|
Main
- books.jibble.org
My Books
- IRC Hacks
Misc. Articles
- Meaning of Jibble
- M4 Su Doku
- Computer Scrapbooking
- Setting up Java
- Bootable Java
- Cookies in Java
- Dynamic Graphs
- Social Shakespeare
External Links
- Paul Mutton
- Jibble Photo Gallery
- Jibble Forums
- Google Landmarks
- Jibble Shop
- Free Books
- Intershot Ltd
|
books.jibble.org
Previous Page
| Next Page
Page 6
Thus far we can safely go. This much in favor of the child, over
against the adult, we freely admit. But this does not say that the
child is innocent, pure and holy by nature. The undeveloped roots and
germs of sin are still there. Its nature is evil. It must be saved
from that moral nature. How?
Here again we meet those who have a very easy solution of the
difficulty. They say: "Admitting that the child has sin, this will in
no way endanger its salvation, because Christ died to take away sin.
They have no _conscious_ sin. Therefore, the atonement of Christ
covers their case, and, without anything further, they pass into
heaven, if they die in their infancy."
This view seems to satisfy a great many well-meaning people.
Without giving the matter any further thought, they dismiss it with
this easy solution. Surely, did they stop to consider and examine this
theory, they would see it has no foundation.
Christ's atonement alone, and in itself, never saved a soul. It
removed the obstacles that were in the way of our salvation, opened
the way back to our Father's house, purchased forgiveness and
salvation for us. But all this profits the sinner nothing, so long as
he is not brought into that way; so long as the salvation is not
applied to him personally. Neither can we speak of salvation being
applied to an unrenewed, sinful nature. We cannot even conceive of
forgiveness for an unregenerate being. This would, indeed, be to take
away the guilt of sin, while its power remained. It would be to save
the sinner in and with his sin.
The position is utterly groundless. It is even contrary to
reason. It assumes that a being who has in his heart, as a very part
of his nature, the roots and germs of sin, can, with that heart
unchanged, enter into the kingdom of God. It makes God look upon sin
with allowance. It does violence to the holiness of His nature. It
makes heaven the abode of the unclean.
No, no. It will not do. When men try to avoid what seem to them
difficult and unwelcome doctrines of God's Word, they run into far
greater difficulties and contradictions. That child is conceived and
born in sin. It is a child of wrath, _dead in trespasses and in
sins_. Its nature must be cleansed and renewed. Otherwise, if it
can be saved as it is, there are unregenerate souls in heaven!
Better abide by what is written, and believe that every one,
infant or adult, who has been born of the flesh, must be born of the
Spirit. Listen to the earnest words of Jesus as he emphasizes them
with that solemn double affirmation, "_Verily, verily, I say unto you,
except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God_." He
repeats this sweeping declaration a second time. In the Greek it
reads, Except _any one_ be born again. The assertion is intended to
embrace every human being. Lest this should be disputed, Jesus further
says, "_That which is born of the flesh_"--i.e., naturally born--"_is
flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit._" Wherever
there is a birth of the flesh, there must be a birth of the Spirit.
The flesh-born cannot even _see_ the kingdom of God, much less enjoy
it, still less possess it. There must be new life, divine life,
spiritual life breathed into that fleshly, carnal nature. Thus will
there be a new heart; a new spirit, a new creature. Then, and not till
then, can there be comprehension, apprehension and appreciation of the
things of the kingdom of God. This is the teaching of the whole Word
of God. Gal. vi. 15: "_For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision
availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature_"--i.e.,
neither Jewish birth nor Gentile birth, without the new birth.
Here also then our Church confesses the pure truth of God's Word,
when, in the second Article of the Augsburg Confession, as quoted
above, she goes on to say: "And this disease, or original fault, is
truly sin, condemning and bringing eternal death upon all that are not
born again."
Here then we take our stand. No child can be saved unless it be
first reached by renewing Grace. If ever an infant did die, or should
die, in that state in which it was born, _unchanged_ by divine Grace,
that infant is lost. There are, there can be, no unregenerate souls in
heaven. Where there is no infant regeneration, there can be no infant
salvation.
Here also we remark, in passing, that this doctrine, of the
absolute necessity of infant regeneration, is not held by the Lutheran
Church alone. Even the Romish and Greek Churches teach that it is
impossible for any human creature, without a change from that
condition in which he was born, to enter heaven. All the great
historic confessions of the Protestant churches confess the same
truth. Even the Calvinistic Baptists confess the necessity of infant
regeneration.
Previous Page
| Next Page
|
|