In the fourth place, the Spirit of the Father is obtained in quite a different way from that in which Christ is received at conversion. Christ is received by Faith, the Holy Ghost is obtained by Prayer.

The sinner does not need to pray for Christ, all that he has to do is to believe and accept Him. God is entreating the sinner to be reconciled, and to accept Christ freely offered to him in the Gospel. Christ Himself is standing at the door of the sinner's heart, and knocking to obtain admittance: the moment that the door is opened Christ enters. The Shepherd is going after the poor lost wandering sheep, and is more anxious than the sheep itself for its return. It is quite a mistake to suppose that the sinner has to go to God, asking to be reconciled; or to stand knocking at the door of mercy, and waiting till it be opened, as Bunyan represents it in his Allegory. The asking, and the seeking and the knocking are not for the sinner at all; they are only for God's children after they have got in. It is not the door of mercy that is shut; it is the door of opportunity. When the door of mercy is shut, knocking will be of no avail. It is not God's answer to the sinner's prayer, but the sinner's answer to God's prayer that saves him. The moment that the sinner really believes that God loves him and wants him to accept of Christ as his Saviour, all that he has to do is to say "yes," and the thing is done.* That is what takes place at conversion; Christ is received by faith, not by prayer.

We have said that the Holy Ghost, which is the Spirit of the Father, is to be obtained by prayer; and this is proved from Luke xi. 13. "If ye then being evil, know

* INSTANT SALVATION by the instant acceptance of a Mediator and Surety, by the Rev. James Gall (480th thousand); Gall & Inglis, Edinburgh and London.

how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Ghost to them that ask Him?" The whole of this discourse was addressed to the disciples, whom He calls God's children, and to whom the Father had already given life "in His Son." If then Christ's Spirit was dwelling in them (without which, Paul tells us they were none of His), it was needless for them to pray for what they had already got. What they wanted was not Christ, but the Holy Ghost.

Again, a man may pray for the Holy Ghost and receive not, because he may ask amiss, that he may "spend it in his pleasures" (Jas. iv. 3). He may be anxious to distinguish himself as an evangelist; his object may be to be popular, and that he may be sought after. In such a case it would be neither for that man's good, nor for God's glory, that he should be gratified.

And yet the Holy Ghost is not like temporal blessings, which are to be asked for only subject to God's will. This is a gift which is specified as a thing promised, and which God intended us to get; and if we obey, we are sure to receive it in God's good time. But it is promised only to those who obey. Acts v. 32.

Another thing that must be kept in mind is, that although the gift of the Son is bestowed in every case on individuals as individuals, the gift of the Holy Ghost is given to the Church as a Church, and therefore the greater the number that unite in praying for it "with one accord," the more certainly and the more quickly will it be given. The Holy Ghost is the organising power of the Church, and "the communion (koinonia) of the Holy Ghost" is that which binds it together. It is He that in the hands of Christ presides over Social Christianity; and when He comes, He brings gifts of His own with

Him, "dividing to every man severally as He will" (1 Cor. xii. 11). To one man He gives one gift, and to another another. One He makes an eye, another He makes a hand, and so on; but they form only one body of Christ, in which the Holy Ghost dwells, compacted by that which every joint supplieth.

A very common idea regarding the baptism of the Holy Ghost is, that it is not different in kind from the indwelling of the Spirit of Christ, or rather of Christ Himself, in the believer; but that it is higher in degree. Consequently, it is supposed that under the New Testament dispensation Christians have a higher spiritual life than was enjoyed by the Old Testament saints. This is to misunderstand not only the baptism of the Holy Ghost, but the change that takes place at conversion. The Spirit that is received at conversion is Christ Himself. "He that hath the Son hath life." The Spirit that is received at the baptism is the Spirit of the Father (Matt. x. 20), proceeding from the Father (John xv. 26), and performing the functions of the Father. The Spirit of the Son is able to produce the very highest degree of spiritual life and holiness, for, who among us has greater faith than Abraham; or a closer walk with God, than Enoch; and these were Old Testament saints.

Sometimes the baptism of the Holy Ghost appears as if it were received at conversion, as in the case of Cornelius and his Gentile companions, but in every case conversion must take place first. It is promised only to those that believe, because the Spirit of the Father cannot enter a heart that has not been cleansed by the Spirit of His Son. "I in them and Thou in Me." Paul asked the believers in Ephesus whether they had received the Holy Ghost since they believed (Acts xix. 2), and in addressing

the Ephesians he says, "In whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise" (Eph. i. 13), showing that conversion was first. In the Revised Version both of these passages are altered and made to appear as if conversion and the baptism took place at the same time. The Authorised version is right, and the Revised Version is wrong, because the original Greek will not bear the meaning there given to it.*

And lastly, as the work of the Father is evangelistic, He sends forth the Spirit of His Son (Gal. iv. 6). And as the work of the Son is pastoral, He sends forth the Spirit of His Father (Acts ii. 33).

The analogy between Christ and the believer, both in their birth and their baptism, as well as the light which this great doctrine sheds on the other great doctrines of the Bible, cannot be entered on here. Our only object at present is to show that the baptism of the Holy Ghost is the crowning feature of the New Testament dispensation, that it was lost to the Church in its full plenitude when the Spirit was quenched by the great apostasy, that it was not recovered at the Reformation of the sixteenth century, in consequence of the Reformers adopting the temple theory, and that until it be recovered by the Church as a whole, the conversion of the world is an impossibility.

An aorist participle with an aorist indicative is an idiom that occurs hundreds of times in the New Testament, and in these cases the action of the participle precedes that of the indicative. Consequently, the "believing" in both passages took place before the "receiving of the Holy Ghost."

CHAPTER IX.

ERASTIANISM PART OF THE TEMPLE SYSTEM.

ANOTHER great calamity resulting from the adoption

of the temple theory by the Reformers, was the loss of the liberties of the Church, and the investment of the civil magistrate with ecclesiastical authority and power. This was the necessary result of accepting the temple and the kings of Judah as a model of Church and state.

The temple and its priesthood were pre-eminently a political as well as a religious institution, in which the whole nation was interested as a nation, and the relations which subsisted between the priesthood and the monarchy were of the most intimate kind. The high priest himself occupied a position of great power and influence, being an officer of state and a member of the Government. When the office became vacant, the appointment was vested in the king, or the head of the civil Government, whoever that might be; and although the choice was restricted to the family of Aaron, that family was sufficiently numerous to enable him to appoint those only who were agreeable to his policy or his inclination.

Nor was the royal power confined to the appointment only, for if the high priest became distasteful or offensive to the king, he had the power to remove him and appoint another in his place, as was done by both David and Solomon. Even the Roman governor possessed this power