"God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself." Christ's perfect life on earth in the development of the plan of salvation was to demonstrate the perfection of the law. In him the vista was opened that the world might have a view of the Father and understand the nature of his law. "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father." "He will magnify the law and make it honorable." To magnify is to enlarge and make more distinct. To make honorable is to bestow honor upon that which had not previously been so distinguished. The expression of the prophet shows that the law had not been fully understood or appreciated as it should have been; and Christ's mission was to make it appear in its true native garb of perfection. Sin, with its benighting influences, had made it appear dishonorable; but Christ's mission removed the reproach and exemplified its perfections, which otherwise could not have been made so prominent.
But Christ came not to condemn the world, but to save it. He fulfilled the law in every particular, and thus brought salvation to the lost. The sublime attributes of God were revealed to the world in his life and labor of love for man. Jesus died to vindicate the law—not its stern justice only, but also its mercy. Men are prone to look upon the death of Christ as a sacrifice to appease the stern and unrelenting demands of his Father's law, and much is said of its principles of justice, while mercy is an element spoken of as springing from other sources than anything inherent in the law. Justice is an attribute of God; so also is mercy. Why should the former be prominent in his law and the latter not found there at all?
Jesus gave instruction concerning the two great commandments,—supreme love to God and equal love to man,—saying that all the law is suspended upon them. The law then is love, and that is just what God is said to be. "God is love," and everything proceeding from him must be begotten of love. "This is the love of God that we keep his commandments." That love once in the heart of man constrains him to be obedient, for love is loyalty to God.
MERCY IN THE LAW.
Our fellow-men often transgress against us; but if they repent of the injury done, we are morally bound to forgive them. If we do not forgive, we are transgressors of the law and under its condemnation. But it can condemn none except those who have violated it. Then to cherish an unforgiving spirit is a violation of the law, which could not possibly be true unless there is some principle in the law requiring pardon when the transgressor is penitent. Suppose the transgressor repents toward God, asking for pardon, and is refused. Could God withhold pardon under421such conditions and be in harmony with his law? If he could do so lawfully, how can he justly require us to forgive? How can the law be perfect and not require pardon under such conditions? Is there any instance on record where God has withheld pardon from the truly repentant? It is clear then that the law requires us to forgive. But no one will contend that it requires us to imitate a trait of God's character which is not revealed in his law. It is manifest that we can never become more perfect in any trait of character than the law requires; but it requires us to forgive, and it cannot require more than it grants. It would be an inconsistency for it to require us to be merciful and show none itself.
"Love is the fulfilling of the law." Rom. 13: 10. "Sin is the transgression of the law." 1 John 3:4. Here inspiration gives as clear a definition of love as of sin. By inserting this definition of love in another passage it will help to obtain a very exalted view of the merits of the law. "God so loved [fulfilled the law toward] the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." A comparison of these scriptures presents a sublime thought, from which can be drawn several very important conclusions:—
God's gift of Christ to save the world was in fulfillment of the principles of his law.
Christ's incarnation, life on earth, sacrificial death, and consequent pardon to repentant sinners, are all in perfect harmony with the claims of the law.
The love inherent in the law constrained its Author to make provision for salvation from sin.
We are indebted to the perfect principles of the law for the grace of God bestowed upon us.
The law is an expression of God's love to all his intelligent creatures.
The transgression of the law is a violation of God's love.
Antinomianism is subversive of the plan of grace, for to abolish the law would destroy the very principles that bring us to Christ that we might be justified by faith.
The law contains the principles of mercy if its fulfillment toward mankind brings salvation.
If God had made no provision for salvation from sin, he would not have fulfilled toward the world the principles of his own moral government; and Satan's views of the law would have appeared much more plausible than otherwise, and sympathizers with his rebellious ideas would have had some foundation for their cause. The experiment of sin would have proved the law of God's government imperfect. But the Omniscient God, foreseeing the end from the beginning, laid the foundation of his moral government so infinitely broad and perfect that it would endure the test of rebellion, even though it originated with the brightest angel that stood beside his throne. If God would not provide such a law, his claim to both omniscience and omnipotence would be rendered nugatory and his law manifestly imperfect. But the fact that he can use it as an instrument in turning the sinful from their evil course and making them loyal to him demonstrates its perfection, and shows that it embraces within its principles that which will prevail in any emergency.
This view of the perfections of the law of God enables one to understand that the gospel is but a development of the law—an exemplification of its principles. In spring the tree is laden with blooms, indicative of a rich yield of fruit in autumn. There is a latent force in the tree, which, under proper conditions, results in this development. The acorn contains only a minute germ, but proper conditions will develop it into a great tree. Just so the law of Jehovah is a living thing. Its latent principles have developed and bloomed out in the plan of salvation, and the perfect fruit will appear and be enjoyed in the ages to come. The light sown for the righteous is germinating and developing, first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear.
"The law of the Lord is perfect." Why should inspiration make such an assertion unless its perfection had been questioned? Satan questioned it, and led others to join his rebellion, until the light of its divine principles which their Creator had written in their hearts was obliterated by their sin; but God reveals his mercy and its perfection by sending it forth as an instrument to turn transgressors back to himself, thus showing that its divine love has power to prevail even over its bitterest enemies. By no other means could its absolute perfection be so clearly demonstrated. God is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, when we were dead in sins. Truly the gospel is the mystery of God. When traced back to its origin, it is found to spring from the same germ of divine love in which the moral law originated.
THE ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
By Percy T. Magan
Is It Protestant and Christian?
(Continued.)
JUDGED BY ITS FOUNDERS.
[This article is No. 21 in the series entitled "A Review of Sunday Legislation in Century Nineteen," but it will be of equal interest to those who have not read preceding numbers.—ED. S. OF T.]
As IN the case of the Church of Rome the lives of the popes, the so-called vicegerents of God, were introduced in evidence that the Catholic faith was a bad one, so in the case of the Church of England the lives of the founders of that church may fairly be admitted to prove that she was not Christian and Protestant, that she was not the product of the grand doctrine of RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH, but that she was a "political job."
The character of Henry VIII. is so well known, and so universally admitted to be bad, that it needs no comment here.
How stands the case with Cranmer? By many he is regarded as a saint. His recantation of the Church of England faith is considered to be the only blemish of his life; but his subsequent death at the stake is accounted an atonement for that. We will let Macaulay present his character in its true light:—
"If we consider Mr. Cranmer merely as a statesman, he will not appear a much worse man than Wolsey, Gardiner, Cromwell, or Somerset. But when an attempt is made to set him up as a saint, it is scarcely possible for any man of sense who knows the history of the times to preserve his gravity. But since his admirers claim for him a place in the noble army of martyrs, his claims require fuller discussion."
The origin of his greatness, common enough in the scandalous chronicles of courts, seems strangely out of place in a hagiology. Cranmer rose into favor by serving Henry in the most disgraceful affair of his first divorce. He promoted the marriage of Anne Boleyn with the king. On a frivolous pretense he pronounced that marriage null and void. . . . On a pretense, if possible still more frivolous, he dissolved the ties which bound the shameless tyrant to Anne of Cleves. He attached himself to Cromwell while the fortunes of Cromwell were flourishing. He voted for cutting off Cromwell's head without a trial, when the tide of royal favor turned. He conformed backwards and forwards as the king changed his mind. He assisted while Henry lived in condemning to the flames those who denied the doctrine of transubstantiation. He found out as soon as Henry was dead that the doctrine was false. He was, however, not at a loss for people to burn. The authority of his station and of his gray hairs was employed to overcome the disgust with which an intelligent and virtuous child regarded persecution. Intolerance is always bad. But the sanguinary intolerance of a man who thus wavered in his creed, excites a loathing to which it is difficult to give vent without calling foul names. Equally false to political and to religious obligations, the primate was first the tool of Somerset, and then the tool of Northumberland. When the protector wished to put his own brother to death, without even the semblance of a trial, he found a ready instrument in Cranmer. In spite of the canon law, which forbade a churchman to take any part in matters of blood, the archbishop signed the warrant for the atrocious sentence. When Somerset had in his turn been destroyed, his destroyer received the support of Cranmer in a wicked attempt to change the course of the succession. . . . [He was mixed up in a plot to exclude the papal claimants to the English throne.] The plot failed; popery triumphed; and Cranmer recanted. Most people look on his recantation as a single blemish on an honorable life, the frailty of an unguarded moment. But, in fact, his recantation was in strict accordance with the system on which he had constantly acted. It was part of a regular habit. It was not his first recantation that he had made; and, in all probability, if it had answered his purpose, it would not have been the last. We do not blame him for not choosing to be burned alive. It is no very serious reproach to any person that he does not possess heroic fortitude. But surely a man who liked the fire so little should have had some sympathy for others. A persecutor who inflicts nothing which he is not ready to endure deserves some respect. But when a man who loves his doctrines more than the lives of his neighbors, loves his own little finger better than his doctrines, a very simple argument a fortiori will enable us to estimate the amount of his benevolence.422But his martyrdom, it is said, redeemed everything. It is extraordinary that so much ignorance should exist on this subject. The fact is that, if a martyr be a man who chooses to die rather than to renounce his opinions, Cranmer was no more a martyr than Dr. Dodd. He died solely because he could not help it. He never retracted his recantation till he found he had made it in vain. The queen was fully resolved that, Catholic or Protestant, he should burn. Then he spoke out, as people generally speak out when they are at the point of death and have nothing to hope or to fear on earth. If Mary had suffered him to live, we suspect that he would have heard mass and received absolution, like a good Catholic, till the accession of Elizabeth, and that he would then have purchased, by another apostasy, the power of burning men better and braver than himself."
"We do not mean, however, to represent him as a monster of wickedness. He was not wantonly cruel or treacherous. He was merely a supple, timid, interested courtier, in times of frequent and violent change."
We most gladly concur with Macaulay in the sentiments expressed in the last paragraph quoted. Cranmer, from a worldly standpoint, was not a grossly bad character. But the life of Jesus Christ was not the ruling passion of his soul. The citations given will at least prove this much, and we have purposely taken them from one of the most moderate and ingenuous of writers. Macaulay wrote long after the time of Cranmer; and he had nothing to gain and nothing to lose by telling the truth about him. Nor have we the slightest inclination to blackmail this prelate's character. So we will simply dismiss his case by saying that he did not manifest the Christianity of Christ, and beyond that we will aver nothing.
Another of the charter members of the Church of England was Somerset. No more need be said of him than that he possessed less of the spirit that makes men martyrs than did Cranmer.
As for Henry VIII., he desired to be his own pope, and considering the character of the man to whom he formerly owned allegiance as 'supreme pontiff,' we cannot blame him much. But he was not a Christian, and therefore any church which he might form could not possibly be a Christian, Protestant church.
Queen Elizabeth also played a prominent part in the formation of the Church of England. She was the daughter of Henry VIII., and she shared her father's feelings. She considered it was her right to be pope in her own dominions. And pope she was. A glance at her character will be sufficient.
Elizabeth was sagacious enough to see clearly that there were great advantages to be derived from a close connection between the throne and the altar. That is, great advantages to herself.
At the time of her accession, indeed, she evidently meditated a partial reconciliation with Rome; and, throughout her whole life, she leaned strongly to some of the most obnoxious parts of the Catholic system. But her imperious temper, her keen sagacity, and her peculiar situation, soon led her to attach herself completely to a church which was all her own. She supported it by severe penal laws, not because she thought conformity to its discipline necessary to salvation, but because it was the fastness which arbitrary power was making strong for itself, because she expected a more profound obedience from those who saw in her both their civil and their ecclesiastical chief, than from those who, like the Papists, ascribed spiritual authority to the pope, or from those who, like some of the Puritans, ascribed it only to heaven. To dissent from her establishment was to dissent from an institution founded with an express view to the maintenance and extension of the royal prerogative.
Such were the motives which dictated the religion of Elizabeth. Her character was far superior to that of her father, but her religious system, wherever it differed from his, differed for the worse. Her pride and arrogance illy became one professing to be a follower of the meek and lowly Jesus. Her system of 'favorites' savored not of heaven. Her treatment of Essex hardly corresponded with the precepts of the Man of Calvary.
Now these four, Henry VIII., Elizabeth, Somerset, and Cranmer, were the charter members of the Church of England. From them it received its mould. They were not Christians, as every man acquainted with the history of the times knows. Therefore the Church of England could not possibly have been, at the time of its conception, a Protestant church. Protestantism in its essence relies solely upon the power of the word of God. It emanates from the word of God. The Church of England has ever relied upon the arm of the State; and it was from a State 'political job' that it emanated. Therefore again we say that the Church of England at its origin was not Protestant. It did afterwards imbibe into its liturgy some Protestant traits; but even these it never lived up to.
Nevertheless we consider it far better than the Romish system, for reasons which we will furnish in our next paper. Suffice to say in conclusion in regard to its origin that it was merely a scheme 'to transfer the full cup of sorceries from the Babylonian enchantress to other hands, spilling as little as possible by the way.'
NEARNESS OF HIS COMING.
By Elder Matthew Larson
BY ELDER MATTHEW LARSON.
HAVING in the previous article established the fact that Christ will come again, and the manner and importance of that event, I shall now call attention to another important consideration, namely, the nearness of his coming. May we know anything concerning the nearness of that event?—Certainly, it seems no more than just and reasonable to believe that an event of such great interest and importance to God's people would in some way be revealed to us, so that we might know when it is near at hand, and so be prepared therefor. "But," says the objector, "what difference does it make to us whether we know anything about when that event is to take place? Admitting that we might know something about it, what benefit can it be to us to investigate the matter? If I am prepared for death, will I not also be prepared for his coming? What, then, is the use of saying anything about it?"
These objections may seem quite plausible to the minds of those who present them, but they plainly indicate that those who make them are not yet prepared for death, far less for the coming of Christ; for some of these same persons will say, "He may come to-night, or to-morrow; or he may not come for a hundred or a thousand years from now." And the more you talk to them on the subject, the more will they manifest their aversion to hearing anything concerning it; and we would naturally be led to the conclusion that they would prefer to not have him come at all. Still they profess to love him, and declare that he is their best friend.
The fact is, if we really love Christ, if he is the Chiefest among ten thousand, and "the One altogether lovely" to our souls, we will long for his return, and love to talk about it, and will hail with gladness every token of his soon return. What would we think of that wife's professions of love for her absent husband who, on being informed that he was soon to return, would begin to manifest a dislike to hear anything on that subject, and, in an impatient or indifferent spirit, would begin to object that she did not care to hear anything about it; that it didn't make any difference to her when he would come, just so she might be prepared or ready to receive him when he would come? Would we not conclude, and justly, too, that there was something wrong, that she must have turned her affections away from him? and how would her husband feel to learn that she acted, or expressed herself, thus? Those who truly love Christ will love his appearing, and will be waiting and anxiously looking for him to return. Says the apostle:—
"And unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation." Heb. 9: 28.
But how, then, about those who do not look for him?—To them the converse will be true. He will not appear unto them "unto salvation," but they will be left to perish. We are to love his appearing. Says the apostle:—
"Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." 2 Tim. 4: 8.
But what of those who do not "love" his appearing?—To them the opposite of the text must be equally true. There is, then, some virtue in, or necessity of, our looking for and loving his appearing. It is an event in which we are to believe. "And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ; . . . when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe . . . in that day." 2 Thess. 1: 7-10.
May we, then, dear readers, be of those who shall love, believe in, and look forward to that glad day.
"And it shall be said in that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, and he will save us; this is the Lord; we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation." Isa. 25: 9.
The very fact that, as we have already found, there are to be some who will be looking and waiting for him when he returns, is sufficient to prove that we may and are to know, not only in regard to his coming, but something in regard to the nearness of that event.
"But," says one, "don't you know that the Bible says that of 'that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only' (Matt. 24:36), that that day is to come as a 'thief in the night'? So what is the use of troubling ourselves over the matter?" True, we cannot know the exact day or hour when the Son of Man shall come, but does it therefore follow that we are to know nothing about it whatever? The Bible, however, declares just as emphatically that we shall know something about it. We are to know when it is near, even at the doors. "So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it [margin 'he'] is near, even at the doors." Matt. 24: 33.
On whom, then, will it come as a thief in the night?—On the wicked,—those who are not looking for him; and they shall not escape from destruction.
"For when they [those upon whom that day shall come as a thief in the night,—the wicked] shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, . . . and they shall not escape."
But how about the righteous?—"But ye,423brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief." 1 Thess. 5: 1-4. "Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand." Dan. 12: 10.
This will be sufficient to show that we may know when that day is near. "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." Luke 21: 28.
JESUS IS COMING SOON.
By John M'Carthy
BY JOHN M'CARTHY.
Jesus is coming. Oh, loud let us sing;
O'er every mountain this news let us ring!
Peace, joy, and comfort this message will bring,
Jesus is coming soon.
Jesus is coming. Oh, loudly proclaim,
Coming his children redeemed to reclaim!
Sound it more fervent again and again,
Jesus is coming soon.
Jesus is coming. Oh, let us away
To highways and hedges by night and by day!
Tell out the truth, nor one moment delay,
Jesus is coming soon.
Jesus is coming. How blessed to know
That soon from life's transient scenes we shall go,
Leaving all sadness and sorrow below!
Jesus is coming soon.
Jesus is coming. Let's learn of him here,
So that his coming will bring us no fear.
Oh, may we realize now he is near!
Jesus is coming soon.
ANTICHRIST.
By I. E. Kimball
BY ELDER I. E. KIMBALL.
"YE have heard that antichrist shall come." The prophecy concerning this power is so conspicuous that we must notice it. There was universal expectation in the early church that antichrist would quickly appear, working the most dire evil. He is called "that wicked" one, the "man of sin," etc., and is mentioned both in the prophecies of the Old Testament and the New.
It was looked forward to as a monstrous power, the essence of evil, the incarnation of Satan himself. All the prophecies speaking of a giant of evil to come refer to him.
Antichrist signifies not only an opponent, but one arrogating divine power. The Spirit identifies the kingdom of antichrist with the apostasy; thus we read: "Be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means; for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first [unless that apostasy come first], and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple [sanctuary, or church] of God, showing himself that he is God. ["Setting himself forth as God." R. V.] Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now we know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work, only he who now letteth ["there is one, that hindereth," etc.] will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming; even him whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power," etc.
It seems to have been understood by the Antenicene fathers that the Pagan Roman Empire was that power which hindered. A quotation from Tertullian, "Apology," chap. 32, will show this:—
Christians are under a particular necessity of praying for the emperors, and for the continued state of the empire; because we know that dreadful power which hangs over the world and the conclusion of the age, which threatens the most horrible evils, is restrained by the continuance of the Roman Empire. This is what we would not experience; and, while we pray that it may be deferred, we hereby show our good will to the perpetuity of the Roman State.
Jerome, who lived in the very period of the dismemberment of Rome, presently expected antichrist to appear.
"He who hindered is taken out of the way, and we consider not that antichrist is at hand."
In the above quotation from Paul we may see the mystery of lawlessness which was then working ("doth already work") about to shape itself into a mighty kingdom, revealing the man of sin, a mighty colossus of apostasy, sitting in the church of God, setting himself forth as a head and ruler, subjecting all under obedience to himself. This is the evident meaning of the prophecy. That the "temple of God" means the church, wherein he should be enthroned, no one can doubt who reads the New Testament. It was prophesied of Christ that he should "build the temple of the Lord;" and "they that are far off shall come and build in [it]." Zech. 6: 15. We have only to compare this with Paul's comment in Eph. 2: 13–22, and other expressions, such as "the house of God which is the church," "Ye are the temple of the living God," etc., from the same apostle, to make this matter altogether certain that antichrist, through apostasy, would erect his throne in the church itself. He would oppose and exalt himself above God, in that his mandates would infringe upon, and conflict with, the Lord's. By some means he would make the church believe himself to be possessed of the very prerogatives of God himself, and so sway the rod of a god upon earth. All this is contained in Paul's words.
But some thirty years later the Spirit spoke through John even more clearly. The spirit of antichrist was then more fully developed. John speaks of antichrist's coming as follows:—
"Even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time [hour]. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us; but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us."
The apostles Peter and Jude inveigh most emphatically against this class. They are described as "murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouths speaking great swelling words," "seducing" the brethren, "promising them liberty," "alluring through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error."
But they were not utterly infidel in profession, although they denied the Father and the Son. "They transgressed and abode not in the doctrine of Christ," and "whosoever denieth the Son hath not the Father." Paul, speaking of this same class, said, "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient," etc. Titus 1: 16. Manifestly, they were hypocritical professors.
John wrote his first general epistle as a special warning against this class of dissidents (2: 26). We may conclude that they said they had fellowship with God, but walked in darkness, professed to know him, but kept not his commandments, declared themselves to be in the light, but hated their brethren, etc. They were wells without water, spots and blemishes to the body.
But such grossness of heart and sensuality as the apostles attribute to them must utterly separate from God. The vision of God becomes dim to such, who crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh.
Peter had said that "false teachers" of this class should "bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them." And now John asserts this very thing, showing that they denied that Jesus was the Christ. In Rev. 2: 6 we read of schismatics, who must have existed at this same time, whose "doctrine" and "deeds" Christ hated. Doubtless these antichrists are there designated. They certainly "transgressed and abode not in the doctrine of Christ." They did not believe that "Jesus is the Christ," confessed not "that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh." "God manifest in the flesh" is the cardinal principle of the New Testament. The heathen philosophy and Judaism exercised a combined influence in a special way against the doctrine of salvation through Christ. Purgatory was more desirable and reasonable to them. They denied the Father and Son in all their works. The Bible knows such only as hypocrites. The "last hour" had come. For damnable heresies, schisms, and apostates were multiplying everywhere. Antichrist was developing a kingdom of apostates, who should finally find their head and their god in the "man of sin," sitting in the temple of God, setting himself forth as God. From youth to old age, antichrist should exist throughout the entire dispensation, for he should be destroyed by the brightness of Christ's coming. Hence, the apostle looked upon this baleful presentiment as a sure testimony of the "last hour."
REPENTANCE.
By W. S. Chapman
BY W. S. CHAPMAN.
In the twelfth chapter of Hebrews Paul exhorts all to watchfulness, "lest any man fail of the grace of God." He holds up Esau as one who treated the gifts of God triflingly to his own destruction, being finally rejected and unable to repent. Why?—Because repentance is a gift from God, a spiritual condition, contrary and impossible to a willingly carnal heart. 1 Cor. 2: 14. "Despisest thou," writes Paul, "the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?" Rom. 2: 4.
Repentance is a spiritual sorrow for sin (2 Cor. 7: 10); sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3: 4); the carnal heart is enmity to this law, and cannot be subject to it (Rom. 8: 7); so that in order for one to repent the Lord gives repentance. He was ordained to this very work, for says Peter, "Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." Acts 5: 31. He does this in order that he may take away sin (1 John 3: 5), and bring the sinner into relation with his Father (Eph. 2: 12; 1 Peter 3: 18); recreate him in his own image (Eph. 2: 10; 1 John 3: 2; Phil. 3: 21).
Out of Christ sin is the natural element of the sinner. Eph. 2: 12. The ability to realize the true character of sin comes only through the convicting power of the Spirit of God upon the sinner. 1 Cor. 2: 7-16. Hence, Christ said no man could come to him except the Father draw him. John 6: 44. Repentance, therefore, is a change of mind as to the nature of sin. "Repent ye therefore, and be converted" (turned around, changed), was Peter's exhortation (Acts 3: 19), because Jesus was "put forth" "to give reformation to Israel" (Emphatic Diaglott), "to give the Holy Spirit to those who submit to him" (Vatican MSS.). Further, all creative work of God not only is action, but induces reciprocative action on the part of the one acted upon; hence true repentance not only sorrows, but acts, and seeks pardon. Notice the effect of Peter's Pentecostal sermon upon the honest in heart, and their longing cry, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Acts 2: 37, 38. The story of the424prodigal son fully illustrates this argument. Having wasted his gifts in riotous living, we find the man an outcast, without hope or God in the world. Here the loving Lord begins to move on his heart to draw him back to light and life again. He “came to himself,” and then comes the pitiful cry, “How many hired servants of my father’s have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger!” The prodigal is being enlightened and is repenting, but thus far self is uppermost. Hundreds of thousands never go beyond this stage—the grieving for the personal consequences because of sin. Such was the grief of Cain. Gen. 4: 13, 14.
But in the story the Lord continues to draw the awakened soul, and now the penitent one’s mind is filled with visions of his father’s home, and of that dear parent, always loving, patient, and merciful. Sorrow for the grief his wayward course has caused that dear father now fills his heart. He cannot bear to think of him waiting thus for his return. He longs to end his grief at once, and with a boldness which comes only from the power of the Spirit of God, he resolves to endure the punishment due to his sinful course, be it ever so humbling, can he but dwell again beneath the sheltering roof of that long-suffering father. "I will arise," he says, "and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, and am no more worthy to be called thy son; make me as one of thy hired servants." In thus thinking has he manifested a genuine repentance, an acceptance of the gift?—No; he has done nothing. All, so far, has been the work of the Spirit of God; there has been no action on the part of the sinner, hence no perfect appreciation of the goodness and forbearance of God. He thinks to do, but has not yet acted. Thus it is with thousands who do not appreciate the value of God’s grace, and fail at this crisis in their lives to reach out to God for the strength that would enable them to act, to respond to the effort of the Spirit of God, and so make their repentance perfect by coöperation with God, "a godly repentance not to be repented of."
David illustrates this. While he realized the criminality of his action, he understood fully that the offense was in the violation of God’s law, and therefore the sin was towards God. "I acknowledge my transgressions; and my sin is ever before me." Why?—"Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight." Ps. 51: 3, 4. He grieved that sin was committed against a Holy Father. This is the godly sorrow Paul writes about in 2 Cor. 7: 10. A worldly sorrow, even though it may be strong and terrible, as in the case of Judas, leaves God and his grace and law entirely out of consideration, and grieves only for consequences, individually, of sin. It leads to no action, as does true repentance. 2 Cor. 7: 11.
When the humbling of self has proceeded to that degree that the Spirit of God can illumine the mind to comprehend the exceeding sinfulness of sin, and the sinner is made to fully realize his lost condition, the soul, hungering for salvation, cries, "Lord, save me," and the gentle voice of Jesus speaks words of comfort. John 6: 37. True repentance begins with an awakened, tender conscience, and, when complete, always ends in an utter abhorrence of sin; but this is not always, or necessarily, accompanied by strong feeling. Many precious souls doubt the genuineness of their conversion because they do not feel deeply. Feeling depends entirely upon the nature of the penitent. Emotional people will always feel deeply, but, however deep the feeling may be, if it does not bring one to Jesus, it is not a godly sorrow. It is natural to expect a great struggle, for the awakened mind dimly recognizes the fact that a miraculous creative work is being carried on within, but the longing for deep feeling is a snare. The way to grace is so simple that it is hard to believe it is all the work of the dear One who died for us, and that all we have to do is to surrender our wills to him and he will complete the work he begins in us. It was hard for Naaman to believe the simplicity of the gospel. See 2 Kings 5: 11–15. Only by faith can the promise be grasped and realized. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, confess yourself a sinner undone, accept his amazing grace, then bury the past forever, and, with Paul, look ahead (Phil. 3: 13, 14), living as dead to sin and alive to righteousness (Eph. 2: 1–6; Phil. 3: 9, 10), striving to be of some service to the Master in his vineyard, carrying the news of salvation to others sick in sin.