The Wrath of God and the Chastening of the Lord*
By Philip
Mauro
IN view of questions that have been raised concerning certain parts of
this book, namely, those which apply the warnings of Hebrews and of
other New Testament Scriptures to the redeemed people of God, it has
seemed desirable to append a few comments so as, if possible, to give
further light upon that subject. In order that readers may understand
clearly the points in question we quote below an article which recently
appeared in print under the title "No More Wrath." It is our earnest
desire that readers may compare the statements of that article with
what is said in this volume, and may carefully subject both views to
the test of the Scriptures. There is need of this, seeing that the
matter discussed is of very great importance. The article referred to
is as follows:
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth My word, and believeth
on Him that sent Me, bath everlasting life, and shall not come into
condemnation; but is passed from death unto life" (John 5:24). "There
is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus"
(Rom. 8:10). "Who delivered us from so great a death" (2 Cor. 1:10).
"Who delivered us from the wrath to come" (1 Thess. 1:10). "For God
bath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord
Jesus Christ" (1 Thess. 5:9). "Who hath delivered us from the power of
darkness, and bath translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son"
(Col. 1:13). "And were by nature the children of wrath, even as others"
(Eph. 2:3). "And I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never
perish, neither shall any pluck them out of My Hand" (John 10:28).
And how many more texts might be given, which teach the complete
deliverance from wrath and condemnation of the sinner who has believed
in the Lord Jesus Christ! Our blessed and adorable Substitute on the
Cross has accomplished the work of deliverance for us. The judgment due
to us rolled over His Head. He drank the cup of wrath in our stead.
Nothing we have done, or could do, can deliver us from wrath and
condemnation. Equally true it is that the One Who bath saved us and
delivered us will keep us. Wrath and condemnation can never, no, NEVER,
be the lot of a child of God. The sins, the failures, and the
short-comings of the believer can never affect his standing in grace.
Once saved means forever saved, independent of what we are and what we
do.
The apostates mentioned in Hebrews were not true believers, but Jews
that had gone to a certain extent with Christianity and were going back
to Judaism The enemies of the Cross in Philippians (chapter 3.), whose
end is destruction, were not true children of God, but such as had
crept in unawares (Jude, verse 4). No true Christian, who knows himself
a lost sinner and is saved by grace, can ever be an enemy of the Cross.
To teach that salvation depends on what we do, and that our keeping for
eternal life, and the receiving of glory, depends on a surrendered and
separated life, or anything else, is a dangerous thing. It leads to
self-occupation and introspection; it must eventually take away from
the glory and sufficiency of the work and power of our Lord. It leads
simple Christians into confusion. The heart knowledge of salvation by
Grace, the great love wherewith He hath loved us, the living Christ,
and His love for us, produces a holy walk in the believer.
1. We rejoice in the truth, so clearly
stated in the Scriptures quoted
in the foregoing article, that there is no wrath in store for those
whom God has justified through faith in Jesus Christ, and that they
have, by His grace, perfect deliverance from condemnation. This truth
is set forth in the present volume (p. 17 and first paragraph of p.
41), so that there is no controversy here. But, while there is no wrath
and no condemnation for those that are in Christ, they are to expect
chastening and discipline. The writer of the foregoing article has lost
sight of the chastening of the Lord, than which there is probably no
subject that is more needful at this time to be pressed upon the
attention of God's people. Chastening is radically different from
wrath. The latter is the portion of those who reject the Gospel; the
former is wholly for believers. In I Cor. 11:32 the contrast between
chastening and condemnation is sharply drawn: "When we (believers) are
judged we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned
with the world."
The motive of the chastening of the Lord is love. "As many as I love I
rebuke and chasten" (Rev. 3:19). The statement of Heb. 12:6 is very
strong: "For whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every
son whom He receiveth."
God scourges His own sons; but there is nothing penal in this. It is
wholly corrective.
2. The passages of Scripture which proclaim the believer's security
from wrath and condemnation apply to him from the moment he believes.
If, therefore, those Scriptures had any reference to the Lord's
chastening (which plainly they have not), it would follow that the
believer would never be disciplined at all. Clearly, then, the promises
of security from wrath afford no immunity from chastening.
3. The statements in the foregoing article that "the apostates
mentioned in Hebrews were not true believers," an I that "no true
Christian who knows himself a lost sinner and is saved by grace can
ever be an enemy of the Cross," are mere assertions, for which no proof
is offered. On the other hand, we have given in chaps. 10 and 11 and
elsewhere (in particular pp. 95-100), ample and convincing Scriptural
evidence and arguments, showing that the warnings of Hebrews against
departing from the living God are written for the admonition of His
redeemed people.
Great difficulty has been encountered by expositors in attempting to
classify the persons specified in Heb. 6:1-6; and inasmuch as there are
teachers and expositors of high repute who, like the able writer of the
foregoing article, regard those persons as "not true believers, but
Jews who had gone to a certain extent with Christianity and were going
back to Judaism," it seems incumbent upon us to give fully the reasons
why we cannot any longer hold to that opinion.
No doubt the particular persons to whom the Epistle was addressed in
the first instance were Jews, and the situation in which they were
placed had special features which do not exist in the case of Gentile
Christians; and there is no doubt that the particular system into which
those Jews were in danger of lapsing was Judaism, from which even Peter
had difficulty in freeing himself (Gal. 2:11,12). But we maintain that
they were converted Jews. And as one reads the several statements made
in Heb. vi. which describe the spiritual state of the persons referred
to, he must be impressed with the idea that such statements could not
possibly be made of unpardoned and unreconciled sinners. Whoever those
persons were, the writer of the Epistle classes himself among them, for
the exhortation begins with the words "let us go on to full growth."
The language of this passage would apply to such as were children
(infants) in the true faith, and that such they were is distinctly
asserted in the passage immediately preceding (chap. V. 12-14). They
had become dull of hearing; they had need to be taught again the first
principles of the oracles of God; and having ceased to "go on" in the
ways of God, there was danger lest they should go back to the old
doings from which they had been called out. We do not see how it could
possibly be said that those who were on "the FOUNDATION of repentance
from dead works and faith toward God" were unbelievers. And it is
calculated to give one something of a shock to hear that men in their
sins and in the corruption of the flesh were" partakers of the Holy
Ghost." The Lord Jesus, speaking of the Holy Spirit, said "Whom the
world cannot receive" (John 14:17); from which it follows that an
unconverted person could not possibly be a partaker of the Holy Ghost.
Therefore, the statements of Heb. 6 could not have been made to define
a class of unbelievers. We think it will be quite clear, when viewed
apart from all theological bias, that those statements were made to set
before our minds the great privileges to which even the youngest
believers have been brought through the grace of God, and in order that
all might understand how serious a matter it is to "fall away" from
what is set before the redeemed people of God as a goal. For instance,
even the "babe "in Christ has " TASTED the good Word of God," for he
has been fed upon the milk of the Word. Beyond all doubt the whole
purpose of the passage is to exhort spiritual infants to "go on" to the
full attainment of "the promise," and to stimulate them to do this by
showing them the peril and loss they incur if they turn back therefrom.
But, it will be asked, if the meaning be so clear, how is it that some
of the ablest expositors of Scripture have entertained the view set
forth in the above-quoted article? That fact certainly calls for an
explanation; and we think it can be supplied. The view referred to is
that of theologians of the Calvinistic School, who hold (and we believe
rightly) that a person who has received the Son of God as his Saviour,
thereby becoming a child of God, can never forfeit his relationship
with God, and can "never perish." On the other hand, the passage in
Heb. vi. is the principal Scripture upon which theologians of the
Arminian School rely in support of the contention that a child of God
may forfeit his relationship with God, and be lost. Both parties to
this theological dispute have taken it for granted that the words "fall
away," meant to fall away from God, that is, to cease to be a
Christian, or to depart wholly from the faith and be lost; and that
"impossible to renew them again unto repentance," meant impossible to
restore them again to a standing in grace, thus putting them in a
position impossible of salvation, as if they had committed the
unpardonable sin. But immediately it is seen that the entire passage
has to do solely with the attainment of a reward, promised to those
children of God who go on to full-growth and show diligence to the full
assurance of the hope unto the end, and who thus, through persistent
faith and patience, inherit the promises, the difficulty disappears.
Obviously, a son and heir may forfeit part, or all, of his inheritance,
without ceasing to be the son of his parents; and there may be
conditions imposed as to certain portions of the estate such that, if
he once violates them (as by contracting marriage contrary to his
father's expressed wishes) he can never undo his act, and be "renewed,"
i.e., reinstated in the place he was, with reference to the estate,
before the condition was violated. There can be no doubt (in our
opinion) that such is the true significance of the passage under
consideration. It is clearly a case illustrated by the "provocation in
the wilderness," and by Esau's sale of his birthright. There was no
"renewing unto repentance" in either case. But the Israelites did not
lose their status as God's people, nor Esau his as the son of Isaac.
Esau subsequently received a blessing, but not the blessing. We might
refer also to Moses as a conspicuous instance of one who, though a
servant who "was faithful in all God's house," yet because of
disobedience forfeited the privilege of entering the Land of Promise,
and who found in the Lord no place of repentance as to that matter,
though he sought it carefully. (See Deut 3:23-27.)
4. Referring more particularly to the expressions "crucifying to
themselves the Son of God afresh," and "enemies of the Cross of
Christ," we call special attention to our comments on pp. 95-100, which
will, we think, satisfy the unbiased reader that those expressions are
applicable to Christians, and are inapplicable to any others. If
further proof as to this be desired, it may be found in 1 Cor. 11,
where the Lord's Supper is spoken of. No one, we suppose, will question
the application of that passage to believers; yet it contains
expressions every whit as strong as those in Phil. iii. and Heb. vi.
and x. There we read the solemn statement that "Whosoever shall eat
this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily shall be GUILTY of
the BODY and BLOOD of the Lord"; and further that, "he that eateth and
drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation (judgment) to
himself." The expression "guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord" is,
if anything, a stronger expression than "enemies of the Cross of
Christ."
An "enemy" is one who opposes, or acts in a hostile manner. The Cross
of Christ separates the Christian from the appetites of the flesh (the
"belly") and from "earthly things." Hence the Christian who acts with
reference to those things in a manner contrary to the intended effect
of the Cross is in opposition or enmity to that Cross. Other Scriptures
fully confirm this explanation. According to Rom. 8:5-7 (a passage
which unquestionably applies to believers) the mind of the flesh is
ENMITY against God. Hence believers who walk after the flesh, and who
mind the things of the flesh, are at enmity with God. The danger is
that the mind of the flesh in us may be "death" to us. For "the mind of
the flesh is death," and it is written "if ye (believers) live after
the flesh ye shall die." Again, friendship with the world is spiritual
adultery and is ENMITY with God (Jas. 4:4). Manifestly these offences,
referred to in Rom. 8. and James 4., are, from their very nature, such
as only a Christian can commit. Those who are of the world cannot
commit adultery with the world, for they have no covenant relations
with God. In like manner the Christian who shares in the enjoyment of
the things from which he has been separated, in God's contemplation and
purpose, by the Cross of Christ, is at enmity with that Cross. Only a
Christian can commit that offence. Therefore the telling of it brought
tears to the Apostle's eyes. That unbelievers should so " walk" is
inevitable. But that saints should so walk is cause for weeping.
The word "destroy" is applied to believers in several instances, the
sense of the word being to inflict grievous injury. Destruction is
radically different from perdition or damnation. Thus in Rom. 14:15 we
read, "Destroy not him (thy brother) with thy meat, for whom Christ
died." The word "destroy" in that passage is the same as in Phil.
3:19," whose end is destruction," and in Heb. 10:38, "them that draw
back unto destruction." The fact that the word "destruction" is used in
these texts, instead of "perdition" or "damnation" or "everlasting
destruction" (as in 2 Thess. 1.9), is an additional reason for taking
them as applying to believers.
5. In the article quoted above, the word "saved" is used as if it meant
pardoned, or justified; whereas in the Scriptures discussed in this
book the "salvation" spoken of is something yet future; and this (as we
have shown) is almost invariably the Scriptural sense of the words
"saved" and "salvation." This distinction is of the very essence of the
doctrine under discussion. We are well aware that justification and the
receiving of eternal life do not depend upon "what we do." Far from it.
This volume very distinctly asserts the contrary. But on the other
hand, we do say, and upon the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ and
His apostles, that the salvation spoken of by them as the salvation of
the soul, does depend upon the believer's walk and upon the heed paid
by him to His Lord's commands. This teaching does not lead to
"self-occupation and introspection," nor does it lead "simple
Christians into confusion." Since it is the teaching of the Lord
Himself, it would be presumptuous on our part to defend or justify it;
but we may properly point out that its obvious purpose is to admonish
the slothful, disobedient, and worldly Christian to consider and amend
his ways. Since the publication of the first edition of this book, we
have had abundant and gratifying evidence that it has served to
stimulate and encourage some of God's saints, and to arouse others. We
do not in the least fear that it will lead any simple Christian into
confusion.
On the other hand, we do greatly fear that the effect of such articles
as that quoted above is to lull into false security, and to confirm in
their self-pleasing ways, those saints for whose benefit chiefly the
warnings of the Lord and of His apostles have been recorded. The desire
for the preaching of" smooth things" is by no means confined to the
unconverted. It is not a kindness to the slothful, world-conformed
Christian to tell him that all is well with his soul, and that "the
heart knowledge of salvation by grace produces a holy walk in the
believer." That statement is contradicted both by Scripture and common
experience; for there are many believers who, notwithstanding their
knowledge of salvation by grace, are walking after the flesh, making a
god of their appetites, and minding earthly things. These are "enemies
of the Cross of Christ"
Again, we are told in the above-quoted article that to teach that
salvation depends upon what we do is "a dangerous thing." Of course, it
is according to the sense in which the word "salvation" is used,
whether it depends upon what we may do, or solely on what Christ has
done for us. The Lord Jesus Christ is our Authority for the teaching
that the saving of our soul does depend very much upon what we do. It
is He Who said, "Whosoever shall lose his soul for My sake and the
Gospel's shall SAVE IT." Those words are simple and clear, and their
meaning is confirmed by every Scripture that speaks of the salvation of
the soul. Pardon of past sins and eternal life are indeed secured to
every believer, and do not depend in the least upon his doings; but we
are admonished to "work out our own SALVATION with fear and trembling"
(Phil. 2:12). Dare any one, after weighing the words of the Lord and
His apostles, assert that every believer will save his soul regardless
of his conduct? It seems to us that whosoever discredits this wholesome
doctrine as a "dangerous thing," and seeks to turn the saints against
it, is assuming a very grave responsibility.
There is a man-pleasing doctrine abroad which finds ready acceptance
with the unpardoned and unreconciled sinner, namely, that God is all
goodness and mercy, and there is no wrath to come for the unbeliever.
But there is a counterpart to this doctrine which is well pleasing to
the disobedient, world-conformed Christian, namely, that God is all
grace, and there is no chastening to come for the believer. Against
this latter doctrine we have sought to raise a warning. Surely it will
not disturb those saints who are walking in holy separation from the
world, awaiting the coming again of the Son of Go" unto salvation.".
That it may serve to disturb those who are not so walking is much to be
desired.
6. Several correspondents have questioned the application of Matt.
24:42-51, and Luke 12:35-48 to the saints of this dispensation. This
objection comes mainly from those who exclude the earth-life and
ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ from the present, or Church
dispensation. Without discussing the dispensational question, we would
enter a strong protest against limiting the application of these words
of the Lord to any special era. Another has well said," Dispensational
knowledge should drive the application home to us with tenfold power,
instead of leading us to say, ‘it does not apply to us." The
Lord, in
the Scriptures cited above, was addressing His own disciples, whom He
designates in this connection by the endearing term, "little flock"
(Luke 12:32); and He was telling them what He requires of His
"servants." What conceivable reason can there be for supposing that His
requirements of His servants in this dispensation are any less rigid
than in some other? If there be any difference, it should be the other
way, since the greater privileges always carry with them increased
responsibilities. In this very passage we read, "For unto whomsoever
much is given, of him shall much be required" (Luke 12:48). Those
servants who are charged with the custody of the Gospel of the grace of
God, or with ministry to the members of the Body of Christ, are
entrusted with the greatest responsibility ever committed to human
hands. It is required of stewards that they be faithful (1 Cor. 4:2);
and this was said by the Apostle Paul concerning himself, and to a
Gentile Church. In another place he said, "WOE is unto me if I preach
not the Gospel." We deem it a perilous thing to dismiss the warnings
that came from the Lips of the Lord Jesus, as applying only to "the
Jewish remnant." And surely it is an extreme instance of misdirected
ingenuity in the handling of the Scriptures to apply the words "Fear
not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you
the kingdom," to the saints of this dispensation, and then to apply the
words that immediately follow, and which were addressed to that very
same "little flock," to the "Jewish remnant." That order of ingenuity
has been very much exercised in dealing with the Epistle to the
Hebrews. We believe it to be a real service to the people of God to
warn them against it.
7. SAVING THE SOUL. We are not aware that anyone has heretofore
attempted to lead the Lord's people to inquire precisely what is meant
by "saving the soul." So far as we have information, it is a new
subject; and it is very probable that most of our readers have never
sought to trace, by the aid of the Scriptures, the distinction between
soul and spirit. It is not surprising, therefore, that some have found
difficulty in laying hold of that distinction. Desiring to aid further
to that end, we offer here some additional suggestions.
The point of chief importance to be
grasped is that" saving the soul"
does not mean escaping eternal perdition. The saving of the soul is not
what is preached as the Gospel of God's grace to sinners. What the
Gospel offers to every believing sinner is the forgiveness of sins and
the bestowal of eternal life as the free-gift of God. Hence the saving
of the soul is never spoken of in connection with the Gospel. It is not
in the Lord's commission to the apostles (Luke 24:47). It is not in
Peter's addresses to Jews in Acts 2. and 3., and to Gentiles in Acts
10. It is not in Paul's model Gospel address in Acts 13, nor in his
Epistles which treat of the Gospel (Rom., Cor., Gal.). The saving of
the soul is something radically different from the justification and
life which God bestows upon every sinner who believes on the Crucified
and Risen Saviour. The saving of the soul is not preached to sinners at
all. It is spoken of by the Lord only to His disciples, and by the
apostles only to believers. Moreover it is invariably spoken of as
something in regard to which the saints themselves have responsibility.
Losing one's soul does not mean being
eternally lost, i.e., damned. It
does not mean incurring the wrath of God. Conclusive proof of this is
furnished by the Lord's words to His disciples in which He urged them,
for their own advantage, to lose their own souls, and to hate their own
souls in this world. We need hardly say the Lord did not exhort His
disciples to be damned In this world. If losing the soul in this world
does not mean damnation, then losing it in the world to come does not
mean damnation. On the other band, we may learn what u meant by saving
the soul in the world to come, by ascertaining what it means for a man
to "find his soul" in this present world; and this we may do by
attentively considering the Scriptures cited in chap. 16 of this book.
Whatever be meant by finding one's soul in this age, the same thing is
meant by finding it in the age to come.
By reference to those Scriptures it will be seen that the subject of
saving and losing the soul is always found in connection with a
reference to experiences in this world that are directly contrary to
the natural feelings and desires of a human being, and which involve
present loss, suffering, trial, or denial of self in some form. The
first occurrence of the subject is in connection with the sufferings
which the Lord foretold as awaiting the twelve (Matt. 10:16-39). The
next is in connection with the Lord's disclosure to His disciples of
the sufferings that awaited Himself at Jerusalem (Matt. 16:21-27). He
was speaking there of laying down His own Soul, and His call to His
disciples is to "follow" Him in losing their souls in this world,
though not necessarily in the same manner in which He parted with His.
Likewise in John 12:23-27 the Lord speaks of saving and losing the soul
in direct connection with His own Sufferings on the Cross. And here it
is recorded that He used the expression "Now is My SOUL troubled." In
Luke 21:19 the Lord's exhortation "By your patience (endurance) gain ye
your souls" is found in connection with the sufferings which He foresaw
for His disciples. By enduring those sufferings as the present portion
of their souls, in lieu of the pleasures which the soul naturally
craves, they were to "gain" their souls, though apparently losing them.
In Heb. 10. and 1 Pet. 1, where the same subject is referred to, the
immediate context speaks of sufferings experienced through the natural
human feelings. These Scriptures afford much light as to the
significance of the expression we are considering.
Thus, from the teaching of the Lord and His Apostles, we learn that to
every Christian is presented a choice between two paths in this world.
One is the path of self pleasing. Those who take it are in pursuit of
pleasures, honors, indulgences, and whatever else is gratifying to the
natural feelings of a man, which feelings have their seat in his soul.
There may be nothing inherently wrong in the things sought.
They may be quite proper and respectable, so that the Christian may
"see no harm in them." In that path, then, one may perhaps succeed in
finding gratifications for his soul, so far as it is possible for this
present world to supply them. This is what we understand by "finding
one's soul in this world."
The other path is that of denial of one's self: To walk in it involves
submitting to present loss, to the daily cutting off of the soul from
the things which exist in the world for its enjoyment. It involves the
endurance of reproach, ridicule, and it may be of persecution, for
Christ's sake and the Gospel's. They who enter upon that path have
deliberately willed (for it is an action of the heart) to part with
their souls, as it were, during this present time for the sake of
Christ. They "will" to lose their souls in this world; for the loss of
the things that satisfy the soul of man is virtually the loss of the
soul itself. To choose that path is an act of faith; for the choice is
influenced solely by the Word of God. Such a choice is, from the
natural standpoint, an act of folly—throwing one's life
away—for that
path leads away from all that makes life in this world agreeable. They
who walk in that path of separation and loss "walk by faith"; for they
are influenced in so doing by "things not seen." In fact, they must go
directly against all the powerful attractions of the things that are
seen. To follow the Word of God in a direction contrary to nature, and
because of what God has spoken, is the walk of FAITH. This is that
particular kind of faith spoken of in Hebrews. Abraham displayed it
when, at the bidding of God's Word, he came out of his native country,
and when he sojourned as a stranger in the land promised to him for an
inheritance (Heb. 11) This following of God's Word in a direction
contrary to the natural inclinations, is the distinguishing trait of
those who are "of faith to saving the soul"; for thereby they are
distinguished from those who "draw back" to the resources of the world,
seemingly to their immediate gain, but really to their great and
irreparable loss (Heb. 10:39).
The Lord's words found in Matt. 11:29 are sufficiently clear to settle
the meaning of the expression "saving the soul"; and surely no one who
believes His words would dare, in the face of that saying, to maintain
that a man can find rest unto his soul in any other way than by taking
voluntarily the yoke of Christ upon Him, and by learning of Him
meekness and lowliness of heart.
Finally, let us keep in view the main thing, which is, not to settle
the meaning of a disputed passage of Scripture, but to secure the
benefit of the doctrine of the Lord. Beyond all doubt, consequences of
the most serious character depend upon our walk here below. Whether we
describe those consequences by the words "saving the soul," or by some
other words, does not affect their serious character. Whatever
explanation of those disputed passages may seem right to us, we cannot
afford to neglect that salvation so great, which at first began to be
spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him.
* From the Appendix God's
Pilgrims: Their Dangers, Their Resources, Their Rewards By
Philip Mauro (1912)