Different interpretations have been put on this section. Some have maintained, that “assurance is here plainly made a fruit and consequent of saving faith, and not an essential act.” Others have held that assurance is here supposed to be essential to saving faith, and that it belongs, in some degree, to every believer, strong or weak, but is always in proportion to the degree of his faith. “How faith,” says the illustrious Boston, “can grow in any to a full assurance, if there be no assurance in the nature of it, I cannot comprehend.” And another, amplifying this idea, says: “If there was not some degree of assurance in the nature of faith, it could never grow up to full assurance. To what degree soever anything may grow, it cannot, by its growth, assume a different nature. It may increase to a higher degree of the same kind, but not into another kind.” Perhaps this difference of opinion has arisen from attaching a different meaning to the word assurance. Those who deny that assurance belongs to the nature of faith, understand, by that word, an assurance that a person is already in a state of salvation; but this sense of the term is disavowed by those who maintain that assurance is essential to faith. “It would greatly conduce to clear views of this subject,” says one of the latter class of divines, “were the distinction between the assurance of faith and the assurance of sense rightly understood and inculcated. When we speak of assurance as essential to faith, many suppose we teach that none can be real Christians who do not feel that they have passed from death unto life, and have not unclouded and triumphant views of their own interest in Christ, so as to joy under the manifestations of his love. “My beloved is mine, and I am his.’ But God forbid that we should thus offend against the generation of his children. That many of them want such an assurance may not be questioned. This, however, is the assurance, not of faith, but of sense; and vastly different they are. The object of the former is Christ revealed in the Word; the object of the latter, Christ revealed in the heart. The ground of the former is the testimony of God without us; that of the latter, the work of the Spirit within us. The one embraces the promise, looking at nothing but the veracity of the promiser; the other enjoys the promise in the sweetness of its actual accomplishment. Faith trusts for pardon to the blood of Christ; sense asserts pardon from the comfortable intimations of it to the soul. By faith, we take the Lord Jesus for salvation; by sense, we feel that we are saved, from the Spirit’s shining on his own gracious work in our hearts.” The distinction between these two kinds of assurance has been accurately drawn by Dr M’Crie, and extremes on both hands judiciously pointed out. “Assurance,” says he, “is of two kinds, which have been designed the assurance of faith and the assurance of sense. The former is direct, the latter indirect. The former is founded on the testimony of God; the latter, on experience. The object of the former is entirely without us; the object of the latter is chiefly within us. “God hath spoken in his holiness, I will rejoice,’ is the language of the former; “we are his workmanship, created anew in Christ Jesus,’ is the language of the latter. When a man gives me his promissory-note, I have the assurance of faith; when he gives me a pledge, or pays the interest regularly, I have the assurance of sense. They are perfectly consistent with one another, may exist in the soul at the same time, and their combination carries assurance to the highest point.
Sorry, this content doesn’t currently have any footnotes.
“Those who deny the assurance of faith, appear to labour under a mistake, both as to the gospel and as to believing. The gospel does not consist of general doctrines merely; but also of promises indefinitely proposed to all who hear it; to be enjoyed, not on the condition of believing, but in the way of believing. “I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions, for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.’ “I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean.’ “I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts.’ “Behold, I bring you glad tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.’ Can a person believe these promises, truly and with understanding, without having some assurance of the blessings promised? There appears also to be a mistake as to the nature of faith, and the place which it holds in the application of redemption. It is a trusting in Christ, a relying upon him for salvation upon the ground of the divine testimony respecting him; and does not this always imply some degree of assurance or confidence?
Sorry, this content doesn’t currently have any footnotes.
“Others go to an opposite extreme. They maintain, that every true Christian always enjoys an absolute and unwavering certainty as to his final happiness–that he is a true believer, and in a state of salvation; and they dwell on the assurance of faith, to the neglect of the evidence which arises from Christian experience and growth in holiness. This is apt to cherish a spirit of presumption, on the one hand, and to throw persons into a state of despondency, on the other. There are various degrees of assurance, and in some genuine believers it may be scarcely perceptible. He who is the author and finisher of our faith, was careful not to break the bruised reed, or quench the smoking flax. While he rebuked the unbelief and unreasonable doubts of his disciples, he never called in question the reality of their faith. He received the man who said, “Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.’ While he said to Peter, “O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?’ he took him by the hand and lifted him out of the water. Grant that doubting is sinful; is there a just man on earth that doeth good and sinneth not? Are not the love and patience, and other gracious dispositions of a Christian, also sinfully defective? Urge the admonition, “Be not faithless, but believing;’ but neglect not to urge also, “Be ye holy, for I am holy.’ “Be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect.’ Would it not be dangerous to the interest of holiness, and discreditable to religion, if a person were supposed to be in possession of perfect assurance, while subject to imperfection in every other respect? Is there not a proportional growth in all the members of the spiritual man? Would he not otherwise be a monstrous creature? Or is the exploded doctrine of sinless perfection in this life to be revived among us? He whose faith is faultless, and his assurance perfect and unvarying, sees Christ as he is, and is already completely like him. He would not be a fit inhabitant of earth; and the only prayer he could put up would be, “Now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace.’”
Sorry, this content doesn’t currently have any footnotes.