MAY, 1857.

NATURE OF THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.-No. III.

WHEN it is clearly understood that the true Christian faith is simply a personal trust in Christ as the Messiah, the Son of God, and that the true Christian "Confession of Faith" is an acknowledgment of this trust, we have at once a satisfactory solution of the much vexed question concerning the nature and the necessity of creeds. It then becomes evident that creed-makers have wholly mistaken, not only the subject matter of the Christian faith, but the very nature of the faith itself, and have substituted confidence in intellectual "views,” for a heart-felt personal reliance; and doctrinal opinions, for a living Saviour. And when, furthermore, we investigate, as we have just done, the true nature of what is properly termed "the doctrine of Christ," and perceive that this has respect to conduct and not to tenets, and that it presents rules and motives of action, and not the propositions and formulas of Theology, the whole foundation on which it is possible to erect a doctrinal creed is wholly swept away. Christian knowledge is no longer to be confounded with Christian faith, or to be divorced from Christian duty. The simple truths inculcated by Christ and the apostles for the guidance of practical life are no longer to be made the basis of any theory, designed to replace the great proposition announced from Heaven by the Father himself, at the baptism of Jesus, and declared by Christ himself to be the rock on which the church is founded. Human opinions and speculations, on the contrary, thus disconnected from the things both of faith and duty, and dethroned from their usurped dominion over the conscience, are at once reduced to their proper insignificance; and the teachings of Christ assuming their true position, are no longer the play-things of a childish opinionism, but the substantial instruments of a real practical obedience; they are no longer objects of contention, but means of harmony; no longer the belligerent "proof-texts" of opposing theories, but the pure and peaceful wisdom of the Christian life.

As it is always interesting to distinguish from each other things that are different, and as it is also most important to do this in regard to the things of salvation, let us endeavour to trace, with still greater clearness, the boundary between the Christian faith and the Christian doctrine. In thus distinguishing, we shall learn how to define them; and, in defining, we shall be enabled to comprehend their appropriate position and their real nature.

Let it be observed, then, that to “believe Christ" in the usual sense of the expression, is one thing, and to “believe IN Christ," is quite another. To believe Christ, is simply to receive any of his teachings as true. To believe IN Christ, is to receive Christ himself, and to trust in him in all his personal and official character, as he is revealed to us in the gospel. In thus receiving Christ, we receive him not only as our High Priest and our King, but also as our Teacher, and we will, then, of course believe his sayings. Hence, when we believe in Christ, it necessarily follows that we will believe Christ.

On the other hand, it is quite possible for men to believe Christ, without at all believing in Christ. There are multitudes who receive the sayings of Christ, not because of their confidence in Him as a Divine Teacher, but because they approve the pure morality and the sublime principles which he developed. The

N

intrinsic beauty and obvious wisdom of his instructions, compel the admiration and the intellectual homage of the world; but this is quite compatible with the utter rejection of his Messiahship, both formally and practically, and the entire absence of an interest in Him as the Saviour of men. To receive Christ as the Saviour, implies a consciousness of our lost and sinful state; an entire selfrenunciation, and an implicit reliance upon him alone for wisdom—and not for wisdom only, but for righteousness also; for sanctification and for redemption. If it can be supposed possible for any one truly to receive Christ as a Divine Teacher, and thus to believe on him in this respect, without receiving him in his whole character and office as revealed in his own life and teachings, then such a one cannot be regarded as believing on Christ, in the true and scriptural import of the expression. Christ was not sent into the world in order that men might merely believe him, as they might believe a Socrates or a Plato, but that they might believe on him in his entire work of human salvation and in all the relations which he sustains. It is both the will and "the work of God," that men should thus "believe on Him whom He hath sent," and nothing less than this can be regarded as the Christian faith.

But, when the question is closely considered, it is apparent that he only who thus believes in or on Christ, in his whole character, personal and official, can be truly said, in the full and proper sense, to believe Christ. For it is he only who accepts, in its entire meaning, the great fundamental truth that Jesus is the Son of God, and receives this declaration, as well as all the other sayings of Christ, as of divine authority. Others, as before remarked, may be said, in a certain limited sense, to believe Christ, because they believe his teachings from their own convictions of the excellence of the teachings themselves; but the Christian believes Christ because he believes on Him. Hence it is said that those who truly receive Christ, and obtain the privilege of becoming sons of God, are those who "believe on his name." He that believeth on him is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." Again: since he that does not believe Christ as to the great fundamental truth which he announced, and for which he died, gives evidence that he does not believe on Him, so it is further declared, that while "he that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life, he that believeth* not the Son, shall not see life."

It is worthy of special remark, that life and salvation are nowhere promised to those who believe Christ, unless where the declaration of his Messiahship is the thing believed (John x. 36-37.) To believe this, as announced by Christ, is both to believe him and to believe on him. The sublime truth, "Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God," is thus the Christian's creed, which is to be received— it matters not how or by whom declared, whether by Moses, by the Father, by

* There is an admirable propriety in the language of the original here, which does not appear in our translation. In the first clause we have lotevæv Els tov viov, but here the verb is changed, and we do not have, as in English, the same one repeated with a negative, but areιowv тw vw, which implies more than a simple absence of faith, and is not the exact opposite of TOTEUv, since it involves the idea of a perverse will, a practical rejection or wilful disobedience, a refusing to confide or trust. Hence it is rather the opposite of UTEVOU ELs, and might properly be rendered, "believe not on the Son," or "trusteth not in the Son".

the Son himself, or by the apostles. The proposition itself is true, and in believing it we believe the person who announces it. Hence Jesus says: "Though I bear record of myself, my record is true, for I know whence I came and whither I go." Still, though thus true in itself, the credibility of the declaration is not suffered to rest on Christ's assertion alone. "It is written in your law," said He to the Jews, "that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me." Again, John v. "If I (alone) bear testimony of myself, my testimony is not to be regarded. There is another that beareth witness of me"-John the Immerser. "But," continues he, “I have greater witness than that of John, for the works which the Father hath given me to accomplish bear witness of me that the Father hath sent me. And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Have ye never heard his voice at any time nor seen his shape ?" Here he evidently refers to the announcement, "This is my beloved Son," made by the Father at his baptism, and to the descent of the Holy Spirit, in the form of a dove, which abode upon him. He further adds, respecting the ancient Scriptures: "These are they that testify of me.. .Had you believed Moses, you would have believed me, for he wrote of me."

We have here, then, a brief summary of the testimony at that time before the Jews, all of which has relation to the great fundamental truth, that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God;" which, though variously, is yet substantially attested by all the witnesses appealed to. To their testimony was afterwards added that of the Holy Spirit and the apostles (John xv. 26-27.) And now, to believe unreservedly, in all its amplitude, the great truth or fact thus proven, whether as declared by Moses, by John, by the Father, by Jesus himself, by the Holy Spirit, or by the apostles, is, indeed, to believe each of these witnesses; but it is also to believe on Christ, and to believe on Christ is to believe on Him that sent him. This is the Christian faith-a sincere personal and official trust-a belief (es) ON, or in relation to Christ, with which alone salvation is connected. He that is "born of God," and " overcomes the world," is he that "believeth that Jesus is the Son of God." He that thus "believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself." He that thus "hath the Son hath life, and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life."

66

It is remarkable how constantly we, accordingly, find the preposition aus, signifying into, on, unto, connected with TσTevw, to believe. Wherever we have Christ," or "His name," accompanied by a verb signifying to believe or trust, we have always els interposed to establish the relation between them. We have "His disciples believed (es) on him." "Many believed (es) on his name." "God gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth (es) on him should not perish." He that believeth (eɩs) on him is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed (es) in the name of the only begotten Son of God." The question which Jesus himself puts to the converts is: "Dost thou believe (es) on the Son of God?" and the terms propounded by the apostles are, 'Believe (es) on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." Never have we, in the language of inspiration, "believed Christ," unless where, as before remarked, the declaration of his Messiahship is the matter to be believed, and where Christ is himself a witness (John iv. 48, x. 26-27, xii. 47.) Men are censured because they did not "believe John," or "be

lieve Moses," or "believe the Scriptures," and they are called upon to “believe the gospel," but nowhere is the Christian faith made to consist in simply believing Christ as a teacher, or, in other words, believing the teachings of Christ. These, indeed, constitute the Christian doctrine. And it is not the belief of these, but belief on Christ, that constitutes the Christian faith. Belief of Christ's teachings is a consequence of the Christian faith, and not its substance.

It is just here that theologians have failed to make the proper distinction between the Christian faith and the Christian doctrine. Overlooking the obvious fact, that the Christian faith has respect to Christ himself, in his personal and official relations, they have supposed it to consist in various doctrinal propositions or tenets, deducible from his teachings and those of the apostles. Hence they reverse the order of things in Christianity, and instead of a suffering Saviour, present to the unconverted person, for his acceptance and belief, a system of religious opinions. In Christianity, however, the Christian faith precedes the Christian doctrine in order of time; and not only so, but addresses itself to the unconverted, while, what is truly called the Christian doctrine, appertains exclusively to those who are already in possession of the Christian faith.

The objection to doctrinal creeds, then, is based on a grand fundamental principle, and not upon mere expediency. We reject them, not because they are in themselves false, but because they are a false basis of faith; we deny their authority, not because the propositions they contain may not be found in Scripture, but because they substitute these for gospel facts, and virtually make a reliance on mere intellectual conceptions an equivalent for a trust in a living Saviour.* Since doctrinal creeds are a false basis of faith, they are no less a false basis of Christian union. True Christian faith can be the only real basis of Christian union. Creeds, indeed, are designed merely to detect heresy. They have no tendency to prevent it, or to secure permanent unity of sentiment. In fear of heretics, these sentinels on the outposts of each beleagured camp demand the watch-word. They ask, "What do you believe?" But the watchman on the walls of the true Zion inquires, " In whom do you believe?" The former makes a real or supposed knowledge of the "mystery of Christ," the test of fealty; the latter demands a heart-felt trust in the great Captain of salvation. But progress in knowledge is one thing, and the possession of faith another. Men may have the same faith, while they differ greatly in the amount and accuracy of their religious knowledge. Hence doctrines, or knowledge of Christian mysteries, can never be a basis of Christian union. Each sect, however, seeks to base union upon unity of knowledge. In Christianity, on the other hand, Christian union is based alone upon oneness with Christ. We must have this Christian unity, on oneness with Christ, before we can have true Christian union, or fellowship with each other. Hence our Lord prayed for those who should believe

* I have noticed, with regret, a disposition on the part of some disciples to depart from this great principle. From an undue anxiety to promote what they regard as Christian union, they have gone so far even as to draw up various articles embracing doctrinal questions, and to propose these as a basis of union, or an exponent of our orthodoxy, by way, as it would appear, of propitiating the religions parties, aud accommodating matters somewhat to suit the taste of creed-mongers. This is an entire departure from the reformation ground we occupy, and a yielding up of the whole matter in controversy. The Christian doctrine is for Christian practice, and not for unchristian debate and strife. To divorce this doctrine from the simple obedience which it teaches, and with the aid of abstractions and theory, to erect it into a standard of faith, and make it a substitute for a personal trust in Christ, is, however true the proposed doctrines may be in themselves, to sanction religious partyism, and build again the things we have been laboring to destroy.

66

a

ON him, that they might be "one"-not that they might be united, as the expression is commonly understood, but that they might be one." Christian union, as commonly understood, and the oneness or unity here spoken of, are different things. The former is the fellowship of Christians with each other— a congregational or ecclesiastical concord and fraternization; the latter is the fellowship of believers "with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ" spiritual oneness in God, which does not necessarily involve a formal or ecclesiastical union among Christians, though it tends to produce it, and may be followed by it, and, indeed, is, as already stated, the only true basis of a real Christian union. Hence it is in vain for men to construct platforms - to prescribe articles of belief, or erect ecclesiastical establishments, in order to secure Christian union. Yet how many vain attempts have been made to effect an apparent union and coöperation of professing Christians, where, instead of oneness with Christ, the basis proposed has been a mere intellectual assent to a few religious dogmas?

It is to be remembered that, in the Saviour's prayer, those only are embraced who should" believe ON Him" through the testimony of the apostles. It is through this belief on Him-this Christian faith-this reception of Christ in his whole character and in his entire work of salvation, that any one can partake of that spiritual oneness for which he prays. This oneness is clearly defined in the following verse : As thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us," and it is effected by the indwelling of that Holy Spirit, for whose impartation to his disciples Christ had promised to pray the Father. As the Father dwelt in the Son by his Spirit given at his baptism, so Christ dwells in his people by that same Spirit which he received of the Father. Hence verse 23: "I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one;" and 1 John iii. 24: "Hereby we know that he abideth in us by the Spirit which he hath given us." And the promise of this Spirit is “through faith,” and its fulfilment is to be sought as the great end or purpose of the Christian profession, and as the completion of that salvation in this life contemplated in the gospel, which consists in the "washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit," received" through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Thus it is not a unity or uniformity of doctrine, that constitutes Christian unity, or can become a basis of Christian union, but it is a unity of Spirit. "He that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit." And this consummation of the Christian faith, or belief on Christ—this indwelling Divine Nature received by all who receive Christ as he is presented in the gospel, is the authentication of that faith, the seal of spiritual oneness, the means of Christian union, the source of spiritual life, and the earnest of a future inheritance. R. R.

PROPHECY-No. XIII.

THE AGENCY OF THE JEWS IN THE CONVERSION OF THE WORLD.NO. 1. "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament: and they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars for ever and for ever."--(Dan. xii. 3.)

"Afterwards he brought me again unto the door of the house; and behold waters issued out from under the threshold of the house Eastward: for the fore front of the house stood towards the East, and the waters came down from under from the right side of the house, at the South side of the altar."-(Exekiel. xlvii. 1.)

THE institution of Moses was a kind of tangible outline of Christianity. It was intended to typify and to illustrate by various sensible objects, the funda