从神而生之人的伟大特权 （约翰·卫斯理讲道19）

“凡从神生的就不犯罪。”（约翰一书 3:9）

一、称义与重生的区别

1. 人们常常以为“从神而生”与“称义”是同一回事，认为“重生”与“称义”只是表达同一个概念的不同方式。确实，凡称义的也是从神生的，凡从神生的也必定是称义的，并且这两样恩典常常在信徒生命中是同时发生的：在同一时刻，他的罪被涂抹，他也因神而重生。

2. 尽管如此，称义和重生虽然在时间上不可分割，却在本质上有着显著的不同。称义只是关系上的改变，重生却是实质性的更新。称义是神为我们成就的事，使我们与神和好，从敌人成为儿女。而重生则是神在我们里面的工作，使我们由罪人转变为圣徒。称义除去罪的定罪，重生则除去罪的权势。因此，虽然这两者在时间上同时发生，但性质上却迥然不同。

3. 没有区分这两者，导致许多人在解释“凡从神生的就不犯罪”这个伟大特权时思想混乱。

4. 为了清楚理解这一点，我们需要：

• 首先，思考“凡从神生的”这句话的正确含义；
• 其次，探究“他就不犯罪”在什么意义上成立。

I. “凡从神生的”是什么意思

1. “从神生的”这一说法，并不单指受洗或任何外在的改变，而是指一种极其重大的内在变化，是圣灵在灵魂里所做的更新工作。一个人从神生了之后，他的生活方式与以往截然不同，仿佛进入了另一个世界。

2. 这个说法的含义其实很容易理解。因为属灵的重生与自然出生有诸多相似之处，所以理解自然出生的过程，有助于我们理解属灵重生的意义。

3. 一个未出生的婴儿虽然靠空气维持生命，但几乎没有感知能力。他几乎听不见，看不见，生活在黑暗之中。他也许有些微弱的生命迹象，但灵魂的感官尚未开启。

4. 他对这个世界一无所知，不是因为世界离他远，而是因为他的感官尚未打开，且有一道厚厚的帷幕将他与世界隔绝。

5. 然而，一旦婴儿出生，他的感知就大大改变。他开始呼吸空气，身体各个感官也随之觉醒。他的眼睛看见光，耳朵听见声音，开始与这个世界建立联系，获得新的知识与经验。

6. 属灵重生也是如此。一个人尚未重生时，虽然“生活、动作、存留都在乎神”，但他对神毫无知觉。神的呼唤他听不见，神的事对他没有影响。他可能有一些属灵生命的萌芽，但没有属灵的感官，无法感知属灵之事。

7. 他与看不见的属灵世界几乎没有交集。不是因为这世界远离他，而是因为他没有属灵的感官，也因为一道厚重的帷幕隔绝了他。

8. 但当他从神而生，重生之后，他的全人就对神变得敏锐。他能够经历神的同在，并且能在爱与祷告中不断回应神的爱。这种属灵的呼吸持续不断，使他的属灵生命日益增长，各种属灵感官也逐渐觉醒。

9. 他的“心眼”打开了，看见了那看不见者。他清楚知道神赦免了他的罪，并且因基督的面得见神的荣耀。他活在神的光中。

10. 他的耳朵也打开了，能听见神的声音。他遵行神的呼召，与看不见的属灵世界有清晰的联系，经历属灵的平安、喜乐与爱。他“住在神里面”，而神也“住在他里面”。

II. “他就不犯罪”是什么意思

1. 明白了“从神生的”的含义后，我们继续探讨“他就不犯罪”的意义。

一个真正从神生的人，持续接受圣灵的恩典，并在信、望、爱与祷告中不断回应神。只要他这样行，他就不会犯罪。“那存在他里面的种子”（就是信心与爱）保守他，使他不能犯罪。

2. 这里所说的“罪”，是指明显的、外在的、故意的违背神已知律法的行为。而“凡从神生的”，在持续信靠与爱神的状态中，不仅不会，而且不能这样犯罪。

3. 然而，一个疑难问题随之而来。许多显然是从神生的人，确实曾犯过明显的外在之罪，这如何与约翰的断言相符呢？

4. 大卫就是一个例子。他明明是属神的、爱神的、敬虔祷告的神的儿女，但他却犯了奸淫与谋杀的罪。

5. 新约中也有例子。巴拿巴曾被圣灵呼召与保罗同工，但后来因争论而离开了事工。

6. 彼得在安提阿也犯了罪。他因惧怕犹太人而与外邦人分离，行为不合福音的真理。

7. 这些事例表明，从神生的人若不保守自己，就可能犯罪。只有在他“保守自己”的时候，恶者才无法触摸他。

8. 大卫的例子可以进一步说明。他虽然爱神，却在疏忽、失去对神的专注时被诱惑。他没有回应圣灵的警告，心中罪恶的欲望逐渐生根，最终导致了外在的罪行。

9. 这显示出人如何从恩典一步步滑向罪恶。从爱神到接受诱惑、爱冷淡、信心软弱、拒绝圣灵、欲望滋生，最终陷入外在的罪。

10. 彼得的例子也是如此。他曾凭信心活在神面前，却因怕人而屈服于试探，失去了信心与爱心，最终犯下明显的罪。

因此，“凡从神生的就不犯罪”这话是真实的，只要他保守自己。但若不如此，他就可能犯各样的罪。

III. 结论与教训

1. 首先，我们学到，外在的罪总是发生在失去信心之后。在犯外在之罪前，必先经历了某种程度上的内在犯罪与信心衰退。

2. 其次，属神之人的生命是持续不断与神互动的生命。神不断向他施恩，而他则不断以爱、赞美与祷告回应神。

3. 再次，我们看到，若没有这不断的回应，属灵生命就无法持续。若人拒绝回应神的爱与光，圣灵最终将离开他，他将陷入黑暗。

4. 最后，正如使徒所说，“不要自高，反要惧怕。”让我们时刻警醒，警惕罪比死亡或地狱更可怕。即使今天我们站立得住，也要小心，不可自满。让我们不断地祷告，常常信靠与爱神，这样我们就必永不犯罪。

重生的标记（约翰·卫斯理讲道18）

重生的标记

约翰·卫斯理
讲道第十八篇
（1872年版，托马斯·杰克逊编辑）

“凡从圣灵生的，都是如此。”（约翰福音 3:8）

一、重生的第一个标记，也是其他所有标记的基础，就是信心。

第二个属圣经的标记是盼望。

第三个属圣经的标记，也是最重要的，就是爱。

什么是重生？

每一个“从圣灵而生”的人，也就是重生的人，都是从神而生。那么，重生到底意味着什么？什么是从神而生，或从圣灵而生？成为神的儿子或神的儿女，或者拥有“儿子的灵”，意味着什么？我们知道，这些特权通常是通过神的怜悯，在洗礼中赐下的（因此主耶稣在上一节称其为“水和圣灵的洗”）。但我们希望进一步了解这些特权的内涵：究竟什么是重生？

或许没有必要对它做出严格的定义，因为圣经也没有。但这个问题对每一个人都极为重要，因为“若有人不重生，他就不能见神的国。”因此，我打算用最简单的方式，正如圣经所描述的，陈述重生的标记。

一、信心

第一个标记，也是所有其他标记的基础，是信心。正如保罗所说：“你们因信基督耶稣，都是神的儿子。”（加拉太书 3:26）约翰也说：“凡接待他的，就是信他名的人，他就赐他们权柄作神的儿女；这等人不是从血气生的，不是从情欲生的，也不是从人意生的，乃是从神生的。”（约翰福音 1:12-13）又在书信中说：“凡信耶稣是基督的，都是从神生的。”（约翰一书 5:1）

但这里所说的信心，并非只是头脑的同意或理论上的认知。这不仅是认同“耶稣是基督”这一命题，或赞同《使徒信经》与《旧新约圣经》所有教义。魔鬼也相信这些，却依然与神为敌。因此，这里所讲的不是死的信心，而是活的、真实的基督徒信心。这信心是神放在我们心里的，是确实的倚靠，是对神的信赖，相信借着基督的功劳，我们的罪已得赦免，与神和好。

这种信心意味着，人首先要弃绝自己，完全依靠基督，而非倚靠自己的行为或义。他承认自己是罪人，无可夸口，彻底需要救主。这种对罪的深刻认识（尽管常被误称为绝望），加上对基督救恩的切望，是活信心的前提。真正的信心是信靠那位为我们舍命、完成律法义务的救主。

这种信心的即时和持续的果效，就是胜过罪的能力——胜过一切外在的恶行，也胜过内心的不洁。这就是保罗在罗马书第六章中所说的：“这样，我们既然在罪上死了，怎能仍在罪中活着呢？”（罗马书 6章）我们与基督同钉十字架，使罪的身体灭绝。信心的人对罪是死的，对神却是活的。“罪必不能作你们的主。”（罗马书 6:14）

约翰也同样强调：“凡从神生的，就不犯罪；因为神的道存在他心里，他也不能犯罪，因为他是从神生的。”（约翰一书 3:9）一些人试图解释为“不习惯性犯罪”，但经文中并没有“习惯性”的字样。圣经明说“他不犯罪”。若有人添加自己的解释，实在是危险之举。

约翰在第五章继续说：“我们知道凡从神生的，必不犯罪；从神生的必保守自己，恶者也就无法害他。”（约翰一书 5:18）

这种信心的另一个果效就是平安。“我们既因信称义，就借着我们的主耶稣基督得与神相和。”（罗马书 5:1）耶稣在离世前曾说：“我留下平安给你们，我将我的平安赐给你们。”（约翰福音 14:27）这种出人意外的平安，是任何环境、任何痛苦都无法夺去的。它使神的儿女无论在顺境还是逆境中都能喜乐知足。

二、盼望

第二个标记是盼望。彼得说：“愿颂赞归与我们主耶稣基督的父神，他曾照自己的大怜悯，借耶稣基督从死里复活，重生了我们，叫我们有活泼的盼望。”（彼得前书 1:3）

这盼望不同于死的盼望。活泼的盼望出于神，必带来圣洁的生活。正如经上说：“凡有这指望的，就洁净自己，像基督洁净一样。”（彼得前书 1:3）

这盼望包括良心的见证，即我们在“单纯和虔诚”中行事；还包括圣灵的见证，向我们的心灵见证我们是神的儿女。若是儿女，便是神的后嗣，与基督同作后嗣。（罗马书 8:16-17）

神的灵与我们的心灵同作见证：“我们是神的儿女。”这是主耶稣所应许的安慰，是痛苦转为喜乐的根源。即使在试炼中，活泼的盼望也带来说不出的喜乐。

三、爱

第三个标记，也是最重要的标记，是爱——“神的爱借着所赐给我们的圣灵浇灌在我们心里。”（罗马书 5:5）

圣灵在我们里面呼叫“阿爸，父！”（加拉太书 4:6）我们因爱神，常常呼求祂，依靠祂，喜乐于祂。祂是我们心中的喜乐和满足。

“凡爱那生他的，也必爱从他生的。”（约翰一书 5:1）爱神的人必爱主耶稣基督，也爱众弟兄姐妹。正如经上说：“我们因为主舍命，知道何为爱，我们也当为弟兄舍命。”（约翰一书 3:16）这爱甚至包括我们的仇敌。

真正的爱必结出顺服的果子。约翰说：“我们遵守神的命令，这就是爱他。”（约翰一书 5:3）爱神不仅仅是外在的行为，更是内在的情感。爱必使我们在行为上顺从神，活出圣洁与良善。

四、结语

我已经清楚陈述了圣经中重生的标记。重生之人是凭信心不犯罪，享有神赐出人意外的平安；是靠盼望充满喜乐和荣耀；是靠爱心顺服神，爱人如己。

你们中间有谁是从神生的？你们自己知道。不要靠洗礼的记号自满。问问自己：“我现在是神的儿女吗？圣灵住在我里面吗？”若没有，单靠过去的洗礼并不能证明你是重生的。

不要说“我受过洗礼，所以我现在是神的儿女”。许多受过洗礼的人仍然活在罪中，是魔鬼的儿女。因此，你必须重生。

如果你没有这些属神儿女的标记——无论你受没受洗——你就必须得着，否则你必灭亡。你唯一的盼望，就是重新得着“作神儿女的权柄”，得着圣灵的内住与更新。

阿们，主耶稣！ 愿每一位愿意寻求你的人都重新领受那“儿子的灵”，呼叫“阿爸，父！” 让他们凭信心成为神的儿女，得着你宝血的救赎与赦罪。让他们如今被重新生为有活泼盼望的人，如你一样洁净。愿圣灵充满他们，使他们完全，圣洁敬畏神！

Wesley on communion, at Oxford, on the Law

We read three more sermons of Wesley this week at IWU.

The Duty of Constant Communion
I've had people suggest this sermon to try to guilt trip Wesleyans into taking communion more often. Don't do it. It backfires. Give them the sermon "Means of Grace" instead.

What works in this sermon is the idea that, if God actually dispenses his mercy to us in communion, then why wouldn't we want it as often as possible? I also agree with Wesley that one shouldn't be fearful about taking communion because you're not perfect. Similarly, I do not at all believe that communion inevitably becomes a ritual if you take it often. I believe I could take communion every day and it not become a "vain repetition."

However, his argument that it is a command of God to do it as often as possible doesn't work. Jesus says, "as often as you drink it." He does not command a specific time frame. It is also unhealthy to think of it as a duty. It is a privilege. It is a great opportunity. In that sense, I fear we are hearing some of Wesley the "almost Christian" in this sermon.

The Almost Christian
This is a masterful little sermon. Wesley preached it at Oxford in 1741. It is masterful for the way it fits its context and for the way it builds its rhetoric.

The text is incredibly clever, Herod tells this to Paul in Acts 26, that Paul almost convinces him to be a Christian.

What Wesley does is he describes a very religious person, a very pious person. Indeed, he is describing himself as a "methodist" in the Holy Club when we was at Oxford before. How wonderful if we had lots of people in our churches who were "almost Christian" like he describes!

He builds to the "altogether Christian." This is the person who loves God and neighbor truly. And at the climax of the letter he gets to the main point. This is the person who is justified by faith.

I wonder if today we should almost preach the sermon backward, since we have plenty who are justified but are hardly as dedicated as the almost Christian he describes.

The Original, Nature, Properties, and Use of the Law
I was really impressed with this theological piece. I think, to a large part, it fits very well with the new perspective on Paul. Wesley recognizes that Paul in Romans 7 is referring to the Jewish Law, but he distinguishes different referents within the Jewish Law when Paul uses the word law.

I know that purists will point out that Jews did not distinguish between ceremonial and moral parts to the Law. But, like it or not, Paul uses the word law to refer to different parts of the Law that roughly correspond to what Wesley means by these terms. The phrase "works of Law," especially in Galatians, largely refers to what Wesley calls the ceremonial law. Similarly, Romans 7, as Wesley says, points to the part of the Law that Paul expected believers to continue to live out.

Wesley also weighs in on some contemporary debates within Protestant. Lutherans and, I believe, some Pietists, rejected the "third use of the law." Luther accepted the first two uses of the Law: 1) to show us that we are sinners, 2) to lead us to Christ. (Wesley does here have the old sense of the law as a schoolmaster, where it would be more appropriate to think of it as our guardian).

Calvin and Luther, however, debated about the third use of the Law--to show us how to live. Wesley here sided squarely with Calvin. The (moral) law shows us how we need to live, by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Also interesting here is Wesley weighing in on divine command theory and the Euthyphro question: "Is good good because God says so, or does God say so because it's good?" For Wesley, good is not arbitrary or a random choice of God's will. Good is good because God is good and thus good is his will.

Of course I have questions about this answer, orthodox and Wesley-an though it be. But my thoughts are only musings, nothing I am willing to stand on.

Wesley's The Way to the Kingdom

This Spring the Honor's College at IWU has initiated reading groups on campus that are reading through a number of Wesley's sermons. One of them I read this morning is titled, "The Way to the Kingdom."

1. Wesley's main text is Mark 1:15: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news" (NRSV). Some will recognize this verse as quite possibly the cornerstone of Jesus' message on earth. Of course Wesley did not have the benefit of the last two hundred fifty years of biblical studies. In their apocalyptic context, Jesus and John the Baptist likely referred to the coming in-breaking of God's rule to the earth in a very concrete and visible kingdom, for which we still look.

But as a child of his age, Wesley tied this kingdom to true, inward religion. He connects the phrase "the kingdom of God" in Mark to the phrase in Romans 14:17: "The kingdom of God is not food and drink but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit" (NRSV). Wesley takes this verse to mean that the kingdom of God is something inside us. I suspect more is going on here for Paul than Wesley sees in this verse, because he was 1700 years removed from Paul. A more literal paraphrase of Paul would go something like this: "The kingdom of God, which we await to come to earth fully when Christ returns, will not be focused on the purity rules of the Jewish Law and should not be now. Rather, the key concern in God's kingdom is that we be righteous and that we be at peace with one another and that we be a community of joy."

2.  Here we get to an essential point and one that I think is particularly important for the Wesleyan tradition. Neo-evangelicalism, because it was born out of the fundamentalist-modernist controversy, is very focused on the original, historical meaning of the Bible (although it sets sharp boundaries on the conclusions a scholar can reach using historical-method). If you go to the pillar institutions of evangelicalism--Wheaton, Gordon-Conwell, Trinity, or any number of others--the focus of their biblical studies program is not only on how to read the Bible in context but you will find an assumption that this meaning is more or less the meaning we need to know to hear God in the Bible. In so many words, unless you learn Greek, Hebrew, and do extensive homework, you are not equipped to read the Bible "for all its worth."

Wesley was not a scholar of the original meaning, but his theology was usually spot on. We can do the hard original meaning research and the sophisticated hermeneutics work to come up with the same things he came up just by catching the spirit of Scripture, even if he was not in a position to know the letter with precision (and truth be told, even experts disagree frequently on this).

I am not against the original meaning at all, what the Bible really meant. I'm out of a job as a Biblehead if the church ever throws the real meaning of the Bible away completely. What I am saying is that the original meaning task is not the "be all and end all" of the Bible for the Church. It is relevant. It is part of it. But the theological task in which it sits is more primary. Our theology and ethics find their origins in the original meaning of the Bible, but they come to us within a framework that the Spirit has worked out over time. The Church does not read the Bible so much to "get back" as to move forward.

3. So in this sermon, Wesley argues that true religion is a matter of the heart, not of orthodoxy or ritual. "Neither does religion consist in orthodoxy or right opinion which... are not in the heart, but the understanding" (56). "The nature of religion is so far from consisting in these, in forms of worship or rites and ceremonies" (55).

Remember of course that Wesley was quite concerned to be orthodox and that, as an Anglican, his ritual practices were far more extensive than the typical Wesleyan Church (a lot of my seminary students would be wierded out thinking he was Catholic ;-) But these were not the essence of religion for him. These were not the heart of the matter.

"This alone is religion, truly so called; this alone is in the sight of God of great price. the Apostle sums it all up in three particulars--'righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost'" (56).

Faith "is not... a bare assent to the truth of the Bible, of the articles of our creed, or of all that is contained in the Old and New Testament... It is... a sure trust in the mercy of God through Christ Jesus" (60). More properly, it is faith in the God who raised Jesus from the dead and, thus, in Jesus as Lord, but Wesley is completely right in what it is not.

4. I found this sermon refreshing. I put smiley faces in the margins when he broke exegetical rules or got an interpretation wrong. He mixes Scriptures together from different places in the Bible. He has a "soterian" view of the gospel (60). As a child of the Enlightenment, his filter is individual focused in places where Paul was surely more corporate in thinking.

But Wesley's message is spot on. It is not that orthodoxy is unimportant, and there is much a Christian can gain from the sacraments. But these do not make someone a Christian. BTW, this also applies to neo-evangelical orthodoxy or even the expected practices of holiness communities. We may find that we have just changed the referent of these terms but still missed the point.

Repentance for our wrongdoings and faith in Christ--this is what God expects of our hearts. Love of God and love of our neighbor, this is what God expects in our lives.  God expects true righteousness, and this will result in peace and joy.

"Means of Grace" 5

Paraphrasing continues of Wesley's sermon, "Means of Grace" in contemporary English.

I
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

II
Part 4
________________
6. These individuals do not really understand that great foundation of the whole Christian building: "You are saved by grace." That is, you are saved from your sins, from the guilt of them and from the power of them, by the free gift and grace of God, his sheer mercy. You are saved through the merits of God's well-beloved Son. Only in this way are you restored to God's favor and only in this way is the image of God restored in you. It does not happen because of anything you have done on your own or because you have earned it or deserved it. You are not saved by any power or wisdom or strength that is in you or any other creature. You are only saved through the free gift and power of the Holy Spirit, who is working in everything.

7. Nevertheless, the central question remains for someone who is convinced that he or she does not have salvation: "We know that this salvation is the gift and work of God, but how can I get it?" If you say to this person, "Believe and you will be saved," the person might answer, "True, but how do I believe?"

You might respond, "Wait on God."

Again, you might hear in response, "OK, but how should I wait. Should I wait and participate in the means of grace, or should I wait without participating? Should I try to use these means of grace as I wait for the grace of God which brings salvation or should I not use them while I wait?"

8. It's impossible to imagine that the word of God has not given us any direction on such an important point. We can't imagine that the Son of God who came down from heaven "for us humans and our salvation" (Nicene Creed) would not have left us without a clear sense of a question that is so connected to our salvation.

And, indeed, he did not leave us without a clear answer. He has shown us the way in which we should go. We only have to consult the oracles of God [in Scripture] and ask what is written there. And if we will simply abide with what they teach, no possible doubt will remain...

"Means of Grace" 4

Paraphrasing continues of Wesley's sermon, "Means of Grace" in contemporary English.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
________________
... I am using this expression, "means of grace," because I don't know of any expression that is better. I also use it because it has frequently been used by Christians in the Church for many ages. It has particularly been used by our own church, the Anglican Church, which instructs us to praise God both for giving us these means of grace, as well as for our hope of future glory. The Church teaches us that a sacrament is "an outward sign of an inward grace, and a means by which we receive this grace."

The most important of these means are 1) prayer, whether privately or publicly in a worshiping congregation, 2) searching the Scriptures--including reading it, hearing it read, and meditating on them, and 3) partaking of the Lord's Supper, eating bread and drinking wine in remembrance of Christ. We believe that God has ordained these to be the normal channels by which God conveys his grace to the souls of men.

2. But let's make it clear that the whole value of these means depends on whether they actually serve the ultimate goal of faith. As a result, all of these means, when they are separated from the goal, are less than nothing. They are emptiness. If they do not contribute to knowing and loving God, they are not acceptable in God's sight. Indeed, they become rather an abomination before God, a stink in his nostrils. He is tired of putting up with them. Most of all, if they are used to do away with the faith they were designed to serve, it is not easy to find words for the enormous foolishness and wickedness of thus turning God's arms against himself. It is keeping Christianity out of the heart by using the very means that God put in place to bring it.

3. Similarly, we accept that apart from the Spirit of God, no outward means whatsoever can bring any benefit. It cannot to any degree bring the knowledge or love of God. Beyond dispute, the Spirit himself brings about any help that happens on the earth. It is he alone who, by his own almighty power, brings about in us what is pleasing in his sight. All outward actions--unless God is working in them and by them--are only ineffective and impoverished actions.

Therefore, whoever imagines that there is any intrinsic power in any means of grace whatsoever is greatly in error. This person does not know the Scriptures or the power of God. We know that there is no inherent power in the words that are spoken in prayer, in the letter of Scripture read, the sound of Scripture heard, or the bread and wine received in the Lord's Supper. Rather, it is God alone who is the giver of every good gift and the author of all grace. The whole power is from him whereby there is any blessing conveyed to our soul through any of these.

Similarly, we know that he is able to give the same grace even if there were no means [of grace] on the face of the earth. In this sense, we may affirm, that, with regard to God, there is no such thing as a means of grace, because he is just as able to work whatever he wants by any means or by no means at all."

4. We believe further that no use of these means of grace will ever atone for a single sin. Only the blood of Christ alone can do that. Only through the blood of Christ can any sinner be reconciled to God. There is no other satisfaction of the need for atonement [propitiation] because of our sins. There is no other fountain to wash our sin and uncleanness.

Every believer in Christ is deeply convinced that there is no worthiness before God except in Christ. There is no virtue in any work that we do, not in saying prayers or searching the Scripture or hearing the word of God or eating the bread of communion or drinking the cup of communion. No one who knows the grace of God will deny that Christ is the only real basis and cause of God's grace, which if nothing else is captured by the expression that "Christ is the only means of grace."

5. Still again, although it is a sober truth, we recognize that a large proportion of those who are called Christians today abuse the means of grace to the destruction of their souls. No doubt this is the case with all those who are content with a look of godliness but who lack the power of it. Some of them would like to think that they are already Christians, because they do certain things, even though Christ was never yet revealed in their hearts, nor the love of God poured out in them. Others suppose that they will certainly become one just barely because they use these means. They may be dreaming, without hardly thinking about it, that there is some kind of automatic power in them that will sooner or later (they don't know when) make them good people. Or they imagine that there is some sort of merit in using them that will earn them true righteousness from God--or that perhaps he will accept them without it...

Wesley's "Means of Grace" 3

Paraphrasing Wesley's sermon, "Means of Grace" in contemporary English.

Part 1
Part 2
___________________
...
6. Experience shows how easily this idea spreads and insinuates itself into the minds of people. And it happens especially to those who have been awakened from the sleep of death, those who begin to feel the weight of their sins a burden too heavy to bear. Such individuals are usually impatient about their current state and are trying to find a way to escape it. They are eager to catch any new idea, any new proposal for ease or happiness. They probably have already tried these sorts of outward means and found no relief in them. Indeed, they may have experienced as a result more and more remorse, fear, sorrow, and condemnation.

Therefore, it is easy to persuade them that it is better to abstain from all these means. They are already tired of working hard, seemingly in vain. They are tired of working in the fire. They are therefore eager for any excuse to through them aside, actions in which they are finding no pleasure. They want to get up their painful striving and to sink down into lazy inactivity.

II1. In the following discussion, I want to examine in general whether there actually are any "means of grace."

By "means of grace," I mean outward signs, words, or actions, ordained of God, and appointed for this purpose, to be the normal ways that God uses to convey grace to us--grace that leads us to him (prevenient grace), grace that makes us right with him (justifying grace), and grace that actually makes us righteous (sanctifying grace)...

Wesley: "Means of Grace" 2

Paraphrasing Wesley's sermon, "Means of Grace" in contemporary English.

Part 1

Now Part 2
___________________
...

5. At the same time, in their zeal for the glory of God, in their attempt to recover souls from the fatal delusion that ritual acts are effective in themselves, isn't it strange that some of these individuals would speak as if "outward religion"--things like prayers, reading Scriptures, and communion--is completely meaningless and has no place in following Christ? Certainly it was because they were strongly convinced that the abuse of these "ordinances," these God-ordained activities, had spread across the whole church and almost driven true religion out of the world. It isn't surprising at all that they have not always been careful enough as they have expressed themselves. If you weren't careful, someone listening might think they were saying that all outward actions were completely useless and not actually designed by God to be the normal way God conveys his grace to our souls.

Indeed, it is possible that some of these holy voices did themselves fall extensively into this position. I'm thinking especially here of those who were cut off from these ordinances, not by choice, but in God's providence. Some  were forced to wander the earth with no place to live, even living in the caves and crannies of the earth. Since they were able to experience the grace of God directly, because they were deprived of these outward means in the Church, some might easily have jumped to the conclusion that grace would still be given to those who intentionally stay away from them...

Wesley - "The Means of Grace" 1

Yesterday I started paraphrasing one of John Wesley's sermons, "On a Catholic Spirit." However, I found that someone else has already done a fine job of that here. There are a few other Wesley resources there in modern English.

A man named Teddy Ray has also done three of Wesley's sermons in contemporary English ("Salvation by Faith," "The Almost Christian," and "Awake, Thou That Sleepest"). Ken Kinghorn has published all of them in modern English in three volumes.

Rather unmotivating, but I'm willing to give a new sermon a try, one that isn't represented above on the web (Kinghorn's is only in book form). I thought I'd start over with one that Wesley Seminary MDIV students read in their first semester spiritual formation course, "The Means of Grace."
____________________
Scripture: Malachi 3:7
"You have gone away from my decrees and have not kept them."

I. 1. Are any decrees from God now, since the gospel brought life and immortality to light? Under the Christian dispensation, are there any usual channels, any means of grace that are ordained by God now?

This question would never have been asked in the early church by the apostles, except by some pagan who came to Christ out of the blue with no knowledge. On the contrary, the whole body of Christians were agreed that God had instituted certain outward means, certain paths by which he conveyed his grace into the souls of humanity. [1] The early church's constant practice of these sorts of actions makes this claim beyond dispute for as long as "all believed and had all things in common" (Acts 2:44). And, "They continued firmly in the teaching of the apostles, in breaking bread together, and in prayers" (Acts 2:42).

2. But in time, when "the love of many waxed cold" (Matt. 24:12), some began to mistake the means of grace for an end in itself. [2] They began to think that faith and religion [3] was about those outward actions themselves rather than having a heart that is renewed to be like God, for the image of God in us to be renewed. [4] They forgot that the goal of every commandment of God is "love, from a pure heart" with a "faith that isn't faked" (1 Tim. 1:5). The goal is for us to love God with all our heart and our neighbor like ourselves. It is to be purified from pride, anger, and evil desire by "faith in the working of God" (Col. 2:12).

Nevertheless, some seemed to think that there was something about these outward actions in themselves that would make them pleasing and acceptable to God, even though the heart of faith does not lie in these outward means, even though they did not show the same concern for the more important commands of God--justice, mercy, and the love of God.

3. In this case, it is clear that individuals who abused these means of God's grace were not using them in the way that God intended them to be used, for the reasons God instituted them. Rather, that which was meant to make them whole actually became a cause of failure. They were so far from receiving any blessing from them. Rather, they were bringing down a curse on their heads. So far from growing "more heavenly," more like God in their hearts and the way they lived--the purpose of these outward actions--they became "twice as much a child of hell" as before (Matt. 23:15).

Then as an over-reaction, when others saw that these actions did not change these children of the Devil, they began to say that these actions were not tools for facilitating God's work in us at all, that they were not means of grace at all.

4. In most of Christian history, the number of those who abused these channels of God's transforming power was far greater than those who ended up despising them. Yet in recent history, certain individuals have arisen who would also throw them away who have made this way of thinking into a more significant movement. [5] Here I have in mind individuals of great understanding, sometimes with considerable learning, people who seem to be people of love. These are people who in practice are well acquainted with true, inward religion. Some of them have been shining lights, people who were famous in their time, people who have stood in the gap against the tide of ungodliness, the kind of people that the church of Christ needs.

At first, these holy and noble individuals did not intend to do anything more than to show that outward religion is worthless unless it also involves a religion of the heart, because "God is a Spirit, and those who worship him must worship him in spirit and truth" (John 4:24). Therefore, external worship is worthless unless it is accompanied by a heart devoted to God. But if it is accompanied by this heart, then these outward actions God has put in place bring a great benefit. Then they advance us in holiness (being pure in our hearts).

But when these actions do not advance inward holiness, they are useless and pointless. They are less than pointless. Indeed, when they have nothing to do with our hearts, they are a complete abomination to the Lord....

[1] It might be helpful to get on the table right off the bat what Wesley is talking about here. He is talking about actions like prayer, searching the Scriptures, communion. As "means of grace," Wesley believed that God especially transformed people as they prayed, read the Bible, and partook of the Lord's Supper. As will be clear, he did not think this happened automatically, but he would have said people were transformed more often when doing these things than when doing other things.

[2] Here Wesley might have had in mind both the Roman Catholic Church of his day as well as, no doubt, many in his own church, the Church of England or Anglican Church. Wesley of course lived in the 1700s.

[3] The word religion has taken on a negative connotation today, so I have added the word faith here. It is important to realize that this condemnation of the word "religion" is just a recent fad of language in certain Christian circles. To critique Wesley for using the word religion is only to be ignorant of how the connotations and meanings of words change over time.

[4] The image of God in us for Wesley especially refers to the part of us that, when God restores us, is like God, especially when it comes to goodness (the moral image of God in us).

[5] I have considerably expanded this sentence to give context. Wesley is thinking here of the Anabaptist movement of the 1500s, 1600s, which continued in his day and has persisted to the present. They would reject "means of grace" altogether as a concept.

Wesley's Sermons: "On a Catholic Spirit"

In the Spring, many at IWU are going to be reading some of Ken Collins and Jason Vickers' mammoth new Wesley collection, Wesley's sermons arranged systematically. Since I'll be reading through the sermons anyway (right now we're reading Steve Harper's The Way to Heaven in preparation), I thought I might poke a little at a project I've suggested someone do--paraphrasing key sermons of Wesley in contemporary English.

So why not? I thought I'd start today with sermon #34 (in the collection of 44 sermons) or #39 (in the collection of 53): "On a Catholic Spirit."
__________________
On a Catholic Spirit [1]

Scripture: 2 Kings 10:15
"And when Jehu departed from there, he met up with Jehonadab, the son of Rechab, who was coming to meet him. 

"And Jehu greeted him and said, 'Is your heart with me, as my heart is with you?' 

"And Jehonadab answered, 'It is.' 

"'If it is,' Jehu answered, 'then give me your hand.'"

Sermon
Introduction
1. "You will love your neighbor as yourself." Even those who don't love as they should, agree that they owe love to all humanity. This is the royal law. When you hear the command, you know it's right.

The command does not mean what some of those in Jesus' day took it to mean--love your relative, your friend, your associate, "but hate your enemy." Not so, Jesus said. Rather, "Love your enemies, bless those who curse you." Do good to those who hate you. Pray for those who use you in spite, who persecute you. If you do these things, you will be children of your Father in heaven, who gives sun not only to the righteous but to the evil as well. He does the same with the rain. (Matt. 5:43-45). If you do these things, all humanity will see it.

2. To be sure, there is a special love we owe to those who love God. David wrote, "All my delight is on the saints who are on the earth on those who excel at virtue" (Ps. 16:3). [2] And of course Jesus is greater than David, and he says, "I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you must love one another." (John 13:34-35).

The Apostle John frequently and strongly insists on this love.  He says, "This is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another." (1 John 3:11) "By this we perceive the love of God: because he laid down his life for us." So we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters, if love should call us to do so. (3:16)

Again John says, "Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God." The one who doesn't love does not know God, for God is love. (1 John 4:7-8) "Not that we have loved God, but that God has loved us and sent his Son to be an atoning sacrifice for our sins." (4:10-11)

3. Everyone agrees with these ideas. But does everyone practice it? Our daily experience shows the opposite. Where are there even Christians who love each other as he has given the commandment?

How many obstacles stand in the way? The two biggest hindrances are 1) Christians do not agree on everything and, consequently, 2) we do not have the same lifestyle. Indeed, their way of living in small matters differs in proportion to how different their beliefs are.

4. So Christians will differ in their opinions or in the way they worship. These may prevent us from uniting as organizations. But does it need to prevent us from loving each other? Although we do not think the same way, can we not love the same way? Isn't it possible for us to be of one heart, even though we aren't of one opinion?

Without a doubt, we can! In this way, all the children of God can unite, despite our smaller differences. Even though these other differences remain, we can advance each other forward in love and good works.

5. So we see in the example of Jehu in the Scripture, even though he was a mixed sort of character. His sentiment is worth the attention and imitation of every Christian. "And when Jehu departed from there, he met up with Jehonadab, the son of Rechab, who was coming to meet him. And Jehu greeted him and said, 'Is your heart with me, as my heart is with you?' And Jehonadab answered, 'It is.' 'If it is,' Jehu answered, 'then give me your hand.'"

This Scripture naturally divides into two parts. First there is a question from Jehu to Jehonadab. "Is your heart with me, as my heart is with you?" Then there is the offer, after Jehonadab responds, "It is." "If it is, then give me your hand."

...

[1] I have kept the word catholic in the title because it is a good word to learn in the sense that Wesley used it. Catholic here does not mean "Roman Catholic" because, of course, Wesley was not a Roman Catholic nor was he particularly friendly in some of his writings toward the Roman Catholic Church.

The word "catholic" here has its older sense of the church everywhere in all times and places. It is the universal Church. To have a "catholic" spirit in this sense is to sense your unity with Christians who belong to Christian groups other than your own. The sermon will make this sense clear.

[2] As we would expect of a man from the eighteenth century, Wesley was a pre-modern in his use of Scripture. He read its words in the light of the way words were read in his day and, of course, assuming traditional authorship.