The Oxford Methodists : $b Memoirs of the Rev. Messrs. Clayton, Ingham, Gambold, Hervey, and Broughton, with biographical notices of othersTyerman, L. (Luke)
History
The Oxford Methodists : $b Memoirs of the Rev. Messrs. Clayton, Ingham, Gambold, Hervey, and Broughton, with biographical notices of others
“Let me produce one text more,—‘I send thee to turn them from
darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God; that,
they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among
them which are sanctified by faith that is in Me’ (Acts xxvi.
18). Here Christ distinguishes between _remission of sins_,
and the _inheritance of the saints_; between the _pardon_ that
delivers from hell, and the _justification_ that entitles to
heaven. So that the former does by no means constitute the
latter; but is connected with it, as a link in the same sacred
chain; or included in it, as part of the same glorious whole.
“_Theron._ Admitting your distinction to be just, is not
the satisfaction, made by the death of Christ, sufficient
of _itself_ to obtain, both our full pardon, and our final
happiness?
“_Aspasio._ Since my friend has started the question, I may
venture, with all reverence to the divine counsels, to answer
in the negative; it being necessary, that, the Redeemer of
man should _obey_, as well as _suffer_, in their stead” (John
x. 18; Matt. iii. 15; Rom. v. 17). “It should be considered,
Whether Christ’s sufferings were a complete satisfaction of the
law? Complete they were with regard to the _penalty_, not with
regard to the _precept_. A distinction obvious and important.
From whence arises the following argument; which, for once,
you will allow me to propose in the _logical_ form. By what
alone the law was not satisfied; by that alone sinners could
not be justified: By Christ’s sufferings alone, the law was not
satisfied. Therefore, by Christ’s sufferings alone, sinners
could not be justified. But when we join the active with the
passive obedience of our Lord,—the efficacy of the one, with
the perfection of the other,—how does our justification stand
firm, in the _fullest_ sense of the word! We have _all_ that
the law demands, both for our exemption from the curse, and as
a title to the blessing.
“_Theron._ But if we are justified by Christ’s fulfilling
the law, we are justified by works. So that, before you can
strike out such a way of salvation, you must _contradict_
yourself; and, what is more adventurous, you must abolish that
fundamental principle of the Gospel; ‘By the works of the law,
shall no flesh be justified.’
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