will do Christians good, and even answer the most excellent ends for them? Consider we next what were St. John’s thoughts of Antinomian apostates. He had such a sight of the mischief which their doctrine did, and would do in the Church, that he declares, “This is LOVE, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, that ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it. For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not [practically] that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh,” to destroy the works of the devil; who deny Christ in his holy doctrine; and among other dangerous absurdities will even give you broad hints that you may commit adultery and murder without ceasing to be God’s dear children. But believe them not. “Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought. Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the [practical] doctrine of Christ, hath not God, &c. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed,” 2 John 1:6-10. Again: “He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. These things have I written unto you, concerning them that seduce you, 1 John 2:4, 26. Little children, let no man deceive you: he that does righteousness is righteous, &c. He that committeth sin is of the devil, &c. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil,” 1 John 3:7, &c. When, in the text quoted above, St. John says, “They went out from us, but they were not all of us,” what a fine opportunity had he of adding, “If they are elect they will INFALLIBLY come back to us.” But, as he believed not the modern “doctrines of grace,” he says nothing either for Calvin’s reprobation, or Dr, Crisp’s election. Nor does he drop the least hint about a “day of God’s power,” in which changeless love was infallibly to bring back one of all those backsliders, to make him sing louder the praises of free, sovereign, victorious grace.

Although I have frequently mentioned St. Paul’s thoughts concerning fallen believers, I am persuaded that the reader will not be sorry to see them balanced with St. James’ sentiments on the same subject.

I.

St. Paul’s account of BACKSLIDERS.

Alexander the coppersmith (who was once a zealous Christian, see Acts 19:33,) did me much evil; the Lord reward him according to his works. No man [i.e. no believer] stood with me; but all forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge, 2 Timothy 4:14, 16. I fear lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would — lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults; and lest my God humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many who have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness, II.

St. James’ account of UNFAITHFUL BELIEVERS.

My brethren, &c, if there come unto your assembly a man in goodly apparel, and also a poor man in vile raiment, and ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, &c, are ye not partial? &c. But ye have despised the poor, &c. If ye have respect to persons ye commit sin, &c, for and fornication, and lasciviousness which they have committed, 2 Corinthians 12:20, 21. Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some is, &c. For if we sin wilfully [as they do] there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment, and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries, &c, [especially him] who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite to the Spirit of grace, Hebrews 10:25, &c. Many [fallen believers] walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you, even weeping, that they are enemies of the cross of Christ; whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly — and who mind earthly things. For all [comparatively speaking] seek their own, and not the things which are Jesus Christ’s, Philippians 3:18; 2:21.

whosoever [of you] shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. From whence come wars among you?

Come they not even of your lusts? &c. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that, &c, whosoever will be a friend of the world, is the enemy of God? James 2:1, &c; 4:1, 4.

The Epistle to the Hebrews is a treatise against apostasy, and of consequence against Calvinian perseverance. As a proof of it, I refer the reader to a convincing discourse on Hebrews 2:3, published by Mr. Olivers. The whole Epistle of St. Jude, and the second of St. Peter, were particularly written to prevent the falling away of the saints, and to stop the rapid progress of apostasy. The Epistle of St. Jude, and 2 Peter 2, agree so perfectly, that one would think the two apostles had compared notes: witness the following parallel: — I.

St. Peter’s description of ANTINOMIAN APOSTATES.

They have forsaken the right way; following the way of Balaam, who loved the wages of unrighteousness, 2 Peter 2:15.

Spots are they and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings, while they feast with you, ver. 13.

They walk after the flesh in the lust of II.

St. Jude’s description of ANTINOMIAN BACKSLIDERS.

These be they who separate themselves.

They ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, Jude 1:19, 11.

These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you; feeding themselves without fear, verse 12.

Filthy dreamers — walking after their own lusts, verses 8, 16.

uncleanness, ver. 10.

They speak great swelling words of vanity, they promise them [whom they allure] liberty, while they themselves are the servants of corruption, verses 18, 19.

As natural brute beasts, &c, they speak evil of the things that they understand not, [especially of the perfect law of liberty,] and shall utterly perish in their own corruption, ver. 12.

Wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest — beguiling unstable souls — to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever, verses 14, 17. [How far was St. Peter from soothing any of those backsliders by the smooth doctrine of their necessary infallible return!]

[St. Peter indirectly compares them to] the angels that sinned [whom] God spared not, but cast down to hell, and delivered into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment, ver. 4.

Their mouth speaketh great swelling words: — creeping in unawares [i.e. insinuating themselves into rich widows’ houses] having men’s persons in admiration, verses 4, 16.

These speak evil of those things which they know not [especially of Christ’s law.] But what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves, ver. 10.

Clouds they are without water, carried about of winds, trees whose fruit withereth, &c; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever, verses 12, 13. [How far was St. Jude from rocking any of those apostates in the cradle of infallible perseverance!]

[St. Jude compares them to] the angels who kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, &c, reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day, ver. 6.

From this remarkable parallel it is evident that the apostates described by St. Peter, and the backsliders painted by St. Jude, were one and the same kind of people: and by the following words it appears that all those backsliders really fell from the grace of God, and denied the Lord that bought them.

Even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction, &c, whose &c, damnation slumbereth not, 2 Peter 2:1.

Ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying [in works at least] the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, [as Lord, Lawgiver, or Judge,] Jude 1:4.

St. Peter more or less directly describes these backsliders, in me same epistles as people who have “forgotten that they WERE PURGED from their old sins” — who do not “give all diligence to add to their faith virtue” — who do not “make their calling and election sure” — who, “after they have ESCAPED the pollutions of the world through the KNOWLEDGE of our Lord Jesus Christ, [i.e. through a true and living faith,] are again entangled therein, and overcome; whose latter end is worse than the beginning — who, after they have KNOWN THE WAY of righteousness, turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them,” and verify the proverb, “The sow that was WASHED is turned to her wallowing in the mire.”

Here is not the least hint about the certain return of any of those backsliders, or about the good that their grievous falls will do either to others or to themselves. On the contrary, he represents them ALL as people that were in the high road to destruction: and, far from giving us an Antinomian innuendo about the final perseverance of all blood-bought souls, i.e. of the whole number of the redeemed, he begins his epistle by declaring that those self-destroyed backsliders “denied the Lord that BOUGHT them,” and concludes it by this seasonable caution: “There are in our own beloved brother Paul’s epistles things [it seems, about the election of grace, and about justification without the works of the law] which they that are unlearned ( amaqeiv, untaught in the Scriptures) and unstable, wrest, &c, unto their own destruction. Ye, therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, [being thus fairly warned] beware lest YE ALSO, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ;” which is the best method not to fall from grace — the only way to inherit the blessing, with which God will crown the faithfulness and genuine perseverance of the saints.

I read the heart of Zelotes; and seeing the objection he is going to start, I oppose to it this quotation from Baxter: “To say that then their faith (which works by faithful love) does more than CHRIST did, or GOD’S GRACE, is a putrid cavil. Their faith is no efficient cause at all of their pardon or justification; it is but necessary, receptive qualification. He that shuts the window, causeth darkness; but it is sottish to say that he who opens it, does more than the sun to cause light, which he causeth not at all; but removeth the impediment of reception; and faith itself is God’s gift,” — as all other talents are, whether we improve them or not. I should lose time, and offer an insult to the reader’s understanding, were I to comment upon the preceding scriptures; so great is their perspicuity and number. But I hope I shall not insult his candour by proposing to him the following queries:

(1.) Can Zelotes and Honestus be judicious Protestants, I mean consistent defenders of Bible religion, if the one throw away the weights of the second scale, while the other overlooks those of the first?

(2.) Is it not evident that, according to the Scriptures, the perseverance of the saints has two causes: THE FIRST free grace and Divine faithfulness; and THE SECOND free will and human faithfulness produced, excited, assisted, and nourished, but not necessitated by free grace?

(3.) With respect to the capital doctrine of perseverance also, does not the truth lie exactly between the extremes into which Zelotes and Honestus perpetually run? And (lastly) is it not clear that if Candidus will hold “the truth as it is in Jesus,” he must stand upon the line of moderation, call back Zelotes from the east, Honestus from the west, and make them cordially embrace each other under the Scripture meridian? There the kind Father falls upon the neck of the returning prodigal, and the heavenly bridegroom meets the wise virgins. There free grace mercifully embraces free will, while free will humbly stoops at the footstool of free grace. There “the sun goes down no more by day, nor the moon by night;” that is, the two Gospel axioms, which are the great doctrinal lights of the Church, without eclipsing each other, shine in perpetual conjunction, and yet in continual opposition. There their conjugal, mysterious, powerful influence gladdens the New Jerusalem, fertilizes the garden of the Lord, promotes the spiritual vegetation of all the trees of righteousness which line the river of God, and gives a Divine relish to the fruits of the Spirit which they constantly bear. There, as often as free grace smiles upon free will, it says, “Be faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life;” and as often as free will sees that crown glitter at the end of the race, it shouts, Grace! free grace unto it! a great part of our faithfulness consisting in ascribing to grace all the honour that becomes the FIRST CAUSE of all good — the ORIGINAL of all visible and invisible excellence.

Perseverance must close our race, if ever we receive the prize; let then the Scriptural account of it close my Scales. But before I lay them by, I must throw in two more grains of Scriptural truth; lest the reader should think that I have not made good weight. If I thought Zelotes to be a gross Antinomian, and Honestus an immoral moralist; and that they maliciously tear the oracles of God in pieces; I would make them full weight by the two following scriptures: — I.

The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness, and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth [or a part of it] in unrighteousness, Romans 1:18.

II.

I testify, &c, that if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy [much more if he take away from the words of every book in the Old and New Testament] God shall take his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book, Revelation 22:18, 19.

But considering Zelotes and Honestus as two good men, who sincerely fear and serve God in their way, and being persuaded that an injudicious fear of a Gospel axiom, and not a wilful aversion to the truth, makes them cast a veil over one half of the body of Bible divinity; I dare not admit the thought that those severe strictures are adapted to their case. I shall therefore only ask, whether they cannot find a suitable reproof in the following texts: — I.

I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that steal my word [contained No. 2.] every one from his neighbour, Jeremiah 23:30.

II.

Ye have made the word of God [contained No. 1.] of none effect by your tradition, Matthew 15:6. [Equally dismembering Christianity, ye still help the adversaries of the Gospel to put in practice their pernicious maxim, Divide and conquer. And who requires this at your hands? Who will give you thanks for such services as these?]