Professor Duncan said, that in desiring and aiming at the conversion of sinners and the edification of saints, it was of great importance that they should have a distinct idea of what the conversion of a sinner means, He thought it was, in a great measure, owing to the want of this that a number of those disorders in practice and errors in doctrine, to which Dr. Cunningham had referred, might be traced. Next to, and closely connected with, an earnest desire for the salvation of souls, and a constant expectancy (which cannot be too strongly inculcated), was the right and Scriptural understanding of what they aimed at when they desired and expected a sinner’s conversion.
Conversion was not merely to be understood as a turning from one thing to another, but as the turning of an absolutely lost sinner to the God of free and sovereign grace. It was therefore of great importance in existing circumstances, and at all times, that their minds and spirits should be under the sober regulation of revealed truth. And while different suggestions had been thrown out as to the means of promoting these ends, one deeply important question for them to consider was, what was the improvement or the amelioration of those means which they were already employing under the authority of the Word of God, which ought to be adopted in their present circumstances? The question was not only, should there be more preaching, but should there be better preaching. Here he begged to refer to the earnest admonition given by Dr. Malan at the Assembly in Glasgow, to beware of Arminianism. He (Dr. Duncan) did not believe that Arminianism existed in their own Church. But he could not disguise from his own mind, that of late years, at least previous to the Disruption—he knew not how it may have been since, for they could not expect to get rid of all these evils in a day—since evangelism had become more fashionable, it had become more indefinite and diluted; and if this does not amount to Arminianism, it is a rounding off the corners of that which is called Calvinism, but which I believe to be Jehovahism; it was a rubbing off and a smoothing down of the salient points of Calvinistic doctrine into something which, if it was not Arminianism, was a kind of doctrine with which all who are called Calvinistic evangelicals and Arminian evangelicals could agree. Now this was just the beginning of the evil—it was the letting in of waters—the dilution of the gospel; and the dilution of the gospel would very soon lead to the perversion of the gospel. He remembered an anecdote of a poor man and his wife in England, who were labouring people. They attended a dissenting minister, who, in the course of his ministrations, recommended a Commentary on the Bible. These poor people accordingly laboured to be able to purchase one, and were at last able to do this. After perusing it for some time, the man asked his wife what she thought of the Commentary. “Why,” said the wife, “we used to read the Bible in the evening, and it seemed to do us good; and now that we have got the Commentary—it is very good, no doubt, but I do not think it does us so much good. The Bible did us good like a glass of wine, but the Commentary does us good like the same glass of wine in a pailful of water.”
Dr. Duncan reminded them that zeal for God’s glory should be ever uppermost in the minds of His servants. When they urged sinners to repentance, the character and claims of Jehovah should be laid as the basis for it. This was the basis of all revelation—Jehovah, He is God. That was a doctrine not only of the Old Testament, but set forth and explained in the New Testament, where He was set forth as working all things after the counsel of His own will.
The Doctrine of Man’s Fall
The doctrine of man’s fall—his total fall, not merely from virtue and righteousness, but his total alienation, from Jehovah, and the consequent loss of all internal good—his entire separation from Jehovah God, out of which came the doctrine that the fall was a total ruin—ought to be much insisted on. The doctrine, too, of the Trinity, ought not only to be referred to, but set forth in their whole preaching, in its relation to the manifestation of God’s glory in the salvation of sinners. Their preaching should be the gospel of the Triune God. The doctrine of the Trinity should be ever taught, though not ever formally taught. The doctrine of the person of Christ, which gives glory and excellence to the work of Christ, should be brought forward—not salvation merely, but the glorious Saviour Himself, and that not only for the sake of guilty sinners’ salvation, but for the exhibition of the Divine character—that it was worthy of God to save sinners by such a Saviour. Man’s total apostacy from God—his total depravity—would lead to the exhibition of what alone can be, in an apostate’s condition, any comfort or support—the love of Jehovah. It opened such a deep wound that nothing but a Saviour—as a Saviour for an absolute sinner, dead in trespasses and sins—could heal it.
God should be proclaimed as the sole Creator, Christ as the entire Saviour—not the Redeemer only, but the quickener also, not the author of faith only, but the perfecter and finisher of faith. The doctrine of man’s impotency—of his total inability to bring himself back to God, should be held up. The opposite doctrine, the doctrine of man’s ability to convert himself, countenances the absurdity that man is to return to a dependence on Jehovah by the belief of a certain independence, which is not only absurd, but also dishonourable to God. It would not do to tell a man that he may come to Christ, but that he must come. Some, indeed, would have man to do all, though he could do nothing; and others would have him to do nothing, because all was done for him. As long as I am told that I must come to God, and that I can come, I am left to suppose that some good thing, or some power of good remains in me, and I arrogate to myself that which belongs to Jehovah. The creature is exalted, and God is robbed of His glory. If, on the other hand, I am told that I cannot come to God, but not also that I must come, I am left to rest contented at a distance from God, I am not responsible for my rebellion, and God Jehovah is not my God. But if we preach that sinners can’t come, and yet must come, then is the honour of God vindicated, and the sinner is shut up. Man must be so shut up that he must come to Christ, and yet know that he cannot. He must come to Christ, or he will look to another, when there is no other to whom he may come; he cannot come, or he will look to himself. This is the gospel vice, to shut up men to the faith. Some grasp at one limb of the vice and some at the other, leaving the sinner open—but when a man is shut up that he must and cannot, he is shut up to the faith—shut up to the faith, and then would be shut up in the faith. God is declared to be Jehovah, and the sinner is made willing to be saved by Him, in His own way, as sovereign in His grace.
Many may dislike this doctrine as harsh and severe, but it is because they view God’s sovereignty apart from His grace. They spoke of the sovereign God, but why not of the sovereignty of grace? For himself, he felt comfort when shut up to this truth, that God was sovereign, and His grace sovereign; for though he was a sinner—an absolute sinner, Jehovah had said, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy.” This doctrine came like heaven’s own thunder, and struck down all human dependence. It came upon a man as lost, as the very chief of sinners, and depending solely on God’s will; and then, oh how blessed to know the sovereignty of grace! It struck him down when he read, “The Son quickeneth whom He will.” His mind fixed on the “whom He will,” and he was undone, because it did not depend on his own will, but on the will of another. But he read again and found that it was the Son that quickeneth whom He will, and this raised him from the dust, because the Son, on whose sovereign will his salvation depended, was the same “Jesus Christ who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief.”
It was of importance that the truth which gave such glory to God, which alone could comfort, because it alone brought man down, be declared; that Jehovah’s glory be exhibited; and that men be made to feel their own emptiness, so that they may see Christ’s sufficiency, and Christ’s yearning heart over sinners. On what had been said as to the mode of preaching, he should say not a word, as he was sure all were convinced that it was not by might nor by power, but by the Spirit of the Lord. If God gave the desire, and sent His servants forth with His glorious word impressed on the heart and conscience, He, who had given His Word for that very end, would accompany it with demonstration of the Spirit. Having appointed these means, and ordained them, He would give grace to apply them; and he (Dr. Duncan) believed that Jehovah had this end in view, and the more so when they were feeling their infirmities and sins.
A holy life is a life of light; it is a shining light, to let a blind world see the Glory of God.
Thomas Boston.