The life and times of the Rev. John Wesley, M.A., founder of the Methodists. Vol. 1 (of 3)Tyerman, L. (Luke)
History
The life and times of the Rev. John Wesley, M.A., founder of the Methodists. Vol. 1 (of 3)
Tyerman, L. (Luke)
Methodism; Wesley, John, 1703-1791
Samuel’s answer is dated Tiverton, March 26, 1739, in which he argues
that the witness of the Spirit is not necessary to salvation; and
refers, in proof of this, to the case of baptized infants, and to
persons of a gloomy constitution.[254]
Nine days afterwards, Wesley re-asserted that he had seen many persons
changed in a moment from the spirit of horror, fear, and despair, to
the spirit of hope, joy, and peace; and from sinful desires, till
then reigning over them, to a pure desire of doing the will of God.
He also knew that this great change, in several persons, had been
wrought either in sleep, or during a strong representation, to the eye
of their minds, of Christ, either on the cross, or in glory. He also
argues, that his brother’s reference to infants and persons of a gloomy
constitution fails to sustain his point; because no kind of assurance
is essential to the salvation of infants; and persons of a gloomy
constitution, so far from being doomed to die without the assurance,
have, to his own certain knowledge, even when almost mad, been brought
in a moment into a state of firm, lasting peace and joy.[255]
Other letters might be quoted; but enough has been said to show the
views which Wesley now held concerning the witness of the Spirit. He
believed the witness was necessary to his own salvation; and, yet, he
declares he has it not. He asserts that he has known instances in which
it has been granted in dreams; but he does not insist that dreams are
an essential medium. The whole affair is puzzling. On May 24, 1738, he
“received such a sense of the forgiveness of sins as till then he never
knew;” and yet, months afterwards, he declares, in the most explicit
terms, that he was now living without the enjoyment of the Spirit’s
witness. How is this discrepancy to be explained? Had he lost the sense
of forgiveness which he received on May 24? Or was he attaching to
the witness of the Spirit a signification too high? If he had not the
witness at the beginning of 1739, when did he obtain it afterwards? All
these questions will naturally occur to the thoughtful reader; but they
are more easily asked than answered.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account