CHASTISEMENT A FRUIT OF LOVE.

(Continued from page 115.)

THIRD MEETING.

MR. LAW.-Right glad am I to see you once more under my roof, Mr. G.; and I sincerely hope that we shall have a profitable meeting.

MR. GRACE. I have but one thing in view, friend L., in meeting you, and that is the glory of Jesus Christ. If the Lord will condescend to own and bless my humble effort to the futherance of your knowledge in the CAUSE and END of the Lord in the chastisement of His blood-redeemed children, I am abundantly satisfied.

L.-I can but thank you for your concern in my welfare; though, at the same time, I cannot yet understand how you or any other person can make it plain from the scriptures that chastisement is not for sin.

G.-Without myself or any other person making it plain, the thing is revealed in scripture as clear as that there is a sun in the firmament; though, I must admit, no part of the scripture can be spiritually plain to any save those who have a divine understanding.

6

L.-I will now proceed with the signification of the word chastisement: "In short punishment was correlative to the sentiment of anger; and accordingly Bacon speaks of revenge as a wild justice.' But in its established modern sense, both punishment and chastisement may be defined as pain inflicted with a view to prevent future wrongdoing. The chief difference between them is, that punishment' is the term applied to designate suffering inflicted with a view to deter either the sufferer or others; while chastisement' is confined to the individual who is the object of it, and is supposed and intended to have some reforming and corrective, as well as deterring power. Hence, afflictions are called the 'chastisements' (not the punishments) sent by Providence; but the future retribution of the wicked is spoken of as a 'punishment,' because it cannot act as a corrective, but as a terror (in prospect) to offenders. The pains inflicted by the law of the land are, correctly speaking, punishments, not chastisements; for though some of them may happen to be of a reformatory character, their primary object is to deter, not to correct." Thus I have given you the explanation of the word under discussion.

G.-Then, according to this statement, chastisement and punishment are almost, if not altogether, synonymous.

L.-I find this elucidation of the word is not the author's own; but an extract from a work called, "English Synonyms," edited

by Archbishop Whately; but of course he would endorse it, or he had not quoted it. Now for a paragraph from my author's own pen: "As to the alleged difference between chastisement and punishment, I shall not waste your time in discussing it. In modern English they are synonymous." There, you see, Mr. G., he has made a bold, fearless statement.

G. He has indeed; but surely, my friend, you cannot suppose that the Lord punishes believers for sin?

L.—Well, I must admit, I do not like the expression; for I believe that Jesus was punished, that His people might go free.

G.-Yes, indeed! I should like to know what sort of a Christ your author has found? Surely he must have met with one of the "FALSE CHRIST's" that our Lord said should come. I would recommend him to read this portion, "If therefore ye seek me, let these go their way." Thus the Shepherd was smitten, and the sheep went free as it is written, "The Shepherd shall be smitten, and the sheep shall be scattered."

L.-Yes, I know the Shepherd was smitten, that the flock might go free. But does it entirely exempt the sheep from any blame?

G.-To be sure it does, or they could not enjoy liberty. Now, Jesus Christ, the Great Shepherd, was bound by law and justice, that His people might be bound with the soft cords of love and mercy. We, therefore, prove His yoke to be EASY, and His burden

LIGHT.

L.-Well, supposing Christ has given satisfaction to law and justice, cannot God in His justice find fault with any of His

children?

G.-My friend, your arguments are a mass of contradictions. Supposing you had been guilty of breaking one of the laws of our land, for which you had to pay five pounds, or be imprisoned three months. The money you cannot pay, nor do you know a friend that would help you out of your difficulty by paying the amount for you. The consequence is, you are sent to prison. When the three months expire, who can detain you in prison, seeing you have suffered the penalty due for your breach of the law of the land?

L.-Why, of course, the prison doors would be thrown open, and I should be free.

G.-Just so; and it would be to any man's peril to annoy you afterwards about the thing for which you had suffered. Very well. Now supposing a friend had paid the five pounds for you, would you not be just as free?

L-To be sure I should, because the five pounds would be considered equal to the three months' imprisonment.

G.-Exactly so; and you would be entirely exempted from the

imprisonment, having paid the fine IN THE PERSON OF YOUR

FRIEND.

L.—Yes, I can see all that very clearly. But what are you driving at? What has all this to do with non-chastisement?

G.-I will show you. Now, when our first parents were created, they were bound by a law to obey their Creator, were they not? L.-Yes, I know they were, and they were disobedient; consequently, broke that law.

G.-Very well; the law by them was broken, therefore they came under a broken law, which entailed a curse, involving a threefold death: natural, spiritual, and eternal. Supposing after this breach they had lived a life of innocence-which of course they could not do, every breath being a sinful one, therefore a perpetual breach of the law-they must have gone to hell for ever, because the offence was against an Infinite and Eternal Being. And even then, for this one breach, they could not suffer FOR THE SIN, that is, for the suffering to be equivalent to the offence. If they could suffer for it, as you might in the case before mentioned, there would be a termination, though it were millions of years hence. But as the offence is infinite, persons who are finite cannot atone for it. As the offence is against an Eternal Being, the suffering of a finite creature cannot possibly give the least satisfaction. Then, to meet this difficulty, there must of strict necessity be an Infinite and Eternal Being. Christ supplies the infinite and eternal void. He being an Infinite ONE, could give an infinite satisfaction; He being an Eternal ONE, could give an eternal satisfaction without suffering eternally. Thus, you see, my friend, your floating theory is but a phantom after all; and falls before Christ, like Dagon did before the ark.

L.-I must confess your arguments are weighty, and beyond my power, at present, to overturn. But is it not surprising that hardly a person believes in non-chastisement for sin?

G.-No; it is not altogether surprising, when all things are taken into consideration; for many things are held by people without examining or enquiring into whether the scriptures will bear them out in the things held. There are thousands hold errors in profound ignorance, relying upon the supposed infallibility of their parson, priest, or teacher, whereas, perhaps, their teachers never received the truth by revelation. But because Mr. So-and-so says it, Mr. Somebody-else must believe it. Thus the blind lead the blind.

L.-But, my friend, you would not unchristianize a man, whether minister or layman, if he did not believe in non-chastisement for sin, would you?

G.-No, certainly not; for I God's people who believe in it, warming truths in the Bible.

believe there are very few even of though it is one of the most heartBut, mind you, if God the Spirit

once opens up the subject to a man's mind, all the men in the world, or devils in hell, would never knock the Christ-exalting, and God-glorifying truth out of him. No, indeed; he would be too much delighted with the soul-ennobling mercy, saying, in scripture language-which portion blows to the four winds this lie of Satan"He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob (how can He chastise for it, then?) neither hath He seen perverseness in Israel (though they are as perverse as the devil and sin can make them): the Lord his God is with him, and the shout of a King is among them," saying, "Thou art all fair, my love;" and, "Thy iniquity is pardoned; thy sin is covered." Who can take the covering off?

L.-I am truly rejoiced that the Lord has, in His kind unerring providence, caused me to meet with you; for I begin to see the FALLACY of what I held to be truth; though my mind is still somewhat confused upon the point.

G.-Heartily glad am I that the mist is being driven away from your mind; and have no doubt, after a few more evenings' conversation, with the Lord's blessing, you will be firmly established in the truth, despite what you have read in that book so cried up by professors.

L.-Certainly my opinion of the orthodoxy of that book has been greatly lessened by what the Lord has enabled you to advance; yet I do not entirely give up the point, therefore shall at our next meeting read another paragraph from it; that is, if you have no objection.

G.-No, friend, you are quite welcome to bring all the misconceived opinions of men to wage war against God in His truth; but they must all be driven away, like chaff before the wind.

L.-You do not object to acknowledge that the Lord does chastise His people, though you say it is a fruit of love, and not of anger? G.-For me or any other man to say that the Lord did not chastise His people, would be a lie against the scriptures of truth; for we read of the Lord's people being chastened in many portions of the Word.

L.-Well, I thought you could not say they were not chastised, because the Word declares, "If ye be without chastening, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards and not sons; for what son is he whom the Father chasteneth not ?"

G.-What are all our light afflictions and chastisements compared with what our suffering Head endured! They are indeed but as so many drops of the ocean; or as taper lights compared with the mid-day sun. All God's dealings with the family arise from His boundless heart of love; and it is impossible for Him to LOVE and HATE, SMILE and FROWN, BLESS and CURSE, DWELL WITH and FORSAKE, KEEP and ABANDON the same persons; for " He is in ONE mind (and not two, as Christ despisers affirm), and who can turn Him? and what His soul desireth, even that He doeth."

L.-You believe, then, that God's love is such, that it is impossible for Him to frown upon His children, whatever sins they are the subjects of?

G.-Most decidedly, I do! God has every reason to love and bless His people, seeing they ever stood in Christ, who is the Covenant; and that, though they fell in Adam, and were deserving of eternal damnation, there was, even then, an infinite satisfaction beheld for their vile transgressions in the Person of Christ; so that the words of the poet are strictly true respecting the fall of man: "He turned His eyes to Jesus then,

And in His bosom saw

His dear delights, the sons of men,
Complete, without a flaw."

L.-Do you not think it is going too far, making such statements? G.-In no way; for what is revealed belongs to the family of God; and the secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him, and He will show them His Covenant" (Christ; see Isaiah ii. 6). The Word plainly declares that the sins of the whole body of Christ were laid upon Christ, who was made sin; and who, "by sin (that is Christ, who was made that detestable thing) damned sin in the flesh" (Tyndale's Testament). Christ was the Antitype of the scape-goat that took the sins into the land of forgetfulness; of the sacrificial goat that was first made the sin, and then slain to atone for it; and the lamb that was offered for a burnt-offering: yea, He was the Meaning of every scripture, and the Spirit of every prophecy. He is indeed our Passover, and was slain for us; we will, therefore, keep the feast, not as bond-slaves, but as free-born children, saying, with the poet,

"Now, free from sin, I walk at large;

This Breaker's blood's my soul's discharge;

At His dear feet, content, I'll lay,

A sinner saved, and homage pay."

I must be going, Mr. L., for I am very anxious about my wife and family, who are still very unwell; but not afflicted for my sin, mind.

L.-You are determined to have your own way, I find. However, we will drop the subject for the present, and I hope nothing will prevent you from meeting me next week.

G.—I trust not, my friend, though the Lord only knows. Farewell, Mr. L.

L.-Good by, Mr. G.; if possible, be here early next Tuesday. (To be continued.)

COMMUNION OF SAINTS.

MY DEARLY LOVED FRIEND AND SISTER IN GOSPEL UNION,-I was so very much rejoiced to recognise your dear handwriting; for