John Bovee Dods - Twenty Four Short Sermons On The Doctrine Of Universal Salvation

J >> John Bovee Dods >> Twenty Four Short Sermons On The Doctrine Of Universal Salvation

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14

You perceive (dear reader) that this servant has presented no truth
for this son to believe. He wishes to give this son the impression
that the obtaining of this fortune depends on his _believing_, and not
on the _testament record, and faithfulness_ of his father. In fact, he
denies the existence of the father's _will_, and the _record_, and
requires the son to believe a lie so as to create the truth. The
servant does not understand his message, and the son does not know on
what certainty to rest for the money.

In the same manner we are called upon to secure an _interest_--an
eternal life in the Saviour. They will not admit its existence till we
believe. Then _belief_ must create it. But may we spend our last
breath in convincing poor sinners that it is already secured in Christ
for them, so that they may believe, and live by faith on the son of
God.

This father sends another messenger. He tells this son of the goodness
of his father, and that he has _willed_ him five thousand dollars,
that the _will_ is put on record, and that this fortune will be put
into his possession in two years. The son does not believe it. Now he
is an unbeliever. But does his unbelief alter the truth of the _will_
or of the record. No. The certainty, of his obtaining the money, rests
on the faithfulness of his kind parent. This servant perseveres, uses
convincing arguments and the son at length believes he is saved by
faith from all his miseries, and he rejoices with joy unspeakable. But
his _believing_ does not make the record any more true than it was
before he believed it. It simply alters his present condition by
kindling in his bosom the joys arising from faith and anticipation.--
We have now answered the objections that would naturally be brought
forward by those who believe that our eternal salvation is predicated
on conditions. As _works_ are not the requirements of the gospel only
so far as they flow from faith in the truth, and as _faith_ must
precede works, therefore the truth of our eternal life in Christ, must
exist previous to our believing. Consequently all conditions are
excluded from the gospel covenant.

We will now meet the objector on the doctrine of election and
reprobation, the substance of which is as follows--After man fell, God
was pleased to provide a Saviour for a part of the human family. That
elect number he chose in Christ before the foundation of the world,
gave them eternal life in him, and for them only he tasted death. The
gospel is now to be preached to the whole world, and as long as they
reject it, they are unbelievers. But the elect shall sooner, or later,
all be brought to believe.

We will examine the foundation on which this statement rests. To bring
it clearly before you, we will take an example. Suppose there is a
congregation of one hundred persons. Fifty of them were elected to
everlasting life before the foundation of the world--were secured by a
Saviour, and the rest were reprobated to endless wo. For them no
Saviour was designed, and no eternal life ever has, or ever will be
given them in him. Suppose a sermon is preached to those one hundred;
and the fifty, who are elected, believe the record of their eternal
life, are brought to the obedience of faith, while the other fifty
remain unmoved. The preacher turns upon them and pronounces them
_unbelievers_. But In what sense are they unbelievers? There has been
no truth presented to them, which they disbelieve. Must they believe
that Christ is their Saviour, or that they have an eternal life in
him? But they would in such case believe a lie. If they believed right
the reverse of the elect,--_believed_ that God was their enemy and
that Christ was not their Saviour, they would be _believers_. But if
they believed what the fifty converts did, they would be
_unbelievers_. We here repeat one premise laid down in our last
discourse--viz. In order for any man to be styled a _believer or
unbeliever_, there must first be presented some truth for him to
embrace or reject.

Now either God has given us eternal life in Christ before the world
began, or he has not. If he has, then we are _unbelievers_ if we
reject it. If he has not given it, and should we still believe that he
has, we would then believe a lie. But neither our _belief, or
unbelief_ can ever alter the fact.

God has "chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the world that
we should be holy and without blame before him in love; having
predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to
himself according to the good pleasure of his will." * * * "Having
made known unto us the mystery of his will according to his good
pleasure which he hath purposed in himself; that in the dispensation
of the fullness of times, he might gather together, in one, all things
in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in
him." Some apply the above to the elect. But it embraces all things in
heaven and earth, which are to be gathered together in Christ, and be
new creatures. In addition to this we will introduce two more passages
"Who hath saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according
to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace which was
given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." "In hope of eternal
life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began." In
these scriptures we are assured _first_, that God chose us in Christ,
before the foundation of the world--_second_, that he saved us
according to his own purpose and grace before the world began, and
_third_ that he promised eternal life before the world began. These
things being embraced in his original plan, and purpose, their
performance is therefore certain as that the whole plan of God will be
carried unto execution.

There is, in my humble opinion, a strange inconsistency in the common
doctrine. They contend that on account of the transgression of our
first parent, all mankind were fallen creatures and even came into
existence totally depraved. To show the justice of God in the
constitution of our nature, they contend that Adam was our covenant
head, and had he maintained his original purity, we would also have
stood perfect in holiness, and no one would have had any reason to
complain. Now since Adam has fallen, and involved us in ruin, it is
equally just in God that we should share the fate of our covenant head
in the one instance as in the other. But if we make use of this same
argument in relation to Christ, the second Adam--if we contend that he
was the covenant head of every man, that the covenant was not made for
_this_, but for the _future_ world--that this covenant of grace being
made between the Father and the Son, was to stand independent of man--
that eternal life was promised and given us in him before the world
began--that as our covenant head, he resisted all temptations, and
perfectly fulfilled the law--that he died, and appeared alive beyond
the tomb free from temptation, and in a holy and immortal
constitution. If we contend for this, making use of their own
arguments, saying that it is just as rational that we should appear in
the image of Christ in the future world as that we should come into
this world in the image of Adam, they will pronounce the argument so
far as applicable to Adam, _sound logic_, but so far as this same
argument of theirs is applied by Universalists to Christ, they
pronounce it perfect jargon.

But, says the objector, there is one point you have not settled, and I
will here rest the whole of my argument upon it. It is this--God has,
in no instance, promised eternal to _unbelievers_; and unless you can
prove that the promise does extend to them, your arguments must fall
like rottenness to the ground. We have certainly proved this, and to
attend to the objector's request would but be, in some measure, going
over the ground already occupied. We will, however, just touch this
point again. We will introduce the following words of Paul to Titus.
"In hope of eternal life which God that cannot lie promised before the
world began."

If God promised his creatures eternal life before the world began,
will they not obtain it? They will for this passage says that he
_cannot lie_. But says the objector, he has not promised it to the
unbeliever. We would then inquire, what is it that constitutes him an
_unbeliever_? Why do you call him an _unbeliever_? Do you say because
he disbelieves the truth of God's promise? Then you must, of course,
admit the truth of God's promise to him. If so, it must stand, for God
cannot lie. You cannot call upon a sinner to _believe_, until you
admit the existence of _that very truth_, you wish him to believe,
God's promise of eternal life in Christ, is the gospel we are called
upon to believe with a sincere heart. If you contend that it is
promised to an elect number only, and not to the reprobates, then if
they should all be brought to the knowledge of the truth, what would
they believe? Ans. The elect would believe the promise of eternal life
was made to them, the reprobates would believe right the reverse of
the elect, and all would be believers. No, says the objector, the
reprobates ought to believe just as the elect do. But in this case,
they would believe that they also have the promise of eternal life.
This would be believing a lie, because you say that God has not made
them that promise? How would you preach to such persons? If you called
upon them to believe the truth of the gospel, which is eternal life,
you would call upon them to believe a lie. How can you extricate
yourself from this difficulty? But inquires the objector, how do you
know that God has promised eternal life to all? Ans. Because the
scriptures do call all men either _believers_, or _unbelievers_, in
view of the promise that God has made. Take away that promise and
belief or unbelief respecting it can no longer have an existence--
_Believers and unbelievers_ would be no more.

But says the objector this is not proof that eternal life is promised
to an _unbeliever_. Well I am surprised at this assertion of my
opponent! First, I ask, what do you call a believer? Ans. One who
believes that God has promised, and given him eternal life in Christ
before the world began. Then, of course, an _unbeliever_ must be one,
to whom God has also promised and given eternal life in Christ before
the world, but will not believe it. But says the objector this cannot
be. I would then ask whether eternal life was not promised, and given
in Christ to the _believer_ before he believed it? Certainly. It must
have been the truth before he could believe. Well, what was he at that
time? An _unbeliever_ of course. Then eternal [life] is promised to
all, because it is the lack of faith in _that never failing promise_
of Jehovah that constitutes an unbeliever. But says the objector--a
man "must do so and so," or he cannot be saved. This is not correct;
he must _believe_, or he cannot be saved. We are saved by faith in the
promise and are permitted to look forward with satisfaction and joy to
an immortal existence where we shall be free from sin, sorrow and
pain. This faith and hope fill the soul with love to God, and induce
us to break off our sins by righteousness. So a salvation by faith can
only be enjoyed in this life, and is to end when faith and hope are
lost in certainty and in joy. Though only few are saved by faith, yet
all shall know the Lord from the greatest to the least, whom to know
is life eternal.

SERMON VIII

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee,
Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." John
iii. 3.

As we have in the last three sermons dwelt particularly on a salvation
by _faith_, we will take the liberty to introduce the subject of the
new birth next in order, as it will be, more readily, retained by the
reader, in this connexion than otherwise. Indeed, it hears a strong
resemblance to them so far as the subject of faith is concerned in our
present exposition. But whoever is a careful reader of the New
Testament, will discover that the subject of faith, and the genuine
repentance which that faith produces, is not of trivial moment.

There is no subject of divine revelation, on which more has been said,
preached and written than the one, which we are now about to consider.
It has been brought forward by men of talents and erudition as an
insuperable barrier against Universal Salvation, and their several
adherents have taken it for granted, that it can never be explained in
harmony with the sentiment, that all men shall eventually obtain
eternal life through the Redeemer of men. But these impressions have
arisen from the fact, that they have taken their own views and
explanations to be scripturally correct, and from these premises, they
have drawn conclusions utterly opposed to the final holiness and
happiness of God's intelligent creation. They have supposed the new
birth to be some mysterious change produced by some mysterious
operation of the divine spirit on the mind, and that it is in
substance a miracle.

One denomination has contended that if a man once obtained this
change, he was safe, could never "finally fall from grace," but would
eventually land in the kingdom of immortal glory. Several other
denominations admit the new birth to be the same change already
noticed, but contend that the subject may fall from grace, and be
finally lost. Here then the man, who was, according to their views,
_born again_, might still never see the kingdom of God beyond the
grave. On this principle the new birth would be no security, that any
one would obtain heaven. According to this sentiment, a man might be
born again, fall away, and be born again "until seven times," and in
the end not see the kingdom of God. Those, who advocate this
sentiment, believe that _faith and repentance_ prerequisites to the
new birth, and also believe in the salvation of infants.

This being so, it will come to pass that half of the world will be
saved, inasmuch as about that number die in what may be, justly termed
an infant state. But of those, who come to years of accountability,
they believe but few will be saved. So the greater proportion of
those, who will finally surround the throne of God, will be those, who
have never been born again according to their views. It will not, I
presume, be contended, that infants who, they believe, are totally
depraved, ever exercise _faith_, or experience the _new birth_ in this
life.

From the above views, I shall take the liberty to dissent, and may
probably differ some from the expositions given by others. It is
evident that Jesus Christ in his instructions frequently brought
forward some natural facts plainly understood by those whom he
addressed, in order more clearly to illustrate his subject, and then
made his illustrations so nearly resemble that natural fact, that no
man could possible misunderstand him, unless he had been led into
tradition by blind guides. In the context, he makes allusion to
natural birth, of which every man knows the meaning, and says to
Nicodemus, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which
is born of the spirit is spirit."

Natural birth pre-supposes the perfect formation of the human body by
that secret energy of nature, God only can comprehend. But that
formation, itself, is not birth. Birth is that operation, that
introduced us into this world. We are now flesh and blood, which
cannot inherit the kingdom. What is born of the flesh is flesh. We
must now be born again from mortal to immortality, otherwise we could
not see the kingdom of God.

Must not man be born of a woman in order to see this world? Can he
look upon the beautiful objects of creation, or contemplate these
countless wonders of the Almighty before he is born into being? He
cannot. All without exception will admit, that it is impossible for
any man to enter this natural world, in which we live, without birth.
So it is equally impossible to enter the kingdom of God without being
born _again_ in the strictest sense of the word. A man cannot "be born
again" ten, or twenty years, nor even _one day_ before he sees the
kingdom of God, any more than he could be born twenty days before he
came forth out of the womb. As natural birth cannot take place any
given time before we enter this world, but is the _circumstance_ that
introduces us, so a _second birth_ cannot take place any given time
before we enter the kingdom of God in the next world but is the _very
thing_, that shall introduce us into it; and the moment we are born
again, we shall see it,--we shall be spirit, and beyond the dominion
of death and sin. He that is born of the flesh, _is flesh_, so long as
he lives; and he that is born of the spirit _is spirit_. As we now
"bear the image of the earthly" through a _natural_ birth, "so we
shall also bear the image of the heavenly" through a _spiritual_
birth. And as no man in this world is a spirit, so no man has in
reality passed the new birth. When we were born into this world, we
were brought from insensibility to an existence entirely new. So in
order to enter the kingdom of God, which is not of this world, we must
be born again from the insensibility of death into a new and happy
existence beyond the grave.

The question now arises, when does this new birth take place? We reply
when this mortal puts on immortality through a resurrection. When we
shall be aroused from the sleep of death to a precipient existence in
heaven--when we shall awake satisfied with the likeness of God. Paul,
in the xv. Chap. 1 Cor. Plainly states that the spiritual body is
prepared and put on after death. Birth then must _follow_, not
_precede_ that spiritual body. It is impossible that birth should take
place, till the body is first prepared. Man's natural body is
organized in the womb, and then born into this world. He drops to a
state of insensibility in death, a reorganization of the spiritual
body takes place to the natural eye imperceptible, and its nature
indestructible. It is gradually brought forward through a resurrection
similar to the grain of wheat to which Paul compares it, is awakened
to a conscious existence, and bears the image of the heavenly as it
once bore the image of the earthy. The resurrection is therefore every
moment progressing, and every man is raised in his own order of time.

But says the reader, if the resurrection be the new birth, then
Christ, himself must have been born again, in order to enter the
kingdom of God! Certainly. But inquires the reader, where do the
scriptures teach that Christ was ever born again? In Colossians chap.
i:15. are these words--"Who [Christ] is the image of the invisible
God, the _first born_ of every creature." This cannot mean that he was
the first born into this state of existence; but he was the first one
whom human eyes ever saw alive beyond the destruction of death to die
no more, and the only one that mortal eye will ever see, for he arose
in his natural body, (being the only true witness, appointed of God,)
to bring life and immortality to light through the gospel.

But that passage, says the reader, does not satisfy me, that Christ
was born again. Then listen once more--verse 18--"who is the
beginning, the _first born_ from the dead that in all things he might
have the pre-eminence." Rev. chap. i. 5. "Jesus Christ the faithful
witness, and the _first begotten_ from the dead." Here it is plainly
stated that he is the "first born from the dead" "the _first begotten_
from the dead" These scriptures in connexion with several others, that
might be quoted, prove that Christ was born again, and that the
resurrection is called birth.

It is evident that man falls to a state of insensibility in death, and
remains in sleep while the spiritual body is forming out of those
subtle materials, that at death pass into _hades_; and when the
reorganization is completed, the new being is born into the kingdom of
immortal glory. A drowning man, we know, falls to a state of
unconsciousness. Fainting--yes, even a night's sleep proves that the
mind is susceptible of falling into insensibility, or suspending its
mental operations, and disproves the notion of its entering a future
state, only through a resurrection of the dead. This fact is not only
substantiated by reason, but it is the doctrine of Revelation. The
wise man says, "the dead know not any thing." Paul, in the xv. Chap. 1
Cor. Predicates the truth of our resurrection on the fact that Christ
rose from the dead; and on this ground he reasons, that if there be no
resurrection, then preaching is vain, faith is also vain, the
christians were yet in their sins, and they that were fallen asleep in
Christ were perished, and concludes by saying, "let us eat, drink, for
tomorrow we die." Suppose a christian should this moment die, and,
according to common opinion, enter immediately on an immortal
existence. Could we now say--if there be no resurrection, he is fallen
asleep in Christ and perished? No, because, instead of being perished,
i.e. _Annihilated_, he would remain in infinite happiness and glory,
even if there should, never, be any resurrection. So you perceive that
Paul did not believe any one could enter eternity only through a
resurrection. He believed, they would fall asleep in Christ, and in
that sleep remain till in Christ they were made alive. He embraces the
whole in the following words--"Since by man came death, by man came
also the resurrection of the dead."

When the sentence of death was pronounced upon Adam, which was to pass
upon all men, the promise of a Saviour then made, was, it appears, not
understood. Their posterity looked forward for a temporal king, and
had no idea of an immortal existence beyond the "narrow house." Death
the king of terrors, was not yet disarmed of his sting by the
resurrection of our triumphant Redeemer. This truth was not yet
revealed to men. Here the human family were without hope, and
trembling at the darkness--the seven fold darkness of the tomb. No ray
of light and joy beamed from that cheerless mansion to ease the aching
heart, or dispel that melancholy gloom, which pervaded the parental
bosom when gazing for the last time upon the struggles of a dying
child.

Here was a world born into existence under the certain sentence of
death, and groaning in the bondage of corruption, without any hope of
being delivered from it, by an immortal birth, "into the glorious
liberty of the children of God." In this period of anxiety and
distress, the glad tidings were proclaimed to the shepherds on the
plains of Judea, announcing the birth of the Saviour of the world. A
new birth, which is not mentioned in the old Testament, was at length
proclaimed by a Saviour in the _new_. He died on the cross, and was
"the first born from the dead."

He is the head of every man, by the grace of God tasted death for
every man, and rose again for their justification. The scriptures
declare that "we shall be saved by his life" that he is "the bread of
God that cometh down from heaven and giveth life to the world." He is
our way, our truth and life, and "because he lives we shall live
also." "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made
alive," or born from the dead. And he that is made alive in Christ is
a new creature, old things are passed away--all things are become new.

But says the reader, though the resurrection of Jesus is set forth by
a birth from death, yet the resurrection of the human family is never
so represented. You mistake. Out of the many passage that might be
adduced, we have room, in this discourse, for only one. It shall,
however, be satisfactory. In Romans, 8th chapter, Paul says, "Because
the creature itself also, shall be delivered from the bondage of
corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God; for we
know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together
until now." [We would remark, that the word _creature, is ktisis_ in
the Greek, and is the same that is rendered _creation_ in the next
verse.] In this quotation, you perceive, that Paul represents the
whole creation as groaning in travail pains, and declares that the
whole creation shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into
the glorious liberty of the sons of God. He compares them to a woman
in pain ready for delivery; and that they are delivered from
corruption to incorruption at the resurrection is certain. [See 1 Cor.
xv:42.]

You now understand what I mean by the new birth. It is to pass from
death to life and immortality, in Christ, beyond the grave, where
flesh and blood can never enter. For that which is born of the flesh
is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit.

We have now pointed out the new birth, and shown that it bears some
resemblance to the natural birth, with which Jesus compared it. And
how truly sublime and cheering the thought, that the great family of
man, who are all born into existence under the certain sentence of
death, are to receive a second birth into an existence entirely new,
and the whole of his dying family are to be made the children of Jesus
Christ by adoption.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14