Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

motive than selfishness, in seeking to destroy Mordecai and his people. The Turks act from no worse motive than selfishness, in destroying the Greeks. And the Americans act from no worse motive than selfishness, in enslaving the Africans. fishness is the source of all the sins of omission and commission which are found in the world. If a man loves nobody but himself, he will care for nobody's interest but his own. This was the case of the Priest and Levite. And if a man loves hobody but himself, he will seek his own interest, though it destroys every body's interest but his own. This was the case

of the thieves and robbers. There is nothing in the world so malignant and destructive in its nature and tendency, as selfishness. It has done all the mischief that ever has been done, and will do all the mischief that ever will be done. It has destroyed the temporal and eternal interests of millions in time past, and there is ground to fear, that it will continue to destroy the temporal and eternal interests of millions and millions more in time to come. No man ever can have a just and clear conception of the malignant nature and tendency of any sin, before he has a just and clear conception of the malignant nature and tendency of selfishness. Paul confesses that he never knew the evil nature and tendency of sin, before the commandment came home to his conscience: "Thou shalt not covet ;" that is, thou shalt not be selfish. When this commandment came in its full force and obligation, his sin and guilt revived, and he died. He felt that he deserved, and stood exposed to, that eternal death which is the proper wages of sin.

2. It appears from the different conduct of those who robbed, and of those who neglected to relieve the poor man in the parable, that the different conduct of sinners is no evidence that they are not all totally depraved. There is scarcely any doctrine of the gospel so commonly denied, as the total depravity of sinners in general. Not only infidels and sectarians, but many who appear to be sound believers of the gospel, deny this doctrine. Though they allow that mankind are universally depraved, yet they cannot allow that their depravity is total, and exclusive of all true love to God and man. They ground their opinion principally upon the different conduct of those who have never experienced a saving change of heart. They see sinners exhibit so many amiable qualities, and do so many apparently useful and virtuous actions, that they cannot believe they are all totally destitute of all moral virtue, and entirely selfish and criminal in all their desires, intentions and actions. They could more readily believe that they are all dead in trespasses and sins, if they all acted like the most licentious and abandoned. But if all sin consists in selfishness, and all sin

ners always act from selfish motives, it is easy to see that they may act very differently, while pursuing a vast variety of totally selfish purposes. Some sinners may think it is for their interest to avoid all sins of commission, and practice only those of omission. This appears to have been the case of the Priest and Levite. They meant to maintain a fair, reputable character; and consequently, would neither murder, rob, nor steal, nor be guilty of any other sin of commission. But for the sake of pursuing their own selfish purposes, they would omit or neglect the duty of promoting the happiness, and preserving the life of a poor, miserable, dying man. Selfishness much oftener leads sinners into the sins of omission, than into the sins of commission. There are a thousand sinners, who every day commit the sins of omission, that totally avoid all sins of commission. Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, that prodigy of wickedness, appears to have maintained a fair, amiable character in the morning of life, and while under the penetrating eye of Solomon; but as soon as he thought it to be his interest to throw off his amiable, virtuous appearance, he did not hesitate to commit the grossest enormities. The selfishness of Satan himself sometimes makes him think it to be for his interest, and necessary in order to accomplish his most malignant purposes, to transform himself into an angel of light. Total selfishness will account as well for the best, as the worst actions of sinners. The same selfishness that led the Priest and Levite to neglect their duty, led others to steal and rob and murder. If men only understood the nature and tendency of selfishness, which is the essence of all sin, they never would deny the total depravity of sinners, on account of any difference they discover in their external conduct.

3. It appears from the different conduct of the Priest, Levite and Samaritan, that there is an essential difference between saints and sinners, or between selfishness and pure disinterested benevolence. Many imagine and maintain that there is no such thing as disinterested benevolence; and that all men always act from selfishness, and cannot act from any higher or better principle. They say every man ought to love himself and his own interest supremely, and that he ought not to love another man, nor another man's interest more than his own. And therefore they suppose that saints and sinners only pursue their own interest in different ways, while both pursue the same object, from the same selfish motives. On this supposition, there would be indeed only an apparent and circumstantial difference between them. But there is no ground to make this supposition; for it is as easy to conceive that a man may act from a disinterested love, as from a selfish love. And when

one man acts from disinterested love, and another from selfish love, there is an essential, and not merely an apparent and circumstantial, difference in their characters and conduct. There was an essential difference in the characters and conduct of the Priest and Levite, and the good Samaritan. Their circumstances were precisely alike. The Priest came to the wounded man alone, and left him to die. The Levite came to the wounded man alone, and left him to die. And the good Samaritan came to the wounded man alone, but stopped and examined his case, pitied his condition, and nobly exerted himself to afford him relief. How came he to conduct so differently from the Priest and Levite? It could not be owing to different circumstances; for they were all three in exactly the same circumstances. What reason, or right, has any one to think or say that the Samaritan acted from the same selfish motives that the Priest and Levite did? They acted out selfishness; but he acted out pure, disinterested benevolence. They pursued their own interest; but he pursued the interest of another man. They placed their happiness in their own interest; but he placed his happiness in the interest of another man. And was it possible that he should place his happiness in the interest of another man, from a purely selfish motive? It is extremely absurd to say that good men are selfish because they take as much pleasure in doing good to others, as sinners do in doing mischief to others. If it be true that saints do place their happiness in the happiness of others, then it is absolutely certain that they actually exercise disinterested love; which is the essence of virtue or true holiness, in distinction from selfish love, which is the essence of all sin, or moral evil. There is no truth more certain from reason and scripture than this, that there is an essential difference between virtue and vice, sin and holiness, saints and sinners.

ners.

4. It appears from what has been said, that all men are capable of seeing the essential difference between saints and sinOur Saviour spake the parable of the good Samaritan for the very purpose of illustrating the essential distinction between sinners and saints, sin and holiness. A certain man, to justify himself for neglecting to love God with all his heart and his neighbor as himself, put this question to Christ, "Who is my neighbor? Jesus answering, said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho," &c. And as soon as he had finished his parable, he questioned the questioner, "Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbor unto him that fell among the thieves? And he said, he that showed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go and do thou likewise." He was fully convinced that the Samaritan did right,

but that the Priest and Levite did wrong; or, in other words, he was fully convinced that there was an essential difference between the character and conduct of the Samaritan, and the character and conduct of the Priest and Levite. And it is hard to conceive that any man should read the parable without receiving the same conviction and making the same acknowledgment. But many have denied the essential distinction between saints and sinners. Satan denied this distinction in respect to Job. He asked the Lord, "Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast thou not made an hedge about him and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side?-But put forth thine hand now and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face." This was a plain insinuation that Job did not differ essentially from sinners, notwithstanding all God had said in his favor. Satan also indirectly called in question the disinterested and supreme love of Christ to his Father, when he addressed a selfish motive to his mind to induce him to fall down and worship him. However, be that as it may, we know that not a few who call themselves christians, deny that there is any essential distinction between saints and sinners. Some deny this distinction one way, and some another. Some deny it, by maintaining that we ought not to love God until we know that he loves us. Some deny it, by maintaining that we ought not to love God more than ourselves. And some, by maintaining that God requires self love of us, and that when we exercise self love we actually obey his commands. But if saints do not love God for what he is himself, if they do not love him more than themselves, and if they do obey him by exercising self love, they do nothing more than others. Sinners love those who love them; they love God for his favors, and they externally obey him from selfish motives. But it is vain to deny and dispute the essential distinction between saints and sinners, which is kept up through the Bible, and which cannot be denied without denying that there are such persons as either saints or sinners, or any such thing as either sin or holiness. If sin does not consist in selfishness, it cannot consist in any thing else; for there is nothing else that is morally evil or criminal. And if holiness does not consist in disinterested love, it cannot consist in any thing else; for there is nothing else that is morally excellent or virtuous. If there be any saints, they possess disinterested love; and if there be any sinners, they are totally destitute of disinterested love. And if saints possess that disinterested love of which sinners are entirely destitute, then there is an essential, and not merely an apparent and circumstantial, distinction between them. And this essential distinction Christ meant to illustrate, and did

illustrate, in a manner level to the lowest capacity. There is no man who does not condemn selfishness when he sees it in himself or others; and there is no man but approves of disinterested love, when he finds it in himself or sees it in others.

5. We learn from what has been said, why the scripture represents good men as the excellent of the earth. It is because they possess that pure, holy and universal love in which all true holiness and moral excellence consists. They are as much more excellent than sinners, as benevolence is more excellent than selfishness. They are holy as God is holy, just as God is just, and merciful as God is merciful. They love God for the same reasons that he loves himself. They love his friends with the same complacency with which he loves them. And they love his enemies with the same benevolence with which he loves them. They feel towards all creatures, objects and events, so far as their knowledge extends, as he feels. They love all the designs of God, so far as they are acquainted with them, and desire to be instrumental in carrying them into execution. They have no interests but what they are willing should be made subservient to the higher interests of others, in which they take a sincere and peculiar pleasure. They are as much superior, in moral excellence, to those who seek their own interests supremely and solely, as they are different from them in their views, desires and happiness. Was not Abel more excellent than Cain? Were not Seth, Enoch, and the patriarchs more excellent than those who filled the earth with violence? Was not Moses more excellent than Pharaoh? Was not David more excellent than Saul? Was not Solomon more excellent than Jeroboam? Was not the Samaritan more excellent than the Priest and Levite? In a word, if there be any benevolent men, are they not more excellent than those who are entirely selfish? If this be true, then saints are certainly more excellent than sinners, and the representation which the scripture gives of good men, in respect to moral excellence, is perfectly agreeable to the common sense of all mankind.

6. We learn from what has been said, that those who are destitute of true benevolence to men, are equally destitute of true love to God. True love to God is precisely of the same nature as true love to men. All true love to men is disinterested, and all true love to God is disinterested. True disinterested benevolence is always the first exercise of a new heart. It is difficult to conceive how a man can have complacency in benevolence before he has exercised benevolence, and knows by experience how it feels. God first sheds abroad the love of benevolence in the heart of a sinner, and then the love of complacency. How often do those who relate their experiences,

« AnteriorContinuar »