Whatever public worship, therefore, people may have attended, or whatever ministry they have lived under from their infancy, they must, at all hazards, be convinced of this, or they perish for ever: yea, though that conviction at first _unhinge_ them ever so much; though it should in a manner, _distract_ them for a season. For it is better they should be _perplexed_ and _terrified_ now, than that they should sleep on and awake in hell.
9. In the 10, 12, and 13th _queries_ I am not concerned. But you include me also, when you say in the 11th, “They absolutely deny, that recreations of any kind, considered as such, are, or can be innocent.”
I cannot find any such assertion of mine, either in the place you refer to, or any other. But what kinds of recreation are innocent, it is easy to determine by that plain rule, _Whether ye eat or drink, or whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God_.
I am now to take my leave of you for the present. But first I would earnestly intreat you, to acquaint yourself what our doctrines are, before you make any farther _observations_ upon them. Surely, touching the _nature_ of salvation we agree, That _pure religion and undefiled is this, to visit the fatherless and widow in their affliction_, to do all possible good, from a principle of love to God and man: _and to keep ourselves unspotted from the world_, inwardly and outwardly to abstain from all evil.
*10. With regard to the _condition_ of salvation, it may be remembered, that I allow, not only faith, but likewise holiness or universal obedience, to be the ordinary condition of _final_ salvation: and that when I say, faith alone is the condition of _present_ salvation, what I would assert is this; 1. That without faith no man can be saved from his sins, can be either inwardly or outwardly holy. And 2. That at what time soever faith is given, holiness commences in the soul. For that instant, _the love of God_, (which is the source of holiness) _is shed abroad in the heart_.
But it is objected by the author of “_The Notions of the Methodists disproved_,” “St. _James_ says, _Can faith save him_?” I answer, such a faith as is without works cannot _bring a man to heaven_. But this is quite beside the present question.
You object, 2. “St. _Paul_ says, that _faith made perfect by love_, St. _James_, that _faith made perfect by works_, is the condition of salvation.” You mean final salvation. I say so too: but this also is beside the question.
You object, 3. _That the belief of the gospel_, is called the _obedience of faith_, Romans i. 5. And 4. That what _Isaiah_ terms _believing_, St. _Paul_ terms _obeying_. Suppose I grant you both the one and the other, what will you infer?
You object, 5. That in one scripture our Lord is stiled _The Saviour of them that believe_: and in another, _The author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him_. 6. That to the _Galatians_ St. _Paul_ writes, _Neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by love_: and to the _Corinthians_, _circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping the commandments of_ God. And hence you conclude, “There are several texts of scripture, wherein unbelief and disobedience are equivalently used.” Very true: but can you conclude from thence, that we are not _saved by faith alone_?
11. You proceed to answer some texts which I had quoted. The first is _Ephesians ii. 8._ _By grace ye are saved, through faith._ “But (say you) faith does not mean here, that grace especially so called, but includes also obedience.” But how do you prove this? That circumstance you had forgot: and so run off with a comment upon the context; to which I have no other objection, than that it is nothing at all to the question.
Indeed some time after you add, “It is plain then that good works are always, in St. _Paul_’s judgment, joined with faith.” (So undoubtedly they are, that is, as an effect is always joined with its cause) “And _therefore_ we are not saved by faith alone.” I cannot possibly allow the consequence.
You afterwards cite two more texts, and add, “You see mere faith cannot be a condition of justification.” You are out of your way. We are no more talking now of justification than of final salvation.
In considering _Acts xvi. 31._ _Believe in the |Lord Jesus| and thou shalt be saved._ You say again, “Here the word _believe_ does not signify faith only.――Faith necessarily produces charity and repentance; _therefore_, these are expressed by the word _believe_.” i. e. Faith necessarily produces holiness. Therefore holiness is a condition of holiness. I want farther proof. That _Paul_ and _Silas spake unto him the word of the Lord_; and that his faith did _in the same hour_ work by love, I take to be no proof at all.