Knowing God Humbles the Proud: Charles Spurgeon

This is the purpose of this blog.   In his opening chapter of Knowing God, J.I. Packer quotes Spurgeon articulating this truth, a truth God has taught me only recently.

*******************************************************

“It has beeen said by someone that, ‘the proper study of mankind is man.’ I will not oppose the idea, but I believe it is equally true that the proper study of God’s elect is God; the proper study of a Christian is the Godhead.  The highest science, the loftiest speculation, the mightiest philosophy, which can ever engage the attention of a child of God, is the name, the nature, the person, the work, the doings, and the existence of the great God whom he calls his Father.

There is something exceedingly improving to the mind in a contemplation of the Divinity.  It is the subject so vast, that all our thoughts are lost in its immensity; so deep, that our pride is drowned in its infinity.  Other subjects we can compass and grapple with; in them we feel a kind of self-content, and go our way with the thought, ‘Behold, I am wise.’  But when we come to this master of science, finding that our plumbline cannot sound its depth, and that our eagle eye cannot see its height, we turn away with the thought that vain man would be wise, but he is like a wild ass’s colt; and with solemn exclamation, ‘I am but of yesterday, and know nothing.’ No subject of contemplation will tend more to humble the mind, than the thoughts of God…

But while the subject humbles the mind, it also expands it.  He who often thinks of God, will have a larger mind than the man who simply plods around this narrow globe…The most excellent study for expanding the soul, is the science of Christ, and Him crucified, and the knowledge of the Godhead in the glorious Trinity.  Nothing will so enlarge the intellect, nothing so magnify the whole soul of man, as a devout, earnest, continued investigation of the great subject of the Deity.

And, whilst humbling and expanding, this subject is eminently, consolatory.  Oh, there is, in contemplating Christ, a balm for every would; in musing on the Father, there is quietus for every grief; and in the influence of the Holy Ghost, there is a balsam for every sore.  Would you lose your sorrow?  Would you drown your cares?  Then go, plunge yourself in the Godhead’s deepest sea; be lost in his immensity; and you shall come forth as from a couch of rest, refreshed and invigorated.  I know nothing which can so comfort the soul; so calm the swelling billows of sorrow and grief; so speak peace to the winds of trial, as a devout musing upon the subject of the Godhead.”

-Charles Haddon Spurgeon, New Park Street Chapel, Southwark, England, January 7, 1855. 

The Truth Shall Make You Free: What is freedom?

As a preface, I wrote this for my honors class entitled: Free Will and Human Fate.  This sounds pretty controversial, and indeed, it is.  But though I was worried at times, being a Calvinist in a predominately Arminian territory, I was proved a liar.  There is never anything to worry about.  The following is my term paper.  “Define Freedom, and defend your definition.”  One must note that the version I turned in now exists only in the hands of  my professor, Dr. Geoff Wells (A Presbyterian Calvinist graduate of University of Texas in Austin, writing his dissertation using Calvinism to dismantle Natural Law theorists like his dissertation tutor J. Budziszewski ).  I wished to personalize it much more for my readers to ponder.  I placed my Christian walk in it extensively.  Now, it is almost completely different from the turned in copy, save for the more basic aspects of it.  I pray God edifies you with this purifying journey in my life.

********************************************************************************************************** 

In America, freedom exemplifies the ideal of true identity.  Without freedom it seems difficult to define oneself as human.  There seems no greater abstract to attain.  As Frithjof Bergman puts it, this school of thought thinks freedom “separates man from the beasts” and “raises him above nature” (1). It claims that freedom satisfies, “as the natural and obvious object of every man’s longing” (1).  Nevertheless, one wonders if this proposition is really true.  Is freedom the “object of every man’s longing”?  Perhaps, it is, but perhaps the real question asks: What is freedom? How do you define it? Who should define it? How does one actually attain it?  For Americans, the word “freedom” is the rallying cry for independence, individualism, and equality.  But Americans seem blinded with a veil of tradition and an unsearched acceptance of the culture.  Why do the masses flock to movies like Braveheart? The fictionalized hero, William Wallace, screams the word “freedom” as he suffers a torturous martyrdom, and at this image, American’s hold back tears and pat their warming hearts.  What exactly warms the human heart when he ponders the intricacies of freedom?  Clearly, as Bergman suggests, they long for it.  Before answering this question, however, certain presuppositions exist which will contribute largely toward defining freedom as accurately as possible.

            First, God exists.  “God is Spirit, infinite, eternal and unchangeable, in his being wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth” explains Charles Haddon Spurgeon’s adapted Westminster Catechism (Spurgeon, 2).  “There is but one only, the living and true God.  There are three persons in the Godhead, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one God, the same in essence, equal in power and glory” (Spurgeon, 2).  Second, God’s Holy Scriptures, written by the Holy Spirit through the agency of chosen men are truth, with no mixture of error, and leads no one to error.  They are inerrant and infallible.  According to the catechism, “The Scriptures principally teach what man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of man” (Spurgeon, 1).  If, then, one wishes to define the truths of God and man’s relationship to him, one must consult the infallible inerrant Word of God, totally sufficient and necessary in all matters of faith and conduct.  If one is to define freedom accurately, he must believe these assertions as totally true.

            The following presuppositions exist as an interpretation of the truth found in Scripture.  First, one must understand the nature of man to understand his freedom.  When one reads Scripture, he sees that the sin of Adam in the garden brought about bondage or a lack of freedom.  “The covenant being made with Adam, not only for himself but for his posterity, all mankind descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him in his first transgression” (Spurgeon, 3).  The fall brought mankind into a state of sin and misery.  As the catechism explains, “The sinfulness of that state whereinto man fell, consists in the guilt of Adam’s first sin, the want of original righteousness, and the corruption of his whole nature, which is commonly called original sin, together with all actual transgressions which proceed from it” (Spurgeon, 3).

            Thirdly, one must understand that not all men are bound to this sin and misery.  “God, having out of his good pleasure from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, did enter into a covenant of grace to deliver them out of the state of sin and misery, and to bring them into a state of salvation by a Redeemer” (Spurgeon, 3).  This Redeemer “is the Lord Jesus Christ, who being the eternal Son of God, became man, and so was and continues to be God and man, in two distinct natures and one person forever” (Spurgeon, 3-4).

            Next, an effectual calling exists which freely brings man to God.  The catechism explains, “Effectual calling is the work of God’s Spirit, whereby, convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, he does persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to us in the gospel” (Spurgeon, 5).  This act of grace enables men to “freely” embrace knowledge of the truth.

            Also, those effectually called partake of justification, adoption, sanctification, and “the various benefits which in this life do either accompany, or flow from them” (Spurgeon, 5).  Sanctification is the work of the Holy Spirit whereby man is renewed in the whole after the image of God, and he is enabled more and more to die to sin and to live to righteousness (Spurgeon, 5).

            Lastly, those who are called, justified, and sanctified will be glorified, wherein he finds himself “made perfect in holiness” and “made perfectly blessed in the soul and body in the full enjoying of God” (Spurgeon, 6).  In addition, while many other aspects of the truth still exist, they will be introduced only as needed to defend the definition of freedom. 

            So then, considering these presuppositions, freedom is complete submission to the truth as defined by God in his Holy Scriptures, and works daily through man’s sanctification whereby the Holy Spirit leads him from his sinful nature to righteousness and seals him unto the day of glorification, where he finds complete freedom in communion with the Godhead.  In other words, when man submits himself to truth, he finds freedom.  As Christ says:

If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free…Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.  And the servant abideth not in the house forever, but the Son abideth ever.  If the Son therefore, shall make you free, you shall be free indeed (King James Version, John 8:31-32, 34-36).

When man embraces the truth of his bondage to sin and calls out to God as his only hope of freedom, he finds himself free indeed.

            Now certain qualifications do exist.  First, men will fall to their sinful natures even after coming to embrace the truth, yet the Bible calls this sanctification.  In practice, the journey toward freedom means that his bondage will break, but it will only break as time progresses and the Holy Spirit does his work.  Positionally, however, men who embrace the truth will be free the moment they are effectually called and respond in faith.  As the catechism explains, “The Spirit applies to us the purchased redemption by Christ, by working faith in us…” (Spurgeon, 5).  This paradox of sanctification seems difficult, but Scripture clearly teaches this double sided nature of effectual calling wherein the Spirit calls men and they must (are responsible to) and they will (are certain to) respond in faith.

            As explained first, man is bound to sin by his very nature.  As Arthur W. Pink asserts, “[People] boast of the ‘free moral agency’ of man when, in fact, he is in bondage to sin and enslaved by Satan-‘taken captive by him at his will’ (2 Timothy 2:6).”  Man cannot be free until God, by Himself, sets him free.  “Man chooses that which is according to his nature, and therefore before he will ever choose or prefer that which is divine and spiritual, a new nature must be imparted to him” (Pink, 158).  When one wonders if man is truly sinful, he only needs ask if he has ever broken the law of God.  As the catechism explains, “Sin is any want of conformity to, or breaking of the law of God” (Spurgeon, 3).  “The rule of which God first revealed to man for his obedience is the moral law, which is summarized in the Ten Commandments” (Spurgeon, 6).  Has the person broken any one of the Ten Commandments?  Has he lied or stolen or lusted after the opposite sex, thereby committing adultery in his heart?  If he has fallen in even one point, he is “guilty of all” (James 2:10).  In addition, the bible teaches that man is bound to break the law of God in accordance to his nature.  He prefers sin, and he is completely opposed to the law of God.  “Why does the sinner choose a life of sinful indulgence?  Because he prefers it-and he does prefer it…Why does he prefer it? Because his heart is sinful” (Pink, 165).  As explained above, the Christian, though he fails at times, “strives after a life of piety and virtue.  Why? Because God has given him a new heart or nature” (Pink, 165).  This perfectly exemplifies the importance and working of effectual calling.  After responding to the calling through faith alone in Christ alone, the man receives the imputation of righteousness, known as justification.  If God does not do a work by His spirit in men’s hearts, they will not respond in faith.  “[They] will not come to Christ, because [they do] not want to, and [they do not] want to because [their hearts] hate Him and [love] sin” (Pink, 166).  By no means, however, is any man coerced to sin.  He is free to sin.

            “The sinner is ‘free’ in the sense of being unforced from without.  God never forces the sinner to sin.  But the sinner is not free to do either good or evil, because an evil heart within is ever inclining him toward sin” (Pink, 167).  No man sins against his will.  He, in fact, wills to sin.  His will is bound to it.  What, then, of effectual calling?  Does it violate the free will of man?  In order to answer that question, one must use the definition given for “being free.”  Is that will in submission to the truth revealed by God in his Holy Scriptures?  The obvious answer is no.  The will, therefore, is not free.  It remains bound to “untruth” until God frees it to freely discern and freely embrace truth.  The effectually called “freely” discern and “freely” embrace in the sense of being unforced from without.  This negative freedom always exists for the sinner and/or the called sinner, that is, he is free from external entities which “force” him to sin unto death or believe unto life.  “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him”(John 6:44).  When a man believes (with saving faith given in the act of effectual calling), he believes freely and only as a result of the sovereign work of God, simultaneously.

            A certain scripture teaches the validity of man’s freedom from the law and a freedom in the Spirit of God.  Paul explains the unveiling of this freedom in 2 Corinthians 3:6-18.  God’s law is holy and righteous.  It is glorious, but it brought death with its administration.  It was so glorious that even Israel could not behold Moses’ face when they looked upon him that received it.  Men directly opposed to it in their hearts cannot approach it.  But how much more glorious is the spirit of this new administration where the law if fulfilled by the God-Man and men are set free from the law of sin and death and given the law of the Spirit and life?  Men’s minds were blinded in this old covenant.  When the Law is read, the veil remains on men’s hearts, but this “vail is done away in Christ.”    When the heart turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away by the Spirit.  “Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”

            Many objections arise as to the validity of man’s responsibility when it comes to believing these doctrines of grace.  How can man be held responsible for not doing what he cannot do? Etc.  These questions, while legitimate, do not fall into the realm of defining freedom.  One simply takes truth as explicitly taught in the Holy Scriptures and applies them to the definition.  If one has problems with the truth or the interpretation thereof, he should seek another debate.  The doctrines of election, predestination, sovereignty and responsibility need debating but only if the debates seek knowledge of the truth.  Simultaneously, if these assertions of sovereignty, predestination, election, etc. cannot be refuted using the inerrant and infallible words of Scripture, they will not be refuted period.  As explained before, only Scripture contains the truths of God and the duty God requires of man.  Freedom is submission to these truths and works as the Spirit leads man to deny his sin and embrace the truth unto a glorification wherein sin is eradicated and man is completely free to enjoy God forever.

            One may ask: What about those who never come to knowledge of the truth?  The answer is that they are never going to be free.  Whether they deserve that or not is another debate.  However, if it was an issue of “deserving”, no man would come to knowledge of the truth because all men are universally condemned for their freely willful acts of sin. Since no man deserves it, God has no responsibility to answer for his actions. As the catechism says, God effectually calls men “out of his good pleasure” (Spurgeon, 3).

            Finite men cannot understand why an infinite God teaches this or why his good pleasure leads him to this manner of soteriology.  Men, indeed, long for freedom as Bergman suggested, but they don’t always find it.  The American ideal mildly echoes it, but it will never set men free.  It does not submit to the Scriptures.  Men have pondered and debated and written and studied what it means to be free.  Others and I have done this for the last three months.  We studied various brilliant men, Socrates and Plato to Immanuel Kant and Frederic Nietzsche to Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud.  All have interesting thoughts, but all of these deny the one true God.  As Dosteoevksy once cogitated, “Without God, all things are permissible.”  Indeed, this is true.  Men have sought freedom apart from God for thousands of years, but none have attained it when they do this.  People like Marx may ask if I feel that I am free in this form of “estrangement.”  I say, “yes,” and then they may ask a series of questions.  1.) “What about the influences of culture?  2.) What about the influences of government?  3.) Didn’t your Christian-esque upbringing influence you?  4.) Don’t these Calvinistic views make you feel used and unfree?”

            First, note that I did not define freedom negatively.  Freedom is not freedom from influence.  I find that impossible, if not completely ridiculous.  Dostoevsky’s underground man typifies the madness of this thought.  Instead, I have defined freedom thusly:  Freedom is submission to God’s truth.  It is a positive form of freedom.  It is a freedom to do something. 

            1.)  I don’t think I am bound to my culture, though many are.  God’s truth says to understand it, relate to it, and stay separate from it.  God’s truth also says that everything is made Holy with the Word of God and prayer (1 Timothy 4:4-5).  For the more controversial subjects of culture, I must ask if I have made it holy using the two tools at my disposal?  Unfortunately, I fall into bondage many times by submitting to the culture rather than the Holy Word.  In those moments, I place the shackles back on my wrists.  Just the same, if God is supreme, why shouldn’t I enjoy its nobler aspects (Philippians 4:8)?  Another class I took this semester convinced me of this truth.  God can be found in the culture, and God’s people can stay separate.  If God reigns supreme in their hearts and he is not dishonored by that on which they think, then God is glorified, and they are still in submission to His truth.

            2.)  I don’t think I’m bound to my government either; the Word says to submit to it (Romans 13).  Note also the following scripture from Peter, the apostle:

Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake; whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.  For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:  As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.  Honour all men.  Love the brotherhood.  Fear God.  Honour the king.  Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also the froward. (1 Peter 2:13-18) 

            Peter acknowledges God’s purpose for government.  He calls it freedom to submit to it.  Why? Because God’s will (truth) commands the existence of government.  On another note, if God’s authority is challenged by my government, it’s my duty to defend it and fight for its supremacy.  This is my submission to God’s truth.  I will not bow my knee to an idol because my government commands me.   I must imitate the three young men in Daniel’s book.  “But if they punish you or kill you, aren’t you unfree?” asks the Marxist.  My answer to that is: “No, I am still free.”  I have submitted to the truth of God.  His will is done, and I am found the most free when I finally meet him face to face if they should kill me.  My murderers unwittingly set me free.  Peter continues his discourse:

For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.  For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.  For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously. (1 Peter 2:19-23)

It’s astonishing how clearly Scripture teaches its truth if we will but read it.  If we suffer wrongly for submitting to truth, God would have us suffer silently because Christ, the bearer of truth, did the same.  There is freedom in this martyr’s death because he died for truth, and that is freedom glorified.

            3.)  I don’t know why God chose to place me in a home heavily influenced by a Christian-esqe religion.  I don’t know why he gave me the parents I have or why I live in this bible-belt as I have.  Just the same, I have no idea why he saved me.  I have greatly offended him, and he is justified in condemning me to hell for all eternity.  This is why I believe in unconditional election.  Charles Haddon Spurgeon writes:

I believe in the doctrine of election, because I am quite certain that, if God had not chosen me, I should never have chosen Him; and I am sure He chose me before I was born, or else He never would have chosen me afterwards; and He must have elected me for reasons unknown to me, for I never could find any reason in myself why He should have looked upon me with special love. (Spurgeon, “Defense of Calvinism”).

I am just as perplexed as my questioner.  Why did God choose me?  I don’t know.  I just know it humbles me to the dust.   

            4.)  First, John Calvin didn’t write the bible; the Holy Spirit did.  And I find myself most free when I submit to its teachings.   I have no idea when God called me with an effectual calling.  It’s hard to pinpoint it.  But I do know this: He didn’t force me to believe.  I believed after he showed me my sins and then when he showed me his glorious forgiveness found only in Christ Jesus.  No, this teaching does not offend me.  It just shows me that God is passionate about his glory, and he graciously wants me to enjoy it forever.  And why should I marvel that God is so passionate about his glory?  He created me, and he created me for this glory.  If that is why I was created, then logically, submitting myself to that chief end is how I am most free.

            I have often wondered why I can’t think more philosophically and avoid bringing the Bible into the class discussions.  I think perhaps, God has graciously invaded my brain.  I have trouble pondering ungodly philosophies for even moments without quickly returning to God’s word to answer it.  I guess that’s his grace in my life.  The fact that I’m so patient with other views is another sign of grace.  I assure you:  it wasn’t always that way.  For example, my other classmates disagreed with my Calvinistic beliefs, and they often favored Sartre’s Existentialism and Marx’s economic ideals instead.  They favored James Arminius much more than they liked Arthur Pink.  In fact, they despised him.  When faced with Calvinistic passages of Scripture, they grimaced and squirmed, and after they were done doing that, they continued defending “free will”.  Only at times did I open my mouth to answer them.  Why? Because I know, at least, that we hold to the same fundamentals.  I am definitely not a Hyper-Calvinist.  But I pray that I don’t become a hyper-active Calvinist.  A hyper-active Calvinist will drive across the state to defend Calvinism, but he won’t walk across the street to share the gospel (Mohler, 4).  I couldn’t help wondering, however, if they ever felt convicted.  I don’t know their hearts, though.  I am just a fellow sheep feeding in the same inexhaustible fields of Scripture.  I pray God grants them a knowledge of the truth just as much as I hope he does the same for me.  I am by no means the arbiter of truth.  But I know who is.  I just hope they don’t seek truth somewhere other than God.  When men seek freedom apart from God’s truth, they will only find more chains.  Christ prayed for his people in John 17.  In the prayer, he knew what would set men free.  He remembered his words, and He prayed to His Father that the promise would do its work.  “Sanctify them through thy truth,” he prayed, “Thy word is truth” (John 17:17).  He sets men free with truth, and when he does, they are free indeed.

Works Cited

“A Defense of Calvinism.” Charles H. Spurgeon. www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm (accessed December 10, 2007).

Bergman, Frithjof.  On Being Free. London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1977.

King James Version. Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1998.

“Heir of the Puritans: Spurgeon’s Catechism.” Comp: Charles H. Spurgeon. London: 1855

Mohler, R. Albert.  Reaching Today’s World Through Differing Views of Election.  June, 2006: SBC Pastor’s Conference.

Pink, Arthur W.  The Sovereignty of God. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1930.