people by the special work of His Spirit； whom He promised to send when
He left the world。 （John xv。 26。） A parison of the ninth and tenth
verses of the eighth chapter of Romans seems to me to show this
plainly。 It convinces me that 〃Christ in us〃 means Christ in us 〃by His
Spirit。〃 Above all； the words of St。 John are most distinct and
express： 〃Hereby we know that He abideth in us by the Spirit which He
hath given us。〃 （1 John iii。 24。）
In saying all this； I hope no one will misunderstand me。 I do not say
that the expression。 〃Christ in us〃 is unscriptural。 But I do say that
I see great danger of giving an extravagant and unscriptural importance
to the idea contained in the expression； and I do fear that many use it
now…a…days without exactly knowing what they mean； and unwittingly；
perhaps； dishonour the mighty work of the Holy Ghost。 If any readers
think that I am needlessly scrupulous about the point； I remend to
their notice a curious book by Samuel Rutherford （author of the
well…known letters）； called 〃The Spiritual Antichrist。〃 They will there
see that two centuries ago the wildest heresies arose out of an
extravagant teaching of this very doctrine of the 〃indwelling of
Christ〃 in believers。 They will find that Saltmarsh； and Dell； and
Towne； and other false teachers； against whom good Samuel Rutherford
contended； began with strange notions of 〃Christ in us；〃 and then
proceeded to build on the doctrine antinomianism； and fanaticism of the
worst description and vilest tendency。 They maintained that the
separate； personal life of the believer was so pletely gone； that it
was Christ living in him who repented； and believed； and acted！ The
root of this huge error was a forced and unscriptural interpretation of
such texts as 〃I live： yet not I； but Christ liveth in me。〃 （Gal。 ii。
20。） And the natural result of it was that many of the unhappy
followers of this school came to the fortable conclusion that
believers were not responsible； whatever they might do！ Believers；
forsooth； were dead and buried； and only Christ lived in them； and
undertook everything for them！ The ultimate consequence was； that some
thought they might sit still in a carnal security； their personal
accountableness being entirely gone； and might mit any kind of sin
without fear！ Let us never forget that truth； distorted and
exaggerated； can bee the mother of the most dangerous heresies。 When
we speak of 〃Christ being in us；〃 let us take care to explain what we
mean。 I fear some neglect this in the present day。
（6） In the sixth place； is it wise to draw such a deep； wide； and
distinct line of separation between conversion and consecration； or the
higher life； so called； as many do draw in the present day？ Is this
according to the proportion of God's Word？ I doubt it。
There is； unquestionably； nothing new in this teaching。 It is well
known that Romish writers often maintain that the Church is divided
into three classessinners； penitents； and saints。 The modern teachers
of this day who tell us that professing Christians are of three
sortsthe unconverted； the converted； and the partakers of the 〃higher
life〃 of plete consecrationappear to me to occupy very much the
same ground！ But whether the idea be old or new； Romish or English； I
am utterly unable to see that it has any warrant of Scripture。 The Word
of God always speaks of two great divisions of mankind； and two only。
It speaks of the living and the dead in sinthe believer and the
unbelieverthe converted and the unconvertedthe travellers in the
narrow way and the travellers in the broadthe wise and the
foolishthe children of God and the children of the devil。 Within each
of these two great classes there are； doubtless； various measures of
sin and of grace； but it is only the difference between the higher and
lower end of an inclined plane。 Between these two great classes there
is an enormous gulf； they are as distinct as life and death； light and
darkness； heaven and hell。 But of a division into three classes the
Word of God says nothing at all！ I question the wisdom of making
new…fangled divisions which the Bible has not made； and I thoroughly
dislike the notion of a second conversion。
That there is a vast difference between one degree of grace and
anotherthat spiritual life admits of growth； and that believers
should be continually urged on every account to grow in graceall this
I fully concede。 But the theory of a sudden； mysterious transition of a
believer into a state of blessedness and entire consecration； at one
mighty bound； I cannot receive。 It appears to me to be a man…made
invention； and I do not see a single plain text to prove it in
Scripture。 Gradual growth in grace； growth in knowledge； growth in
faith； growth in love； growth in holiness； growth in humility； growth
in spiritual…mindednessall this I see clearly taught and urged in
Scripture； and clearly exemplified in the lives of many of God's
saints。 But sudden； instantaneous leaps from conversion to consecration
I fail to see in the Bible。 I doubt； indeed； whether we have any
warrant for saying that a man can possibly be converted without being
consecrated to God！ More consecrated he doubtless can be； and will be
as his grace increases； but if he was not consecrated to God in the
very day that he was converted and born again； I do not know what
conversion means。 Are not men in danger of undervaluing and underrating
the immense blessedness of conversion？ Are they not； when they urge on
believers the 〃higher life〃 as a second conversion； underrating the
length； and breadth； and depth； and height； of that great first change
which Scripture calls the new birth； the new creation； the spiritual
resurrection？ I may be mistaken。 But I have sometimes thought； while
reading the strong language used by many about 〃consecration；〃 in the
last few years； that those who use it must have had previously a
singularly low and inadequate view of 〃conversion；〃 if indeed they knew
anything about conversion at all。 In short； I have almost suspected
that when they were consecrated； they were in reality converted for the
first time！
I frankly confess I prefer the old paths。 I think it wiser and safer to
press on all converted people the possibility of continual growth in
grace； and the absolute necessity of going forward； increasing more and
more； and every year dedicating and consecrating themselves more； in
spirit； soul； and body； to Christ。 By all means let us teach that there
is more holiness to be attained； and more of heaven to be enjoyed upon
earth than most believers now experience。 But I decline to tell any
converted man that he needs a second conversion； and that he may some
day or other pass by one enormous step into a state of entire
consecration。 I decline to teach it； because I cannot see any warrant
for such teaching in Scripture。 I decline to teach it； because I think
the tendency of the doctrine is thoroughly mischievous； depressing the
humble…minded and meek； and puffing up the shallow； the ignorant； and
the self…conceited； to a most dangerous extent。
（7） In the seventh and last place； is it wise to teach believers that
they ought not to think so much of fighting and struggling against sin；
but ought rather to 〃yield themselves to God〃 and be passive in the
hands of Christ？ Is this according to the proportion of God's Word？ I
doubt it。
It is a simple fact that the expression 〃yield yourselves〃 is only to
be found in one place in the New Testament； as a duty urged upon
believers。 That place is in the sixth chapter of Romans； and there
within six verses the expression occurs five times。 （See Rom。 vi。
13…19。） But even there the word will not bear the sense of 〃placing
ourselves passively in the hands of another。〃 Any Greek student can
tell us that the sense is rather that of acti