SINNERS BOUND TO CHANGE THEIR OWN HEARTS

 

SERMONS ON IMPORTANT SUBJECTS

SERMON I

 

by the Rev. CHARLES G. FINNEY

 

“Cast away from you all the transgressions which you have committed, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit.  For why should you die, O house of Israel?”  (Ezekiel 18:31)

 

These words were addressed to the house of Israel, who, from their history and from the verses in connection with our text, were clearly in an unrepentant state.  The requirement to make them a new heart and a new spirit was enforced by the weighty penalty of death.  The death mentioned in the text cannot mean natural death, because natural death is common both to those who have, and to those who do not have a new heart.  Nor can it mean spiritual death, which is a state of entire sinfulness; for then it should have read, “Why are you already dead”?  The death that is mentioned here must mean eternal death, or that state of banishment from God and the glory of His power, into which the soul shall be cast that dies in its iniquities.

This command given to the Israelites, is binding on every unrepentant sinner that the Gospel addresses.  He is required to perform the same duty, under the same penalty.  It becomes, therefore, a matter of infinite importance that we should clearly understand, and immediately obey this requirement.  The questions that we should ask after reading this text are:

1. What should we understand by the requirement to make a new heart and a new spirit?

2. Is it reasonable to require that we must do this under pain of eternal death?

3. How is the requirement that we should get ourselves a new heart and a new spirit agree with the often-repeated declarations of the Bible, that a new heart is the gift and work of God?

Does God require us to get ourselves a new heart without expecting its fulfillment, simply to show us our helplessness and dependence on Him?  Does He require us to get ourselves a new heart under pain of eternal death, when at the same time He knows we have no power to obey; and that if the work is ever to be done, He must do the very thing that He requires us to do?

In order to answer these questions satisfactorily, I will attempt to show,

I. What this requirement doesn’t mean; and

II. What this requirement means. 

Notice, that although the Bible was not given to us to teach us psychology, yet we may be assured that all its declarations agree with true psychology.  The term ‘spirit’ in the Bible is used in different ways.  Sometimes, spirit means a spiritual being, or a moral agent.  In other places it is used the same way we often use it in conversation.  In speaking of a person’s emotional state, we say that he has a good or a bad spirit, a lovely or a hateful spirit.  This is how it is used in our text today.  The term ‘heart’ is also used in various ways.  Sometimes it appears to be synonymous with soul; sometimes it refers to the will; sometimes the conscience; sometimes it seems to cover all the moral movements of the mind; sometimes it expresses our natural or social affections.  We can understand how it is used in any particular passage by determining the context in which it stands.  Our present business is to determine its meaning in our text; for it is in this sense that we are required to make us a new heart and a new spirit.  So let us look at the term ‘heart’ as it is used in this passage of Scripture.

1. The term ‘heart’ in this passage does not mean the fleshly heart, or that bodily organ which is the seat of animal life.

2. It does not mean a new soul.  We have one soul, and do not need another.

3. Nor are we required to create any new faculties of our body or mind.  We already have all the powers of a free moral agent.  We are just as God created us, and we do not need to alter the substance of our soul or body.

4. Nor does it mean that we are to bring to pass any constitutional change in ourselves.  We are not required to add any new principle or taste to the constitution of our minds or bodies.  Some people speak of a change of heart as something miraculous, something in which the sinner is to be entirely passive, and for which he is to wait while he goes about his daily business, like he would wait for a heart transplant, or for a letter to arrive.  We don’t need to add or change the constitution of our body or mind.  Those who have a new heart do not experience any constitutional change of their physical or mental powers.  They are the same people that they were before, as far as their body and mind are concerned.  The change lies in how they use and employ their moral and physical powers.  A constitutional change, either in body or mind, would change their personal identity.  A Christian, or one who has a new heart, would not be the same individual concerning his powers of moral agency that he was before. He would not be the same moral agent, and have the same responsibilities.

A constitutional change, placing a new principle into our soul, or filling us with new desires that becomes an essential part of our being, would destroy all the virtue of our obedience.  It would make obedience to God nothing more than gratifying our new desires.  There would be no more true virtue in that, than there would be in eating when we are hungry, or drinking when we are thirsty.

Implanting a constitutional principle of holiness into our mind, or creating a constitutional taste for holiness within us, if such a thing were possible, would make the perseverance of the saints physically necessary, and would make falling from grace a physical impossibility.  This would destroy all the virtue of perseverance.

A constitutional change would do away with our need to depend on the Holy Spirit after conversion.  If the Holy Spirit recreated His faculties within us, and implanted a holy taste in the substance of our mind, He would eliminate the need for any other involvement on His part afterwards, other than the need to support us physically, and to give us the power to act.  We would naturally obey the laws of our new nature simply by gratifying our new appetite.

But implanting a new principle, which does away with the need for the special influences of the Holy Spirit afterwards, is contrary to experience; for those who have a new heart, find that the constant agency of the Holy Spirit is as indispensable to their perseverance in holiness, as it was to their conversion.

The idea of a constitutional change is inconsistent with backsliding.  For if the constitution of our mind were changed, and a taste for holiness and obedience were implanted in the substance of our soul, then to backslide, or fall from grace, would be just as naturally impossible as it would be to alter the constitutional appetites of our body.

A constitutional change is unnecessary.  Many believe that the motives of the Gospel have no tendency to move our mind to obey God, unless there is something implanted in our mind that responds to the claims of the Gospel.  They believe that there is a moral opposition that prevents us from receiving the Gospel unless something is implanted in our minds that make us receive the word of God.  In other words, they believe that since the motives of the Gospel are holy, there must be a holy taste or principle implanted in the substance of our mind.  Before these motives can act as motives at all; that there must be a taste corresponding to, and of the same nature with the motives of the Bible, or there is nothing in those motives that can move the mind.  That is, if the motive is holy, the constitutional taste must be holy; if the motive is sinful, the constitutional taste must be sinful. 

This is absurd and contrary to fact.  Based on this principle, I would ask, “How could a holy Adam sin?”  Did God, or the devil, first implant a constitutional sinful taste within him that answered to His outward temptation?  How could the holy angels sin?  Did God also implant a sinful principle or taste in them?  Were Adam and “the angels that kept not their first estate”, originally created with sinful tastes that responded to those outward temptations?  If that is true, then they were sinners by creation.  Who then is the author of sin, and responsible for all their wickedness?  It is true that the constitution of our mind must be suited to the nature of outward influences.  Our mind must adapt to those reasons that influences us, and those reasons or motives must be received and adapted into to our mind if they are going to produce any desired responses from us.  But it is absurd to say that this constitutional adaptation must be some holy principle, or taste, or craving after obedience to God.  All holiness, in God, angels, or men, must be voluntary, or it is not holiness.  To call anything that is a part of our created mind or body, holy, to speak of a holy substance, unless it is spoken figuratively, is to talk nonsense.  Holiness is virtue.  It is something that is praiseworthy.  It cannot therefore be a part of the created substance of our body or our mind.  Holiness must consist in willingly obeying to the principles of eternal righteousness.  The ability to adapt those outward motives to our mind lies in the powers of our moral agency, which every human being possesses.  We have an understanding to see and weigh; we have a conscience to decide on the nature of moral opposites; we have the power and freedom to choose.  Now, to we who possess these faculties, the motives of the Gospel are addressed; and there is clearly a natural tendency in these weighty Biblical considerations to influence us to obey our Maker.

It is now time to show what we should understand by the command of the text.  The Bible often speaks of our heart as a fountain, from which flows the moral affections and actions of the soul.  For example, Matt. 15:19 says, “For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies”.  The term ‘heart’ often applies to the mind.  When it applies to the mind, the term ‘heart’ is figurative, and recognizes an analogy between the heart of the body, and the heart of the soul.  The fleshly organ of the body is also called the heart.  It is the seat and fountain of our physical life, and by its constant action, diffuses life through our physical body.  The spiritual heart is the fountain of spiritual life.  It is that deep seated but voluntary preference of our mind or soul, which lies behind all our voluntary affections and emotions, and from which our character develops.  This is how I understand the term ‘heart’ that is used in our text.  It is something that we have control over.  Something that is voluntary.  Something for which we are to blame, and which we are required to change! 

Now, if the requirement is, that we must make some constitutional change in the substance of our body or mind, it is clearly unjust.  Because requiring a constitutional change makes obedience impossible, and is enforced by a penalty no less than infinite, the requirement is infinite tyranny.  It is clear that the requirement here is to change our moral character, our moral disposition.  In other words, this scripture requires us to change that abiding preference of our minds, which prefers sin to holiness and self-gratification to the glory of God.  I understand a change of heart, as the term is used here, to be just what we mean by a change of mind in regard to the supreme object of our pursuit; a change in the choice of our purpose in life, and not merely a change in the choice of the means we are currently using to accomplish our end.  An individual may change his mind, and prefer, at one time, one set of means, and at another time, another set of means to accomplish the same end. 

A man whose supreme object of pursuit is his own happiness, may, at one time imagine that his highest happiness lies in possessing wealth.  Therefore, he devotes his life to acquiring wealth.  In pursuing his goal, he may often change his choice of means; at one time, he may deal in merchandise or the stock market; at another time, he may pursue the legal profession or perhaps the field of medicine; but all these are only different means to accomplish the same selfish end. 

However, he may see that his happiness does not consist in the abundance of wealth; that he is going to live forever.  He therefore, develops a higher interest in the things of eternity than in those of time.  He may accordingly enlarge his selfish aims, carry forward his personal interests into eternity, and propose as his supreme goal in life, the salvation of his soul.  His interest is now an eternal rather than a temporary interest, which he proposes as his supreme object of pursuit.  But, his end is still his happiness.  His end is the same, it is only selfishness exercised on a more ample and extended scale.  Instead of being satisfied with the happiness of time, his selfishness aims to secure the bliss of eternity.  When he confined his views and desires to acquiring worldly possessions, he aimed at acquiring the affections, the services, the honors, and the wealth of the world.  He now expands the limits of his selfishness and carries forward his aims, desires, and exertions towards eternity.  He determines to pray, to read his Bible, and become marvelously religious.  He would gladly acquire the affections, enlist the powers, and command the services of all heaven, and of the eternal God.  While his views were confined to earthly things, he was satisfied that men should be his servants; but now, in the selfish pursuit of his own eternal happiness, he would gladly call in all the attributes of Jehovah to serve him.  But in all this, there is no change of heart.  He may have changed the choice of the means that he uses, but his end has been always the same.  His own happiness has been his idol.

A change of heart, then, consists in changing the controlling preference of our mind concerning the end that we are pursuing.  Our selfish heart always prefers self-interests to the glory of God and the interests of His kingdom.  A new heart will prefer the glory of God and the interests of His kingdom to our own happiness.  In other words, it is a change from selfishness to benevolence (unselfish love), from having a supreme regard for our own interest to an absorbing and controlling choice of the happiness and glory of God and His kingdom.

It is a change in the choice of a Supreme Ruler.  The conduct of impenitent sinners demonstrates that they prefer Satan as the ruler of this world.  They obey his laws, work actively for him, and are zealous for his interests, even to martyrdom.  They carry their attachment to him and his government as far as to sacrifice both their body and soul to promote his interest and establish his dominion.  A new heart is choosing Jehovah as the supreme ruler.  It is a deep-seated and abiding preference for His laws, government, character, and person as the supreme Legislator and Governor of the universe.

Thus, the world is divided into two great political parties; the difference between them is, that one party selects Satan as the god of this world, yields obedience to his laws, and is devoted to his interests.  Selfishness is the law of Satan's empire, and all impenitent sinners obey it willingly.  The other party chooses Jehovah for their governor, and consecrate themselves, with all their interests, to His service and glory.  Unselfish love is the law of God’s empire, and all repentant saints obey it willingly.  This change does not imply any constitutional change of the powers of our body or mind. 

There are certain things concerning our mind, with which we become familiar by experience.  For example, we know by experience that it is the nature of our mind to be controlled by a deep-seated tendency to prefer a particular course or object.  It is not necessary here, to enter into the philosophy of this fact, but simply to recognize the fact itself.  For instance, when Adam was first created, before he had obeyed or disobeyed his Maker, he could have had no moral character at all.  He had exercised no affections, no desires, nor put forth any actions.  In this state, he was a complete moral agent created in the image of God, who is also a moral agent.  But he was not created with any moral character because moral character cannot be a subject of creation.  Moral character attaches to voluntary action.  I am not saying that any considerable time elapsed between the creation of Adam and his possessing a moral character.  I suspect, that as soon as he awoke into being, and had knowledge of the existence and character of his Maker, the evidences of which, no doubt, shone all around him, he chose God as his supreme ruler, and voluntarily dedicated all his powers to His service.  This preference of God, His glory, and His service, over his own self-interest and everything else, constituted his disposition, or his moral character.  In other words, Adam had a perfectly holy heart.  Out of this heart, or preference, flowed, as from a fountain, the pure waters of obedience.  All the subordinate movements, affections, choices, and purposes of Adam’s mind, and all his outward actions, flowed from this strong and governing preference for God and His service.

Thus, Adam went forth to dress God's garden, and keep it.  Now, for a while, this preference of Adam was strong and abiding enough to insure perfect obedience in all things; for the mind will act consistently with an abiding preference.  For instance, the strong preference that a man may have for home, may prevent him from entertaining any desire to travel abroad.  The strength of his preference for his wife may prevent him from consenting to any improper intimacy with another woman; and the possibility of betraying him into acts of infidelity to his wife may depend on the strength and abiding energy of his preference of her to all other women.  So as long as the preference of Adam remained unshaken, its energy gave direction and character to all his feeling and conduct.  That which must stamp perfection on the obedience of heaven, is the great strength and continually abiding energy of our preference for God and His service.  Indeed the continued holiness of God depends on the same cause, and flows from the same fountain.  His holiness does not consist in the substance of His nature, but in His preference of right.  His holiness must be voluntary, and He is always holy, because He is infinitely strong, so strong and so abiding, that He would never do anything inconsistent with His holy character.

Adam was perfectly holy, but not infinitely holy.  Since his preference for God was finite, it was possible that his preference could change, and we have that sad fact written in characters that cannot be misunderstood, on every side of us, that an occasion occurred on which he actually changed it.  Satan, in the person of a serpent, presented a temptation of a very peculiar character.  It was addressed to the constitutional appetites of both Adam’s soul and body; to his appetite for food, and for knowledge in his mind. These appetites were constitutional; they were not sinful in themselves, but their unlawful indulgence was sin.  The proposal of the serpent was, that Adam should change his mind concerning the supreme end of his pursuit; and thus change his heart, or his whole moral character.

“Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made.  And he said to the woman, ‘Has God indeed said, “You shall not eat of every tree of the garden”?’  And the woman said to the serpent, ‘we may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, “You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die”.’  And the serpent said to the woman, ‘you will not surely die.  For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’”  (Gen 3:1-5) 

Now the foundation of holiness in Adam, and that which was at the foundation of his holy heart, was the desire that God should rule.  Adam chose God and His glory over his own happiness or interest.  This was his purpose, his goal.  It is easy to see that the serpent’s purpose was to bring about a change in the end Adam was pursuing.  The serpent was trying to get Adam to prefer his own gratification to obedience to his Maker, to become his own god instead of obeying Jehovah, to pursue as a supreme end self-gratification instead of the glory of God.  In yielding therefore to the serpent’s temptation, in changing his mind on this fundamental point, Adam changed his own heart, or that controlling preference which was at once the foundation, and fountain, of his obedience. 

Now this was a real change of heart, from a perfectly holy, to a perfectly sinful one.  But here was no constitutional change, no change in the substance of Adam’s body or mind.  There was no change in the powers of Adam’s moral agency, but simply a change in the use of them.  Adam now consecrated his energies to a different end.  Now suppose God spoke to Adam using the command of our text, “get yourself a new heart and a new spirit.  For why should you die ”.  Could Adam have justly answered, “Do You really think that I can change my own heart?  Can I, whose heart is totally depraved, can I change that heart?”  The Almighty might have answered him in words of fire, “Rebel, you have just changed your heart from holiness to sin, you can change it back from sin to holiness”.

Suppose a human sovereign establishes a government, and proclaims that his purpose is to produce the greatest amount of happiness possible within his kingdom.  He enacts wise and benevolent laws designed to promote his goal.  Everything he does conforms to the administration of his government.  He devotes all his wisdom and energy to his goal.  He requires all his subjects to sympathize with him; to aim at the same object; to be governed by the same principles; to set before them as their goal or purpose in life; the promotion of the highest interests of the community.  Suppose these laws are so framed, that universal obedience would automatically result in universal happiness.  Now suppose that one individual, after a period of obedience and devotion to the interest of the government and the glory of his sovereign, should be persuaded to withdraw his influence and energies from promoting the public good, and decide to devote his time and energy to promoting himself.  Suppose he says, I will no longer be governed by the principles of good will to the community, and find my own happiness in promoting the public interest; but I will aim at promoting my own happiness and glory, in my own way, and let the sovereign and the subjects take care of themselves.  “Charity begins at home.” 

Now suppose that he sets himself up to pursue his own happiness and glory as his supreme purpose in life, and he doesn’t hesitate to trample on the laws and encroach on the rights, both of his sovereign and the subjects, whenever those laws or rights prevent him from accomplishing his purpose.  It is easy to see that he has become a rebel; and has changed his heart, and consequently his conduct.  He has set up an interest not only separate from but also opposed to the interest of his rightful sovereign.  He has changed his heart from good to bad.  He was once an obedient subject, but now he has become a rebel.  He used to obey his sovereign, but now he has set himself up as an independent sovereignty.  He enjoyed influencing everyone to obey the government, but now he only seeks the prosperity and the glory of his own sovereignty.  He has become his own little sovereign; and just as Absalom caught the men of Israel and kissed them, and thus stole away their hearts; so he now tries to win the hearts, enlist the sympathies, and command the respect and obedience of all those around him.  Now what would constitute a change of heart in this man towards his sovereign?  He would have to go back and change his mind concerning his supreme object of his pursuit.  To prefer the glory of his sovereign and the good of the public to his own selfish interest would constitute a change of heart.

Now this is the case with the sinner.  God has established a government, designed to produce the greatest practical amount of happiness in the universe.  He has enacted laws wisely calculated to promote this goal.  Everything He does is for this purpose.  He also requires all His subjects to conform their lives to this purpose.  God even sets the example.  After a season of obedience, Adam changed, and placed himself on the throne of his heart.  The same is true with every sinner.  Although the sinner does not obey at first, like Adam did; yet his wicked heart consists in setting up his own interests in opposition to the interests and government of God.  The sinner aims to promote his own private happiness in a way that is opposed to the general good.  Self-gratification becomes the law to which he conforms his conduct.  It is that minding of the flesh, which is enmity against God.  A change of heart, therefore, is to prefer a different end.  It would be to prefer the glory of God and the public good, over promoting his own interest.  As soon as this preference is changed, we see a corresponding change of conduct.  If a man changes sides in politics, you will see him meeting with those that entertain the same views and feelings that he has; devising plans and using his influence to elect the candidate that he has now chosen.  He has new political friends on the one side, and new political enemies on the other.  The same is true with a sinner.  If his heart is changed, you will see that Christians become his friends.  Christ becomes his candidate.  He aims at honoring Christ and promoting His interest in all his ways.  Before, the language of his conduct was, “Let Satan govern the world”.  Now, the language of his heart and of his life is, “Let Christ rule as King of the nations, just like he is King of the saints”.  Before, his conduct changed, he said, “Oh Satan, let your kingdom come, and let your will be done”.  Now, his heart, his life, and his lips cry out, “Oh Jesus, let your kingdom come, let your will be done on earth as it is in heaven”.

He who prefers the glory of God and the interest of God’s kingdom to his own selfish interests is a Christian.  He who prefers his own selfish interest to the glory of God is an unrepentant sinner.

The fundamental difference lies in our ruling preference, this fountain, this heart, out of which flows our emotions, affections, and actions.  Since the difference between saint and sinner consists not in the substance of our minds or bodies, but in the voluntary state of our mind, it is just as un-philosophical, absurd, and unnecessary, to believe that a physical or constitutional change has taken place in anyone who has a new heart.  That would be like saying, because you have changed your political party, your nature has changed.  Furthermore, our new preference needs only to become deep and energetic enough in its influence to stamp the perfection of heaven on our whole character.  From long cherished habits of sin, and acting under the dominion of an opposite preference, when our heart is really changed, it is often weak and measurably inefficient; and consequently the things that our mind does is often inconsistent with our general preference.  Accordingly, God says to Israel, “How weak is your heart!”

This situation is similar to the situation of a man who is so little under the influence either of principle or of affection for his wife, that although he generally prefers her to any other woman, yet he may occasionally be guilty of an act of infidelity to her.  Now what is needed in the case of a Christian is that his old habits of thought, feeling, and action must be broken up; that his new preference should gain strength, stability, and firmness; and thus takes control of the whole man.  We call this process sanctification.  Every act of obedience to God strengthens this preference, and makes future obedience more natural.  The perfect control of this preference over all the moral movements of the mind brings a man back to where Adam was before he fell.  That constitutes perfect holiness.

Once more, if a change of heart were physical, or if it were a change in the physical constitution of our mind, it would have no moral character.  Moral character requires a voluntary change.  A change of heart must not only be voluntary, but must be a change in the governing preference of our mind.  It must be a change concerning the supreme object of our pursuit.

Finally, it is a fact in the experience of every Christian, that the change through which he has passed is nothing more than what I have described.  In speaking from experience, the Christian can say, “Whereas I once preferred my own selfish interests to the glory of my Maker, now I prefer His glory and the interests of His kingdom, and consecrate all my powers to the promoting them forever”.

2. The second question is, whether the requirement of our text is reasonable and equitable.  The answer to this question must depend on the nature of the duty to be performed.  If the change is a physical change, a change in the physical constitution or substance of our soul, it is clearly not within the scope of our ability, and the answer to the question must be, No, it is neither reasonable nor equitable.  To maintain that we are under an obligation to do what we have no power to do is absurd.  If we are under an obligation to do something, and don’t do it, we sin.  For the blame-worthiness of sin consists in its being the violation of an obligation.  But, if we are under an obligation to do what we have no power to do, then sin is unavoidable; we are forced to sin by a natural necessity.  But this is contrary to our reason.  It makes sin consist in something that is naturally forced on us.  Besides, if it is sin, we must blame ourselves, repent of it, and justify the requirement of God.  But it is clearly impossible for us to blame ourselves for not doing what we know we never had any power to do.  Suppose God should command us to fly.  Would the command impose any obligation on us, until we were given wings?  Certainly not!  But suppose, when we failed to obey, God required us to repent of our disobedience, and threatened to send us to hell if we did not blame our selves and justify God’s requirement; a requirement that wouldn’t be just or fair.  We must cease to be a reasonable being before we can do this.  We know that God never gave us the power to fly, and therefore God has no right to require us to fly.  Our natural sense of justice and the foundation of our obligation are outraged, and we indignantly and conscientiously throw back the requirement into our Maker's face.  Repentance, in this case, is a natural impossibility.  As long as we are reasonable beings, we know that we cannot be blamed for not flying without wings; and no matter how much we may regret that we are not able to obey this requirement, and no matter how great we fear God’s wrath, to blame ourselves and justify God is still a natural impossibility.  The fact that God requires men to make to themselves a new heart, on pain of eternal death, is the strongest possible evidence that we are able to do it.  To say that God has commanded us to do it, without telling us we are able, is silly.  Our ability is implied as strongly as it can be in the command itself.  From all this it will be seen that the answer to our question, whether the requirement in our text is just, must turn on the question of our ability; and the question of our ability must turn on the nature of the change itself.  If the change is physical, it is clearly beyond our power; it is something that we have no more control over than we had over the creation of our soul and body.  But if the change is moral, in other words, if the change is voluntary, a change of choice or preference, such as I have described, then the answer to our question, is the requirement of the text just and reasonable, clearly is a resounding, yes.  Yes, it is entirely reasonable and just;

Because you all have the powers of a free moral agent, the thing required is, not to change these powers, but to use them in the service of your Maker.  God has created these powers, and you can and do use them.  He gives you the power to obey or disobey.  Your sin is, that while He sustains these powers, you prostitute them to the service of sin and Satan.

These powers are well suited to both obedience and disobedience.  Your wickedness consists in the wrong but obstinate choice of sin.  But is it not just as easy to choose right as wrong?  Are not the motives for a right choice infinitely greater than for a wrong one?  Could Adam reasonably have objected that he was unable to change his choice?  Could Satan object that he had no power to change the governing preference of his mind, and that it was impossible for him to prefer the glory of his Maker to rebelling against His throne?  If Satan, or Adam, or you, can reasonably bring forward this objection, then there is no such thing as sin in earth or hell.

God only requires of you to choose and act reasonably, for certainly it makes sense to prefer the glory of God, and the interest of His immense kingdom, to your own selfish interests.  It is an infinitely greater good.  Therefore you, God, and all his creatures, are bound to prefer it.  But I said earlier, that the reasons for making a right choice are infinitely greater than the reasons for making a wrong one.  Sinners often complain that they are so influenced by reasons, that they cannot resist iniquity.  They often excuse their sins by pleading that the temptation was too strong for them.  Sinner, why is it, while you are so easily influenced by reasons that you complain that you cannot resist them; that you are too weak to resist their influence to sin; that you are strong enough to resist the mountain of reasons that come rolling on you like a wave of fire, to do right and obey your Maker?

When the Son of God approaches you, gathering reasons from heaven, earth, and hell, and focuses them on your mind like a laser beam, how can you suddenly be strong enough to resist?  You, whose mind is as yielding as air to motives to sin; who are totally weak and complain that you can’t resist when tempted to disobey God, can suddenly exert such great resistance.  I had almost said “the strength of Omnipotence”, in resisting the infinite weight of those reasons to obey God that rolls on you from every quarter of the universe.  It is clear that if you did not exert your whole strength of moral agency to resist, these considerations would change your heart.

3. I come now to the third and last question, which is: How is this requirement, to “make to yourself a new heart,” consistent with the often repeated declarations of the Bible, that a new heart is the gift and work of God?  The Bible ascribes conversion, or a new heart, to four different agencies.  Oftentimes it refers to the Spirit of God.  And if you search the Scriptures, you will find that conversion more frequently refers to the truth; as, “Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of first fruits of His creatures”.  (James 1:18)  “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free”  (John 8:32)  “Sanctify them by Your truth.  Your word is truth.”  (John 17:17)  “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.”  (PS 19:7)  It sometimes refers to the preacher, or to the one who presents the truth; “He who wins souls is wise.”  (Prov 11:30)  Paul says, “I have begotten you through the Gospel”.  (I Cor 4:15)  “Let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.”  (James 5:20)  Sometimes it is spoken of as the work of the sinner himself:  Thus, the apostle says, “Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth;”  (I Pet 1:22)  “I thought about my ways,” says the Psalmist, “and turned my feet to Your testimonies” (Psalms 119:59).  Again he says,  “When You said, ‘Seek My face,’ my heart said to You, ‘Your face, Lord, I will seek.’”  (Psalms 27:8)  Now the question is, are all these declarations of Scripture consistent with each other?  They are all true; they all mean what they say.  There cannot be any real disagreement between them.  There is a sense in which conversion is the work of God.  There is a sense in which it is the result of truth.  There is a sense in which the preacher does it.  And it is also the appropriate work of the sinner himself.

The fact is, that the actual turning or change, is the sinner's own act.  The agent, who induces him, is the Spirit of God.  A secondary agent is a preacher, or an individual who presents the truth.  The truth is the instrument, or motive, which the Spirit uses to induce the sinner to turn.  Suppose that you are standing at the edge of the Niagara Falls.  As you stand on the edge of the precipice, you spot a man lost in thought, approaching the edge totally unaware of his danger.  He walks closer and closer, until he actually lifts his foot to take the final step that will plunge him to his destruction.  At this moment, you cry out above the roar of the foaming waters, “Stop”.  The voice pierces his ear, and breaks his trend of thought.  Looking down, he instantly stops, pale, in shock, and quivering from being at the very point of death.  He spins around, and almost faints in horror; and walks slowly away over to a rest area.  You follow him; the frightened look on his face draws several people around him: and when you approach, he points to you, and says, “That man saved my life”.  Here he ascribes the work to you; and certainly there is a sense in which you saved him.  But, on being further questioned, he says, “Stop! How that word rang in my ears.  Oh, that one word was to me the word of life.”  Here he ascribes his salvation to the word that aroused him, and caused him to turn.  But, on talking with him a little more, he said, “If I had not turned at that instant, I would have been a dead man”.  Here he speaks of his salvation as his own act; but then you hear him say, “Oh the mercy of God; if God had not intervened, I would have been lost.  Now the only flaw in this illustration is this: In this example, the only interference on the part of God was a providential one: and the only sense in which the saving of the man's life is ascribed to God is in a providential sense.  But in the conversion of a sinner there is something more than the providence of God employed; for here not only does the providence of God so order it, that the preacher cries, “Stop”, but the Spirit of God forces the truth home on him with such tremendous power as to induce him to turn.

Not only does the preacher cry Stop, but, through the living voice of the preacher, the Spirit cries Stop.  The preacher cries, “Turn!  Why will you die?”  The Spirit drives his appeals home with such power, that the sinner turns.  Now, in speaking about this change, it is perfectly proper to say that the Spirit turned him just as you would say a man who had persuaded another to change his mind on the subject of politics, that he had converted him, and won him over.  It is also proper to say that the truth converted him; as in a case when the political opinions of a man were changed by a certain argument, we should say, that the argument won him over.  So also, we can ascribe the change to a preacher, or to the person who had presented the motives; just as we would say of a lawyer who had prevailed in his argument with a jury; that he has won his case and converted the jury.  We can also honestly ascribe it to the individual himself whose heart is changed; we would say that he had changed his mind, he has come over, and he has repented.  Now it is strictly true, and true in the most absolute and highest sense; the act is his own act, the turning is his own turning, while God by the truth has induced him to turn; still it is strictly true that he has turned and has done it himself.

Thus, you see the sense in which it is the work of God, and the sense in which it is the sinner's own work.  The Spirit of God, by the truth, influences the sinner to change, and in this sense is the efficient cause of the change.  But the sinner actually changes, and is therefore it is the sinner, in the most proper sense, who is the author of the change.  There are some who, on reading their Bibles, focus their attention to those passages that ascribe the work to the Spirit of God, and seem to overlook those passages that ascribe it to man, and speak of it as the sinner's own act.  When they quote Scriptures, it is only to prove that it is the work of God.  By only quoting certain passages, they seem to think they have proved that conversion is a situation where a man is passive, and that there is no way that it can be the work of man.  Some months since a tract was written, the title of which was, “Regeneration is the effect of Divine Power”, the writer went on to prove that the work is wrought by the Spirit of God, and there he stopped.  Now it had been just as true, just as philosophical, and just as Scriptural, if he had said that conversion was the work of man.  Based on selected Scriptures, it was easy to prove that it was the work of God.  The writer therefore tells the truth, as far as he goes; but he has only told half the truth.  For while there is a sense in which it is the work of God, as he has shown, there is also a sense in which it is the work of man, as we have just seen.  The very title to this tract is a stumbling block.  It tells the truth, but it does not tell the whole truth.  And a tract might be written on this proposition that “conversion or regeneration is the work of man;” which would be just as true, just as Scriptural, and just as philosophical, as the one to which I have alluded.  Thus the writer, in his zeal to recognize and honor God’s involvement in this work, left out the fact that a change of heart is the sinner's own act.  As a result, he has left the sinner strongly entrenched with his weapons in his rebellious hands, stoutly resisting the claims of his Maker, and waiting passively for God to make him a new heart.  Thus you can see that there is a consistency between the requirement of the text, and the declared fact that God is the author of the new heart.  God commands you to do it, expects you to do it, and if it ever is done, you must do it.

I shall conclude this discussion with several inferences and remarks.

1. Sinners make their own wicked hearts.

Their preference of sin is their own voluntary act.  They make self-gratification the rule to which they conform all their conduct.  When they are born, the first principle that we deserve in their conduct is their determination to gratify themselves.  It soon happens that any effort to thwart them in the gratification of their appetites is met with strong resistance.  They seem to set their hearts to pursue their own happiness and gratify themselves no matter what happens; and thus they will successively make war on their nurse, their parents, and their God, whenever they find that the requirements of others prohibit the pursuit of their selfish end.  Now this is purely a voluntary state of mind.  This state of mind is not a subject of creation.  It is entirely the result of selfish temptations that comes from the circumstances under which the child is born. This preference for self-interest is allowed by the sinner to grow as he grows, and strengthen as he increases in strength, until his desperately wicked heart bears him onward to the gates of hell.

2. From what has been said, the need for a change of heart is obvious.

Paul calls the state of mind that impenitent sinners are in, the “carnal mind”; and  “the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be.  And so those who are in the flesh cannot please God.”  (Rom 8:7-8)  The child at first gives up the rein to the bodily appetites.  God requires him to keep his body under control, and make his body the instrument of his soul in the service of God.  God desires that he subject and subordinate all his passions to the will of his Maker.  Instead of this, he makes the gratification of his appetites and passions the law of his life.  It is that law in his members, of which the apostle speaks, as warring against the law of his mind.  This state of mind is the direct opposite of the character and requirements of God.  With this heart, the salvation of the sinner seems impossible.

3.  In the light of this subject, you can see the nature and degree of the sinner's dependence on the Spirit of God.

The Spirit's agency is not needed to give us power, but it is needed to overcome our voluntary rebellion.  Some people think that the Holy Spirit is employed to give the sinner power, that he is unable to obey God without the Spirit's agency.  I have already shown that we are under no obligation to do what we have no ability to do; in other words that our obligation is only proportional to our ability.  We cannot blame our self for not having exerted a power that we never possessed.  If we truly believe that we have no power to obey our Maker, it is impossible that we will blame our self for not obeying God.  And if we believe that the Spirit's agency is indispensable to make us able; consistency must compel us to maintain, that without the agency of the Holy Spirit, we are under no obligation to obey.  Giving the sinner power, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, to obey God, is what the Armenians call a gracious ability.  The way they use the term ‘gracious’ here is absurd.  What is grace?  Grace is undeserved favor, something to which we have no claim through justice.  Grace is something that may be withheld without injustice.  If this is a true definition, then a gracious ability to do our duty is absurd.  It is a dictate of reason, conscience, common sense, and our natural sense of justice, that if God requires us to perform any duty or act, he is bound by justice to give us the power to obey.  That is, He must give us the faculties and strength to do what He requires us to do.  But, if justice requires God to do this for us, how can you call it a gracious ability.  A natural ability to do our duty cannot be a gracious ability.  To call it a gracious ability is to confuse grace and justice.  It makes grace and justice mean the same thing.  If this is true, then the sin of disobedience must lie, not in his having broken the law of God, but solely in his not having complied with the strivings of the Spirit.  Based on these principles, the definition of sin should not be that it is a “transgression of the law”, but that it consists in not yielding to the influence of the Spirit.  Therefore, as long as he is not aware that the Holy Spirit is giving him power, he cannot feel any obligation to be converted; nor can he, on any reasonable principles, blame himself.  Then, how is it possible that with these views he can repent?  And how, based on these principles, can he be blamed for not having repented and turned to the Lord?

But, to illustrate both the nature and degree of man's dependence on the Spirit, suppose a man is bent on committing suicide.  In the absence of his wife, he loads a pistol, and prepares to commit the horrid deed.  His little child observes the disorder of his mind, and says, “Father, what are you going to do?”  “Be still, he replies, I am going to blow my brains out.”  The little one weeps, spreads out her little beggar hands, pleads with him to stop, and pours out her little prayers, with tears and agonizing pleas, to spare his life.  Now if the eloquence of this child's grief, if her prayers and tears could  stop him from committing suicide, he would need no other influence to subdue and change his mind.  But the father refuses to change.  The child runs screaming to her mother, and as soon as she is told why he is in anguish, runs on the wings of terror to her husband’s room, and begs him to change his purpose.  She begs him, over and over again, not to kill himself because of his love for his family and their love for him, because of their dependence on him in view of the torn heart and the extreme emotional disturbance of the wife that he loves, because of the anguish, the tears, the helplessness of his children, because of the regard he has for his own soul, because of the hope of heaven, because of the terrors of hell, because of everything tender and persuasive in life, because of all that is solemn in the final judgment, and terrible in the pains of the second death.  Now if all this can move him, he needs no other and higher influence to change his mind.  But when she fails in her efforts, suppose she could summon all the angels of God, and they also should fail to move and melt him by their unearthly eloquence.  At this point, some higher power must intervene or the man is lost.  But just as he puts his pistol to his ear, the Spirit of God, who knows the state of his mind perfectly, and understands all the reasons that have led him to his desperate determination, gathers such a world of motive, and pours them in such a focused blaze on his soul, that he instantly shrinks back in fear, drops the weapon from his nerveless hand, relinquishes his purpose of death forever, falls on his knees, and gives glory to God. 

Now it was the strength of the man's voluntary purpose of self-destruction alone, that made the Spirit's agency necessary in this situation.  If he would have yielded to all those motives that had been presented before which should have subdued him, no intervention of the Holy Spirit would have been necessary.  But it was the wickedness, and the obstinacy of the wretch, that was the only foundation for the Spirit's intervention.  Now this is the sinner's situation.  The sinner has completely set his heart to do evil.  If the prayers and tears of friends and the church of God, the warning of ministers, the rebukes of Providence, the commands, expostulations, tears, and groans, and death of God's dear Son, if the offer of heaven or the threatening of hell could overcome his obstinate preference of sin, the Spirit's agency would not be needed.  But because no human persuasion, no motive that man or angel can employ, will cause him to turn; therefore the Spirit of God must intervene to shake his preference, and turn him back from hell.  The degree of his dependence on the Spirit, is the same as the degree of his obstinacy.  If he were only slightly inclined to pursue the road to death, men could change him without calling on God for help.  But just in proportion to the strength of his preference for sin, it is necessary that the Spirit should intervene or he is lost.  Thus, you see that the sinner's dependence on the Spirit of God, instead of being his excuse, is that which constitutes his guilt.

4.  You see from this subject the nature of the of the Spirit's agency.

God does not act by any direct physical contact on the mind, but He uses the truth as His sword to pierce the sinner; and that the motives presented in the Gospel are the instruments He uses to change the sinner's heart.  Some have doubted this, and think that you are denying the Spirit's agency altogether to maintain that He converts sinners by motives.  Others have denied the possibility of changing the heart using motives.  But did not the serpent persuade Adam's to change his heart; and cannot the Spirit of God with infinitely higher motives exert as much power over the mind as Satan can?  Can the old serpent change a heart from a perfectly holy to a perfectly sinful one by the power of motives, and cannot the infinitely wise God, do as much as Satan did?  Verily, to deny this, looks much like detracting from the wisdom and power of God.  But that the Scripture abundantly declares that the Spirit converts sinners by the power of motives is very clear.  “Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of first fruits of His creatures.”  (James 1:18)  This scripture is one of the many scriptures that show that the work of the Holy Spirit is persuasive.  The Bible settles the philosophy of this subject.  It is a subject on which we are not free to speculate and form our own philosophical theories, and maintain that by some direct physical contact, irrespective of truth, God intervenes and changes the sinner's heart.  When God says, “Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth”, the question is settled; and is equivalent to saying that he has not begotten us in any other manner.

The very terms used by our Savior in the promise of the Spirit to reprove the world of sin, of righteousness, and of a judgment to come, strongly imply the mode of his agency.  (John 16:8)  The term rendered Comforter in our translation of the Bible, is ‘Parakletos’.  The same term is rendered Advocate in one of John’s epistles.  There, the term is applied to Jesus Christ.  This is what it says: “If any man sin, we have a Parakletos, or an Advocate with the Father, even Jesus Christ the righteous”. (I John 2:1)  In this passage, Jesus Christ is spoken of as the Advocate of men with God.  The Parakletos, or Comforter, promised by our Savior, is represented as God's Advocate, to plead His cause with men.  The term rendered reprove or convince in our translation is a law term, and signifies the summing up of an argument, and establishing or demonstrating the sinner's guilt.  Thus, the strivings of the Spirit of God with men is not a physical scuffling, but a debate, a strife, not of body with body, but of mind with mind in the action and reaction of intense arguments.  From these remarks, it is easy to answer the question, sometimes put by individuals who seem to be entirely in the dark on this subject, whether, in converting the soul, the Spirit acts directly on the mind, or on the truth.  This is the same nonsense as if you should ask whether an earthly advocate who had gained his cause, did it by acting directly and physically on the jury, or by winning his argument.

5. In changing the sinner's heart, God never does what He requires the sinner to do.

Some people, as I have already observed, seem willing to be passive, willing to wait for some mysterious influence like an electric shock, to change their hearts.  But in this attitude, and with these views, they may wait until the Day of Judgment and God will never do their duty for them.  The fact is, sinners, that God requires you to turn, and what He requires of you, He cannot do for you.  It must be your own voluntary act.  It is not the appropriate work of God to do what He requires of you.  Do not wait then for Him to do your duty, but do it immediately yourself, on pain of eternal death.

6. This subject also shows that if the sinner ever has a new heart, he must obey the command of the text, and make it himself.

But here someone may ask, “Isn’t this taking the work out of God's hands, and robbing Him of the glory”?  No.  It is the only view of the subject that truly gives the glory to God.  Some in their zeal to magnify the grace of the Gospel destroy it.  They maintain the sinner's inability, and thereby do away with his guilt.  Instead of considering the sinner a guilty, voluntary rebel, who is worthy of eternal death, they make him a helpless, unfortunate creature, unable to do what God requires him to do.  Instead of making his only difficulty consist in his unwillingness, they insist on his inability, and thus destroy his guilt, and of course, the grace displayed in his salvation.  For what grace can there be in helping an unfortunate individual?  If sinners are unable to obey God, precisely in proportion to their inability, are they guiltless.  But if they are unwilling, if their ‘cannot’ is a ‘will not’, we have already seen that their guilt is in proportion to the strength of their unwillingness, and the grace in their salvation must be equal to their guilt.  Nor does the sinner’s act of turning to God detract from the glory of God.  The fact is, he never does, and never will turn, unless God induces him to do it, so that although the act is the sinner's own, yet the glory belongs to God, inasmuch as God caused him to act.  If a man had made up his mind to take his own life, and you should, by taking the greatest pains, and at great expense, prevail on him to stop, you would deserve credit for influencing him to turn!  Changing his mind and giving up his plans to commit suicide was his own act, but you were the sole cause of his turning.  Certainly, if you had not interfered he would have killed himself.  Are you not entitled to just as much praise as if you pulled the gun out of his hand and physically prevented him from blowing his brains out?  Can we not truthfully say that you had turned him?

7. The idea that the Spirit converts sinners by the truth is the only view of the subject that honors both the Holy Spirit and the truth of God.

The work of conversion is spoken of in the Bible as a work of exceeding great power.  I once heard a clergyman, who spoke extensively on the great powers that God used in conversion.  But he saw it as a physical change in man’s constitution, like implanting a new principle, or taste.  He boldly proclaimed that it was a greater exertion of power than that which hung out the heavens.  He said that the reason why God exerted such great power was that, when God created the universe He had no opposition, but when He converts a soul, He has all the powers of hell opposing Him.  Now this is whimsical and ridiculous!  As if the opposition of hell could present any obstacle in the way of God’s physical omnipotence.  The power that God exerts in converting a soul is moral power.  It is that kind of power that a politician uses to sway the mind of a senate; or that a lawyer uses to move and persuade the heart of a jury.  It is that kind of power by which “David bowed the heart of all the men of Judah, even as the heart of one man.”  (II Sam 19:14)  Now when we consider the deep-rooted selfishness of the sinner, we must consider his long cherished habits of sin and his unlimited excuses and refuges of lies.  It is a most sublime exhibition of wisdom and moral power to pursue him step by step with the truth, to hunt him from his refuges of lies, and to constrain him by the force of argument alone so that he yields up his selfishness and dedicates himself to the service of God.  This reflects a glory and a luster over the truth of God and the agency of the Holy Spirit, that at once delights and amazes the beholder.

8. The idea that the Holy Spirit uses motives to change the heart, is the only view that gives consistency and meaning to the often repeated injunction, not to resist the Holy Ghost.  Do not strive with your Maker.  (Acts 7:51; Gen 6:3)

For if the Spirit operated on the mind by direct physical contact, the idea of effectively resisting physical omnipotence is ridiculous.  The same thought applies to those passages that caution us against grieving and quenching the Spirit.  (Psalms 78:40; 95:10; Is 63:10; Eph 4:30)

9. You see from this subject that a sinner, under the influence of the Spirit of God, is just as free as a jury under the arguments of a lawyer.

Do you see the importance of having the right views on this point?  Suppose a lawyer addresses a jury without expecting to change their minds by anything he says.  Instead, he waits for an invisible and physical agency to be exerted by the Holy Ghost on them.  And suppose, on the other hand, that the jury thought that in deciding their verdict, they must be passive, and wait for a direct physical agency to be exerted on them.  All the lawyer’s pleas would be in vain.  Everything the jury would hear would be in vain.  Because until he presses his arguments as if he was determined to bow their hearts, and until they make up their minds, and decide the question, and act like rational, intelligent beings, both his pleading and their hearing is in vain.  So if a minister preaches to sinners believing that they have no power to obey the truth, and under the impression that a direct physical influence must be exerted on them before they can believe, and if his audience is of the same opinion, he will preach in vain and they will listen in vain “for they are yet in their sins”.  They sit and quietly wait for some invisible hand to come down from heaven, and perform some surgical operation, infuse some new principle, or implant some new constitutional desire; after which they believe that they will be able to obey God.

Ministers should work with sinners as a lawyer works with a jury, using the same principles of mental philosophy.  The sinner should weigh his arguments and decide on the spot whether or not to change according to law and evidence.  But here perhaps some one will ask, “If the truth, when seen in all its bearings and relations, is the instrument of converting the sinner, why will he not be converted in hell, where all the truth will burst on his mind in all its burning reality”?  In answering this, please notice, that the motive that prevails to turn the convicted rebel to God, will be lacking in hell.  When the sinner is crowded with conviction and at the point of despair, and ready to flee and hide himself from the presence of his Maker, he is met by the offer of reconciliation, which, together with the other motives that are weighing like a mountain on his mind, sweetly constrains him to yield himself up to God.  But in hell, there will be no offer of reconciliation.  The sinner will be in despair; and while in despair turning his heart to God will be morally impossible.  Let a man so completely destroy his reputation that he has absolutely no hope of retrieving it.  In this state of absolute despair, no motive can reach him to make him do anything to try to recover his reputation.  He has no sufficient motive to even try.  So if his reputation is so completely destroyed that he has no hope of retrieving it, as long as he is in this state of despair, he can’t be reclaimed.  No motive can reach him and influence him to do something to redeem his character, because he is without hope.  The same is true in hell.  The poor dying sinner will be shut up in total despair.  His character is gone.  His fortune is lost for an eternity; there is no offer, no hope of reconciliation; and punishment will only drive him further and further from God forever and ever.

10. “But”, says an objector, “if the right understanding of the truth presented by the Spirit of God converts a sinner, does it not follow that his ignorance is the cause of his sin”?

I answer, No!  If Adam had always kept what truth he knew before his mind, he would have resisted the temptation; but when he allowed his mind to be diverted from the reasons to obey to those reasons to disobey, he failed.  When he had fallen, and selfishness had become predominant in his life, he was opposed to knowing and weighing the reasons for turning back to God.  (see Gen 3:8)  If Adam ever turned back to God, the Spirit of God must have pressed the subject on him.  The same is true with every sinner.  The sinner first sins against what knowledge he has by overlooking the reasons to obey, and he yields himself to the reasons to disobey.  Once he has adopted this selfish principle, his ignorance becomes willful and sinful, and unless the Spirit of God persuades him, he will not see.  He knows the truth well enough to leave him without any excuse, but he will not consider it and allow it to have its effect on him.

But our objector may still ask, “Is it not true, after all, if a full and sufficiently impressive knowledge of truth is all that is necessary to subdue the sinner, that he only needs to know the true character of God to love it, and that his enmity against God comes from his false notions of God?  Is it not a false and not the true character of God that he hates?”  I answer, No!  He hates the true character of God.  He hates God for who and what He is.  The sinner's character is selfishness.  God's character is benevolence.  These are eternal opposites.  The sinner hates God because God is opposed to his selfishness.  As long as the man remains selfish, it is absurd to say that he is reconciled to the true character of God.  “But is not his ignorance the cause of his selfishness?”  No!  He knows better than to be selfish.  It is true he does not, nor will not consider the unreasonableness of selfishness unless the Holy Spirit compels him.  The work of the Holy Spirit is not just giving instruction, but in compelling him to consider truths that he already knows, to think about the way he is walking and turn to the Lord.  The Holy Spirit draws his attention and consideration to those motives that he hates to think about and feels bad about.  It is probable, if not certain, that if all the motives to obey had been spread before Adam’s mind, or any other sinner, and he had the mind to seriously think about them at the time, he would not have sinned.  But the fact is, sinners do not think about the truth that they know in their mind, but they divert their attention and rush headlong to hell.

Someone will reply, “Although it is true that the sinner's willful, inconsiderate lack of attention forms the only foundation for the need of the Spirit's influence, yet, is it not God’s great business to remove this ignorance brought about by the sinner's willful rejection of light?”  What does consideration do, but to bring the sinner to a better knowledge of himself, God, and his duty, and thus, by force of truth, constrain him to yield?  If ignorance means a willful perverse rejection of light and knowledge, I suppose that this state of mind is not only the cause of his sin, but is his sin.  Paul views the subject in this light.  In speaking about sinners, he says, “having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardening of their heart.”  (Eph 4:18)

Pressing the truth on the sinner's consideration induces him to turn.  But it is not true that he is ignorant of these truths before he considers them.  He knows he must die.  He knows that he is a sinner, that God is right and he is wrong and that there is a heaven and a hell, but, as the prophet says, “They will not see” (Isaiah 26:11) and again, “My people will not consider.”  (Isaiah 1:3)  It is not simply to instruct, but to lead the sinner to think about his ways, that the Spirit employs His agency.

I have already shown why he will not be converted when truth is forced on him in hell.

11. But someone may ask the following question:  “Is not this explanation of the subject inconsistent with that mystery of which Christ speaks, when he says, ‘The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes.  So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.’”  (John 3:8)

Says the objector, “I have been in the habit of considering the subject of a new heart, as something very mysterious: but you make it very simple.  How can you do this?  Does not Christ, in the text I have quoted, represent it as mysterious?”  In answer to this I would ask, where does Christ, in that text, explain what the new birth consists of?  Not in the results that the Spirit produces, for the results are matters of experience and observation.  Not in the instruments used, for these instruments are revealed elsewhere in the Bible.  But the mystery lies in how the Spirit communicates with the mind.  How spirits without bodies communicate with each other, we can’t say.  How a spirit that has no body can communicate with one that wears a body, we don’t know.  We can communicate with each other using our bodily senses.  The particular manner in which the Spirit of God carries on His debates and strivings with our mind is something that we will probably never understand in this life.  Nor is it important that we should.  Every Christian knows that in some way the truth was kept before his mind, and made to bear, and presses on him, and hedges him in, until he was constrained to yield.  These are matters of experience; but exactly how the Holy Spirit does this is just as mysterious as millions of other facts that we daily witness, but cannot explain.

12. But here perhaps another objection may arise.  If the sinner is able to convert himself, why does he need the Spirit of God?

Suppose a man owed you one thousand dollars, was abundantly able, but unwilling to pay you; you prepare to take him to small claims court, to motivate him to be honest and pay his debts.  Now suppose that he should say, “I am perfectly able to pay this thousand dollars, of what use then is this court order, and sheriff, and a lawsuit?  The answer is, it is to make him willing.  Yes, he is able, but he is unwilling.  The same is true with the sinner.  He is able to do his duty, but he is unwilling, therefore the Spirit of God motivates him to make him willing.

13. Sinners should do more than simply pray for a new heart.

Many who believe that sinners are unable to change their own heart, substitute another requirement for that contained in the text when sinners ask what they should do to be saved.  Instead of commanding them to make to them a new heart, they have been told to pray that God would change their heart.  They have been told things like the following: “You must depend on God for a new heart.  Don’t try to do anything in your own strength.  Read your Bible, be as good as you can, call on God to change your heart, and wait patiently for God to save you.”  A few years ago, a lawyer, under deep conviction of sin came to my room to ask what he should do to be saved.  He informed me that when he was in college, he and two of his friends were deeply anxious for their souls.  They went to the president of the college and asked him what he should do.  His directions were, basically, that they should read their Bibles, keep clear of bad company, be good, and pray for a new heart, and that before long they would either be converted, or would give up reading their Bibles and doing things for their salvation.

When I asked what happened, he replied that it turned out as the president told them it would.  They soon gave up reading their Bibles, and trying to be good.  He said that the directions of the president relieved his mind, and that the more he prayed and did what he could, the less distress he felt.  Since he now thought he was doing his duty, and in a hopeful way, the more he read his Bible and prayed, the more acceptable he thought he was to God, and the more likely he should be converted.  The more diligent he was in the things he did, the more self-complacent and contented he became.  And so, he prayed and waited for God to change his heart until his convictions had entirely worn away, and with a burst of grief he added that, that’s what happened to all of them. The other two became drunks and he was nearly ruined by alcohol.  With tears in his eyes, he asked that if there was any hope in his case, what should he do to be saved.  On being told to repent, and pressed to immediately perform his duty, he yielded up himself to God on the spot. 

Now the result of the directions given by the college president was strictly philosophical.  His advice pleased the devil.  It helped the devil far more than to have told them to immediately abandon all thoughts of religion, because this would have shocked and frightened them, and, since they were so anxious, they would have turned with abhorrence from such advice.  But setting them on this sanctimonious method of praying and waiting for God to do what God required them to do, it soothed their consciences.  His advice substituted another requirement in place of God’s command, fostering a spirit of delay and confirming them in self-righteousness.  One of two results can be expected from such advice.  Either they would embrace a false hope, or they would wind up with no hope at all.  For it was perfectly natural and reasonable, if their duty was to pray, use the means, and wait for God, for them to believe that they were growing better because they thought they were doing what God required of them.  The more diligent they were in their impenitent endeavors, the more safely they would rely on God's converting them.  Therefore, the more they walked this way, the less knowledge they would have of themselves, their danger, and their deserts; and the more certainly they would grieve away the Spirit of God.

Sinner!  Instead of waiting and praying for God to change your heart, you should at once summon up your powers, put forth your effort, and change the governing preference of your mind.  But here some one may ask, “Can the carnal mind, which is enmity against God, change itself”?  I have already said that this text in the original reads, “The minding of the flesh is enmity against God”.  This minding of the flesh, then, is a choice or preference to gratify the flesh.  Now it is indeed absurd to say that a choice can change itself; but it is not absurd to say, that the agent who exercises this choice can change it.  The sinner that minds the flesh can change his mind and mind God.

14.  The sinner's obligation to make to himself a new heart, is infinite.

Sinner!  Your obligation to love God is equal to the excellence of His character, and your guilt in not obeying Him is of course equal to your obligation.  You cannot therefore for one hour or one moment put off obeying the commandment in the text without deserving eternal damnation.

15. It is most reasonable to expect sinners, if they are converted at all, to be converted under the voice of a living preacher, or while the truth is held up in all its glory before the mind.

An idea prevails in the church today that sinners must have a season of conviction, and that any sudden conversions are suspicious.  But certainly, this persuasion does not come from God.  Nowhere in the Bible do we read of cases of lengthy convictions.  On the day of Pentecost Peter was not afraid that his hearers did not have enough conviction.  He did not tell them to pray and labor for a more impressive sense of their guilt and wait for the Spirit of God to change their hearts, but Peter drove home their immediate duty to repent.  If he had given them an opportunity to escape, to go from under his voice while yet in their sins, it is probable that hundreds, if not thousands of them would not have been converted at all.  It is as reasonable and philosophical to expect the sinner to turn, if he does it at all, while listening to the arguments of the living preacher, as it is to expect a jury to be convinced, and make up their mind, under the arguments of the lawyer.  The lawyer expects that if they are convinced at all, they will be convinced while he is addressing them.  He does not act on the absurd and preposterous assumption that it is more likely they will be convinced and make up their verdict in his favor after they have retired, and calmly considered the subject.  His goal is so thoroughly to convince, so completely to imbue their minds with the subject, so that he gets their intellect, conscience, and heart to embrace his views of the subject.  This is wise, and truly, in this respect, “the sons of this world are more shrewd in their generation than the sons of light.”  (Luke 16:8)  Now sinner, if you go away without making up your mind, and changing your heart, it is most probable that your mind will be diverted.  You will forget many things that you have heard today.  Many of the motives and considerations that now press upon you may fade from your mind.  You will lose the clear view of the subject that you now have, grieve the Spirit, defer repentance, and push your unbroken footsteps to the gates of hell.

16. It is important to present those truths in such a way that will induce the sinner to change his heart.

Few more mischievous sentiments have ever been proclaimed, than the idea that there is no philosophical connection between the means and the end in converting sinners and that there is nothing in the motives of the Gospel that can annihilate the sinner's selfishness and lead him to submit to God. This idea is a part of the doctrine of physical depravity.  The doctrine of physical depravity considers regeneration as a change in the substance of the mind that is brought about by the direct physical agency of the Spirit of God, irrespective of truth.  If this were the correct view of regeneration, there would be no connection between the means and the end.  For if the work was a work of physical creation performed by the direct physical power of the Holy Ghost, then certainly it is not the result of any means.  But, this is far from the truth.  No sinner ever was or ever will be converted, except by means wisely and philosophically adapted to save souls.

The Spirit selects such considerations, at such times and under such circumstances, that are naturally calculated to disarm and confound sinners, strip them of their excuses, answer their arguments, humble their pride, and break their hearts.  The preacher should therefore acquaint himself with their refuges of lies, and as far as possible take into consideration their entire lives, including their present views and state of mind.  The minister should wisely select a subject, skillfully arrange it, simply and powerfully present it so that it grabs the sinner's attention, and then totally lay himself out to bring the sinner to yield on the spot.  He who deals with souls should carefully study the laws of the mind, and carefully and prayerfully adapt his matter and manner to the situation, circumstances, views, and feelings that the sinner might be in at the time.  He should present that particular subject, in that connection and manner that will have the greatest natural tendency to subdue the rebel at once.  If we would act as wisely and as philosophically in attempting to make men Christians as we do in attempting to sway people’s minds on other subjects, if we would suit our subject to their state of mind, conform “the action to the word and the word to the action,” and press our subject with as much attention, warmth, and perseverance, as lawyers and statesmen do their addresses, the results would be the conversion of hundreds of thousands.  Converts would be added to the Lord “like drops of the morning dew.”  If the whole church and the whole ministry was right on this subject, if the church had all the right views, if they were imbued with a right spirit, and if they would “go forth with tears bearing precious seed, they would soon reap the harvest of the whole earth and return bearing their sheaves with them.”  (Psalms 126:6)

The importance of rightly understanding that God converts souls by motives is inconceivably great.  Those who do not recognize this truth in their practice are more likely to hinder than to aid the Holy Spirit in their work.  Some have denied this truth in theory, but have happily admitted it in practice.  They have prayed, preached, and talked as if they expected the Holy Spirit to convert sinners by the truth.  In such cases, in spite of their theory, their practice was owned and blessed of God.  But a lack of attention to this truth in practice has been the source of a lot of ruinous error in the management of revivals, and in dealing with anxious souls.  Much of the preaching, conversation and exhortation has been irrelevant, perplexing, and mystical.  Sufficient efforts have not been taken to avoid a diversion of public and individual attention.  Sinners have been kept under conviction for long periods, because the person sharing or witnessing withheld those particular truths that they needed to hear more than anything else.  Millions of sinners have been perplexed and confounded by abstract doctrines, metaphysical subtleties, absurd exhibitions of the sovereignty of God, inability, physical regeneration, and constitutional depravity, until their agonized minds became discouraged and mad from all the contradictions coming from the pulpit.  And because of all the absurd teachings and conversations, they dismissed the subject as altogether incomprehensible, and postponed doing their duty because they think that it is impossible.

17. Do you see the importance of pressing every argument, and every consideration, that can have any weight.

And now, sinner, while this subject is before you, will you yield?  To keep yourself away from under the motives of the Gospel, by neglecting church, and neglecting your Bible, will prove fatal to your soul.  And to be careless when you pay attention, or to pay attention and yet refuse to make up your mind and yield, will be equally fatal.  And now, “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.”  (Rom 12:1) Let the truth take a firm hold on your conscience.  Throw down your rebellious weapons.  Give up your refuges of lies.  Fix your mind on the world of considerations that should instantly encourage you to close in with the offer of reconciliation while it now lies before you.  Another moment's delay, and it may be too late forever.  The Spirit of God may depart from you.  The offer of life may never be made to you again.  This offer of mercy may be passed up, and God may close up your account, and turn you over to all the horrors of eternal death.  Hear, then, O sinner, I beseech you, obey the word of the Lord.  “Get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit.  For why should you die?”