05.17. The Object Of Repentance
XIV THE OBJECT OF REPENTANCE
It was recognized as impossible to embody in one discussion a well-rounded view of the doctrine of repentance. The first discussion closed with an illustration designed to impress the accuracy of the definition that repentance is a change of mind toward God, and to expose the inaccuracy of prevalent popular definitions. This illustration consisted in taking the sentence, "The gifts and the calling of God are without repentance" (Romans 11:29), and substituting in turn the various so-called definitions in the place of the word "repentance," to determine which one made the best sense. Resuming the discussion at that precise point, attention is called to a possible objection based on the fact that the phrase "without repentance" in Romans 11:29, is but a rendering of the adjective ametomeletos, which is not derived frommetanoeo, but from metamelei. If anyone should be disposed to consider that this fact impairs the force of the illustration, he may bring out the idea sought to be conveyed just as forcibly by using as a base some sentence which has in it unmistakably metanoia. For example, let the reader try the same procedure with Hebrews 12:17 : "Esau found no place of repentance though he sought it carefully, with tears." Here it is important to observe that the repentance of this verse does not, as is commonly supposed, refer to an exercise of the mind of Esau. The sentence means that Esau found no place for a change of mind on the part of his father, Isaac, though he sought to change his father’s mind with many tears. This change on the part of Isaac was impossible, notwithstanding he preferred Esau above Jacob, because he could not change the blessing pronounced on Jacob through divine inspiration. Hence the margin of the common version renders the passage, "Esau found no way to change Isaac’s mind," thus harmonizing with Paul’s version of the same matter as thus expressed: "And not only this, but when Rebekah also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac (for the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of him that calleth), it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy" (Romans 9:10-16). If, therefore, we want an illustration of confusion confounded, we have only to write Hebrews 12:17, erase the word "repentance," and substitute therefore successively the false definitions heretofore cited.
Here another objector may ask: If we define repentance as only a change of mind, does not that belittle a great doctrine? That depends on the "from what" and the "to what." Remember that the carnal mind is enmity against God, not subject to his law, neither indeed can be. To change that mind into love of God and subjection to his law is no small change. It is as difficult as to raise the dead or make a world. It calls for the exercise of supernatural, creative, omnipotent energy.
It still may be objected: How, then, can we repent, as a stream can rise no higher than its source? The answer is obvious. We cannot repent except by divine grace. Remember this scripture cited: "Jesus Christ was exalted a prince and a Saviour to give repentance," and remember also what has been stated, that the exercise of repentance on our part is but the under side; the upper side is regeneration. We work out what God works in, both to will and to do according to his good pleasure, and therefore our "confession of faith" makes repentance a fruit of regeneration.
If it be objected again that according to this definition there is no element of sorrow in repentance, our reply is, etymologically and abstractly, no. But again, everything depends OD "from what" and "to what." We should never forget the standpoint. Gospel repentance necessarily involves the idea of sorrow, because we repent from the standpoint of sin against the holy God, whose righteous law that sin has transgressed. Hence, like Job when he saw the Holy One, our convicted spirit cries out, "Behold, I am vile. What shall I answer thee? I will lay my hand upon thy mouth. . . . I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear, but now mine eye seeth thee. Wherefore, I abhor myself and repent in dust and ashes." This view makes clear the relation of repentance to godly sorrow.
Godly sorrow, or contrition, is God-wrought sorrow, that is, God is its author. This makes godly sorrow the result of conviction of sin. Conviction is the work of the Holy Spirit. Contrition is our exercise under conviction.
In referring to the Holy Spirit our Lord says, "When he is come he will convict the world of sin." The sinner’s way, though leading to death, seems right to him until he is convicted that it is wrong. When so convicted, he changes his mind and thus godly sorrow worketh repentance. The Day of Pentecost furnishes a notable example of this order of procedure. On that day the Holy Spirit came down, enduing the disciples with power, and through their preaching convicted the Jews of sin. When these so convicted cried out, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Peter replied, "Repent ye." The phrase expressing this conviction is, "They were pricked in their heart." This fulfils an Old Testament prophecy. Jeremiah, in stating the nature of the new covenant, says, "I will put my laws into their mind and write them in their hearts." Paul refers to the same thought when describing the conversion of the Corinthians: "Written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God; not on tables of stone but in fleshly tables of the heart" (2 Corinthians 3:3).
It is very important to observe just here that when we say that the carnal mind is enmity against God and that repentance is a change of mind toward God, we by no means intend to teach by the change alleged that the carnal mind itself is transformed, converted into a loving mind, because the carnal mind is inconvertible. It can never be made subject to God’s law by any possible process. The change of mind is not the turning of one mind into another, as wheat is converted into flour, retaining its substance while changing its form, but it is a change by substitution. One thing takes the place of another radically different thing, as a child is said to be a changeling who in infancy was substituted for the true offspring that had first been removed.-Only we must remember that in repentance the mind substituted for the carnal mind is a new creation. Ezekiel expresses that thought thus: "A new heart also will I give you and a new spirit will I put within you, and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh and I will give you a heart of flesh, and I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments and do them." Paul calls this the "putting off of the old man and the putting on the new man." Observe, however, that when speaking of repentance, or faith, as the under, or human side of regeneration, we do not mean that repentance alone expresses all the change set forth in the paragraphs from Ezekiel and Paul. Faith must be included to insure this full result. As our Articles of Faith declare, "Repentance and faith are inseparable graces wrought in our souls by the regenerating Spirit of God." We may well here be asked, "How then can we discriminate between the work of repentance and faith?" By recurring to the illustration of a changeling we may be able somewhat to discriminate. Repentance takes away the first child; faith substitutes the other. The taking away is but preparatory, as John’s preaching withered the grass of the flesh, utterly consuming any hope of fitness for the kingdom of heaven based on carnal descent from Abraham, to make them ready by faith to receive Christ. And so in Hebrews 8:13 Paul describes the changing of the covenants, "In that he saith, a new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away." In other words, one is taken away as a preparation for the institution of the other, and this is equally a change. Having now considered somewhat in detail its nature and meaning, some attention will be given to the object of repentance.
Paul discriminates sharply between repentance and faith, as to their respective objects, when he says, "Repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 20:21). Observe, therefore, that gospel repentance is only toward God, but as repentance is a general term, we must not forget that we may repent toward other objects. One may change his mind about multitudinous matters, from one thing or person to another thing or person. He may repent toward his earthly parents, toward death, toward shame. From this fact arises a liability to mistake one of these repentances for gospel repentance. Indeed, it is often done. A wild young man, away from home, has been stirred to tears by some preacher’s description of the old homestead, and reflecting upon the grief and pain his disobedience has wrought in the parental heart, he is led by sorrow to change his mind toward his faraway parents. In this case, his repentance is toward his earthly parents, and may not have in it a single element of spirituality, in the gospel sense. Again, a profane, dissipated, and wicked man, when suddenly confronted with death, or threatened with exposure of his unrighteousness, is stricken with remorse, which leads to a change of mind as to the evil done, or rather its consequences. Here the repentance is either toward the horrors of apprehended death or toward the shame of being found out. That we may be well guarded against this liability to mistake, it may be necessary to illustrate repentance of this kind.
Years ago a Texas paper recited a thrilling incident aboard a ship in the Gulf of Mexico. It was just after a gale. The passengers, rejoicing in the subsidence of the storm, were variously occupied, according to inclination or habit, some swearing, some drinking, some gambling. Suddenly the captain, his face white, his lips quivering, rushed into the cabin and startled the unprepared passengers with the awful announcement, "The ship has sprung a leak and will go down in five minutes!" The effect was instant and all-pervasive. The oath and ribald jest were arrested, half-uttered, on the lips of profanity; the drunkard dropped untasted the half lifted bottle; the gamblers threw down their unplayed cards and ignored the tempting gold they had staked on their game. All of them, panic-stricken, by one impulse) fell on their knees in prayer. They all repented toward sudden death. Now, if that ship had gone down, instantaneously engulfing all but one of that crew in a watery grave, and that one survivor had reported that all his shipmates died in the act of prayer, having each one "quit his meanness," their relatives at home would have deduced great hopes of their condition in eternity, and some preachers in funeral services would have preached their souls right into heaven. But, alas! for such repentance, such hopes, such preaching, in the light of subsequent facts. The history proceeds to say that while yet in their fear-prompted devotions the carpenter of the ship appears with the cheering statement that the pumps are lowering the water in the hold and the leak will soon be stopped. The effect of this assuring announcement was like that ascribed to the touch of a magician’s wand. Devotion and panic depart together and wicked inclinations and habits resume their wonted sway. Indeed, the oaths are more frequent, the jests more obscene, on profanity’s lips. The gamblers renew their interrupted game with doubled stakes to make up for loss of time. The drunkard treats himself to an extra two fingers in compensation for his brief abstinence. We may call this "India rubber repentance," because it is like the schoolboy’s hollow ball, which flattens under pressure but resumes its original form when the pressure ceases.
Mark Twain in a very humorous account of this method of getting religion gives us a second illustration, substantially after this fashion: He tells of three men lost in a snowstorm, wearily riding in a circle, until the increasing cold admonishes that they must have a fire or die, and how every match and every powder flash failed to ignite the wet boughs gathered by their benumbed fingers, and how at last the certainty of death called for a preparation for eternity, and how each proposed to get religion by quitting his particular meanness. The first throws down his pipe and promises never to smoke again. The second hurls away his bottle and vows to drink no more. The third scatters to the winds his pack of Mexican cards, pledging to deal monte never again. And then, shaking hands and crying all around, they yield up their ghosts to – sleep. The beautiful snow gathered around them its white mantle as a shroud, but lo I when morning came they awoke to find themselves alive and within sight of the very stage stand they had vainly sought in the darkness. With sheepish faces and in silence they sought its hospitable walls, where, after thawing the outside at the blazing hearth and filling the inside with generous food and drink, they were surprised to find how secular they felt. But each was ashamed for the others to know he had so soon fallen from grace, and so sought solitude after his own fashion. The smoker, when left alone, slipped out, sought, found, and filled his pipe, and stealing behind one corner of the barn to surreptitiously strike a match, surprised the drunkard at the other corner just lifting his recovered bottle to his lips, while both stood aghast at beholding under an old stagecoach the third playing solitaire with his refound pack of Mexican cards.
Henry Ward Beecher says that "one might as well repent toward the jaws of a crocodile as toward the law." The question then may well be asked, "How may one safely distinguish between gospel repentance and repentance toward other objects?" This may be done by keeping in mind the following characteristics of gospel repentance: First, as to its nature. It is spiritual, a new creation, wrought by the omnificent energy of the Holy Spirit. The tree is first made good. Second, it is always the product of contrition, whose marks are thus described by Paul: "For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of, but the sorrow of the world worketh death; for behold this self-same thing that we sorrow after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you; yea, what clearing of yourselves; yea, what indignation; yea, what fear; yea, what vehement desire; yea, what zeal; yea, what revenge. In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter." Third, as to its objects. It is always toward God. It recognizes, abhors and turns away from sin as a transgression of his holy law, and confesses the guilt of alienation from it. Fourth, it always leads to loving acceptance by faith of the Lord Jesus Christ, as the soul’s only prophet, priest, and king. Fifth, being a radical and fundamental change, it always bears fruit in confession, conversion, reformation, and even restitution when possible.
When theologians speak of repentance in a somewhat broader sense than its etymological import, that is, including both anterior and subsequent or accompanying exercises, they find in it these three elements: First, an intellectual element, which recognizes sin as involving personal guilt, defilement and helplessness. Paul calls this "knowledge of sin," Greek,Epignosis, Hamartias, Romans 3:20. Second, an emotional element, called contrition, or godly sorrow, Greek,lupe kata theon. Third, a voluntary element, Greek,metanoia,that is, a change of mind or disposition which turning from sin and self-help seeks pardon and cleansing in a Redeemer.
Here, as a guard against a widespread misconception, it is important to observe that the penitent state is not a passive state, but exceedingly active. The mind acts, the heart acts, the will acts, the whole being is stirred, every faculty is alive and employed, and every means or resource available is utilized. The penitent is indeed no sluggard. With him there is no folding of the hands, no lying supinely on his back, no foolish waiting. He burns, he moves, he tries. He is a very live man. It is well to specify three phases of this activity. First, the penitent is a mourner on account of sin. Second, the penitent prays for pardon and cleansing. Third, the penitent is a seeker after salvation. It perhaps would take up too much time and space to cite the very words of all the scriptures proving these three phases of activity, and yet the reader should take down a list of the more important ones and privately examine them. I suggest the following: Zechariah 12:9; Zechariah 13:1; James 4:8-10; Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 34:18; Psalms 51:1-10; Jonah 3:4-10; Luke 18:9; Psalms 4:1-3; Psalms 107:10-14; Psalms 107:17; Psalms 107:20; Isaiah 55:6-7; Jeremiah 29:12-13; Jeremiah 50:4-5; Luke 18:13; Matthew 6:33. The characteristics of the gospel mourner presented in the passage from Zechariah it is quite important to note. First, it was a great mourning; second, it was an individual mourning, husband and wife apart; third, it is declared to be such a mourning as parents indulge over the death of their first-born, or as Israel indulged over the death of Josiah, their king. Fourth, it was truly lupe kata theon; that is, the Holy Spirit was its agent. Fifth, the preached word, lifting up Christ, was its instrument (compare John 19:37 and Acts 2:17-37). And finally it leads to the fountain of cleansing (Zechariah 13:1). Our Lord, in referring to the mourning of the Ninevites, who put on sackcloth and ashes and cried mightily to God, says that they repented at the preaching of Jonah. He had just said that if Tyre and Sidon had received the light bestowed upon Chorazin and Bethsaida they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.
While discussing the penitent’s activity as a mourner, it may be well to refer somewhat to what is popularly called the mourner’s bench. Within modern times revivalist preachers fell upon the method of inducing movement upon the part of those whom they addressed by asking them to come forward to a designated seat, where they might be instructed and where the people of God could approach them knowing that the approach would not be offensive to them. This method has its dangers and its abuses. There is always danger of making it a fixed institution, and even without intending it, of allowing the popular mind to regard it as a fact that salvation can be found nowhere else than at the mourner’s bench. Then well known excesses have taken place in connection with what are called altar scenes, which have brought this method into reproach with many pious, thinking people. There is equal danger in the opposite extreme of preaching which has no tendency to induce action, movement, decision, which draws no line of demarcation. The Baptists and the Methodists employ the mourner’s bench, as it is called, or some form of that method, more than other denominations. Those popularly known as Campbellites and Martinites most oppose it. Where one is wise a golden mean between these extremes can be profitably found.
A notable case of the second activity, the penitent’s praying, is furnished by our Saviour in the case of the publican, whose prayer is thus expressed in the Greek:“O theos, hilestheti moi toi hamartoloi."It may be translated: God, be propitious to me, the sinner; (or, forgive me through the atonement) . As Baptists usually teach the penitent to pray for the pardon of his sins, it may here be asked whether they call upon him to pray for pardon independent of the atonement wrought by Christ. No one who has ever taught a penitent to pray, at least no Baptist inculcates such teachings apart from the means appointed to secure the remission of sins. If then the penitent is taught to seek pardon in prayer through the appointed means of pardon, this conforms our Baptist teaching to that of our Lord Jesus Christ in the parable of the publican.
And, indeed, it is improbable that any man was ever saved who did not mourn on account of his sins and pray for pardon through Christ and seek eternal life. And we may regard with well-grounded distrust any alleged Christian experience unaccompanied with these exercises of mind and heart.
False teachers have applied to this mourning, praying, and seeking activity of the penitent the opprobrious phrase, "dirt and straw religion." If modern seekers after eternal life were to act as did the Ninevites, fasting, putting on sackcloth and crying mightily to God in prayer, doubtless these dry-eyed, short-cut teachers would ridicule it as "dirt and straw religion," or as doing penance; and yet our Saviour, in referring to these exercises says that the Ninevites repented at the preaching of Jonah. Most probably the real objection of these false teachers to what they call the mourner’s bench, lies more against the mourning, the praying, and the seeking than against the bench. In an effort to avoid the opprobrium heaped upon this method we should take good heed lest we run into the opposite extreme, that is, leave out the mourning, praying, and seeking, while leaving out the bench. The Scriptures prescribe no fixed measure of mourning, praying, and seeking as necessary to salvation. Indeed, it is not a measure of time and process. If in one moment the soul is contrite enough to turn in abhorrence of sin against God from all self-help to our Lord Jesus Christ by faith, it is sufficient.
The reader is called upon to note that when we say that repentance is toward God, we do not mean that only preaching about the law or about God the Father can produce repentance. That is not meant at all. The preaching that leads to repentance toward God is the preaching of Christ and him crucified, for in Christ alone is the Father revealed and the majesty of his law fully set forth. This is abundantly proved by the Scriptures. Our Lord said that in his name should repentance and remission of sins be preached throughout the world. Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost is an illustrious example of how preaching Christ leads to repentance, and the passage from Zechariah, before quoted, says that it is only after they looked on him whom they had pierced that they mourned, and then was opened a fountain for sin and uncleanness. What the Scriptures teach) experience corroborates. Observation of revival meetings shows that hearts are not broken by dry, abstract preaching of the law, but are melted into contrition by Christ lifted up, and set forth as crucified before the eyes of the people. On this account Paul declared that be gloried in nothing save the cross of Christ, and in his preaching knew nothing other than Christ and him crucified. I would commend, therefore, to young preachers and all Christians desirous of leading men to repentance or faith or consecration, or any other gospel exercise whatever, the supreme theme, Christ and him crucified; always Christ, whether to saint or sinner. Preach Christ – not morality, not philosophy, not deeds of charity, not civilization, never anything but Christ.
QUESTIONS
1. How do you meet the objection that the phrase "without repentance" in Romans 11:29 is a rendering of the adjective ametameletos and is not derived from melanoeo?
2. Show how the definition, "Repentance is a change of mind," does not belittle a great doctrine.
3. If repentance calls for the exercise of supernatural, creative and omnipotent energy, how then can we repent?
4. Is there necessarily an element of sorrow in repentance? Show clearly the relation of repentance to godly sorrow.
5. Cite a notable example of this order of procedure.
6. What phrase expresses the conviction?
7. What Old Testament prophecy did this fulfil?
8. How does Paul express the same thought?
9. By the change of mind in repentance is it meant that the carnal Blind itself is transformed, converted into a loving mind?
10. How does Ezekiel express the nature of this change? How Paul?
11. Does repentance alone express all of the changes set forth in the paragraphs from Paul and Ezekiel?
12. How then can one discriminate between the exercises of repentance and faith?
13. How does Paul discriminate between repentance and faith as to their respective objects?
14. May we not repent toward other objects?
15. Is there a liability to mistake one of these repentances for gospel repentance?
16. Illustrate repentance of this kind.
17. Recite substantially Mark Twain’s humorous account of getting religion after this fashion.
18. How did Henry Ward Beecher describe repentance toward the law?
19. How then may one safely distinguish between the real repentance and the spurious?
20. What three elements do theologians find in repentance considered in a broader than the etymological sense?
21. Is the penitent state active or passive?
22. Specify three phases of this activity.
23. Cite scriptures proving that the penitent is a mourner.
24. Proving that he is a seeker.
25. Proving that he prays for pardon.
26. What are the characteristics of the mourning mentioned in Zechariah?
27. What does our Lord say about mourning and praying of the Ninevites?
28. What about Chorazin and Bethsaida (Matthew 11:20-21)?
29. Cite the origin and history of the mourner’s bench.
30. What are its dangers and abuses; dangers of opposite extreme?
31. What denominations most employ this method? Who most oppose it?
32. What is the golden mean?
33. Cite the Greek text of the publican’s prayer; its meaning.
34. Do Baptists teach the penitent to pray for pardon of sins in dependent of the atonement wrought by Christ?
35. If then the penitent is taught to seek pardon in prayer through the appointed means of pardon, to whose teaching does this conform?
36. Is it probable that any man was ever saved who did not mourn on account of his sins, pray for pardon through Christ and seek eternal life?
37. How may we regard any alleged Christian experience unaccompanied with these exercises?
38. What opprobrious phrase do false teachers apply to mourning, praying and seeking?
39. If modern seekers after eternal life were to act as did the Ninevites, what would these dry-eyed teachers say about it?
40. What does our Saviour say about it?
41. What does he say of Tyre and Sidon?
42. What most probably is the real objection of these teachers to the mourner’s bench?
43. What caution is necessary in avoiding the evils of the so-called mourner’s bench?
44. What measure of mourning, praying, and seeking do the Scriptures require as necessary to salvation?
45. What kind of preaching most conducive to repentance?
46. Prove this by the Scriptures.
47. How does experience corroborate this?
48. On this account what said Paul as to the matter of his preaching?
49. What theme is commended to young preachers and other Christians desirous of leading men to repentance, or faith, or any other gospel exercise?