_First_, That GOD himself, in his holy word, hath told us so. Many texts might be produced out of the Old Testament to prove this point, and indeed, one would wonder how _Nicodemus_, who was a teacher in _Israel_, and who was therefore to instruct the people in the spiritual meaning of the law, should be so ignorant of this grand article, as we find he really was, by his asking our blessed LORD, when he was pressing on him this topic, How can these things be? Surely, he could not forget how often the Psalmist had begged of GOD, to make him “a new heart,” and “to renew a right spirit within him;” as likewise, how frequently the prophets had warned the people to make them “new hearts,” and new minds, and so turn unto the LORD their GOD. But not to mention these and such like texts out of the Old Testament, this doctrine is so often and plainly repeated in the New, that, as I observed before, he who runs may read. For what says the great Prophet and Instructor of the world himself: “Except a man (every one that is naturally the offspring of _Adam_) be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of GOD.” And lest we should be apt to slight this assertion, and _Nicodemus_-like, reject the doctrine, because we cannot immediately explain “How this thing can be;” our blessed Master therefore affirms it, as it were, by an oath, “Verily, verily, I say unto you,” or, as it may be read, I the Amen; I, who am truth itself, say unto you, that it is the unalterable appointment of my heavenly Father, that “unless a man be born again, he cannot enter into the kingdom of GOD.”
Agreeable to this, are those many passages we meet with in the epistles, where we are commanded to be “renewed in the Spirit,” or, which was before explained, in the inmost faculties of our minds; to “put off the Old Man, which is corrupt; and to put on the New Man, which is created after GOD, in righteousness and true holiness;” that “old things must pass away, and that all things must become new;” that we are to be “saved by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost.” Or, methinks, was there no other passage to be produced besides the words of the text, it would be full enough, since the apostle therein positively affirms, that “If any man be in CHRIST, he is a _new creature_.”
Now, what can be understood by all these different terms of being _born again_, of _putting off the Old Man_, and _putting on the New_, of being _renewed in the spirit of our minds_, and becoming _new creatures_; but that christianity requires a thorough, real inward change of heart? Do we think these, and such-like forms of speaking, are mere metaphors, words of a bare sound, without any real solid signification? Indeed, it is to be feared, some men would have them interpreted so; but alas! unhappy men! they are not to be envied in their metaphorical interpretation: it will be well, if they do not interpret themselves out of their salvation.
Multitudes of other texts might be produced to confirm this same truth; but those already quoted are so plain and convincing, that one would imagine no one should deny it; were we not told, there are some, “who having eyes, see not, and ears, hear not, and that will not understand with their hearts, or hear with their ears, lest they should be converted, and CHRIST should heal them.”
But I proceed to a
_Second_ argument; and that shall be taken from the purity of God, and the present corrupt and polluted state of man.
GOD is described in holy scripture (and I speak to those who profess to know the scripture) as a Spirit; as a being of such infinite sanctity, as to be of “purer eyes than to behold iniquity;” as to be so transcendently holy, that it is said “the very heavens are not clean in his sight; and the angels themselves he chargeth with folly.” On the other hand, man is described (and every regenerate person will find it true by his own experience) as a creature altogether “conceived and born in sin;” as having “no good thing dwelling in him;” as being “carnal, sold under sin;” nay, as having “a mind which is at enmity with GOD,” and such-like. And since there is such an infinite disparity, can any one conceive how a filthy, corrupted, polluted wretch can dwell with an infinitely pure and holy GOD, before he is changed, and rendered, in some measure, like him? Can he, who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, dwell with it? Can he, in whose sight the heavens are not clean, delight to dwell with uncleanness itself? No, we might as well suppose light to have communion with darkness, or CHRIST to have concord with _Belial_. But I pass on to a
_Third_ argument, which shall be founded on the consideration of the nature of that happiness GOD has prepared for those that unfeignedly love him.