Ver. 22.-.The stain.s of sin. I. Sm STAINS THE CHARACTER AND LIFE OF MEN. 1. Sin leaves stains behind it. No man can have clean hands after touching--it. Theso stains are of two classes: (1) internal-the soiled imagination, the corrupted will, the ,itiated habit which a single act of sin tends to produce; and (2) external, in the form of guilt before God, and lowered reputation in the sight of men. 2. The stains of sin are not natural. They are no part of the true colour of a man's character. They are all contracted by experience. 3. These stains are all evil things. They are not like marks of immature development or of the necessary imperfection of humanity. They, are products of corruption. , II. No MAN CL'i WASH THE GUILT OF SIN FROM HIS CHARACTER. (Oh. xiii.' 23.) 'l;'hs Jews were attempting this by denying the offences charged against them or excusing them. '!'hey would .not admit their apostacy; but in vain. 1. Sin cannot be undone. We cannot recall the'past. History is unchangeable, What we have done we have done. 2. Sin cannot be hidden. We can never hide it from God, who searches the heart (1 John iii. 20). We cannot long or perfectly hide it from man. It will colour our lives and reveal itself in action, in conversation, in countenance. 3. Sin cannot be excused. We may point to our training, our temptations, our natural weakness, our ignorance; and no doubt these facts are important as determining, the degree of our guilt (Luke xx.iii. 34). But the sin itself, greater or less as it may ,be1 cannot be explained away. Our sins are our own ·or they would not be sins. 4. Sin cannot be expiated by us. Sacrifice is of no real avall. '!'bat was only acceptable as a symbol and type of God's method of cleansing sin. Penance· eciuld only act as discipline for the future; for the past it is no better than a fruitless sacrifice, Future •goodness cannot atone for the past; for that is required on its own account, and if it were perfect it would be ·no more than it ought to be-we should still be "unprofitable servants." HI. No MAN CAN WASil THE STAIN OF' INDWELLING SIN FROM HIS LIFE. Men have tried all methods; but in Yain. 1. Sim1,le d'ete,rmination to conquer it. But he_ who commits sin is the slave of sin (John viii. 34), and a slave who cannot eman01pato himself. 'l'he worst effect of sin is seen iu the corruption of the 'will. Henoe we have not the power to reform until our will is renewed,· i.e. until, in New 'l'estament lan"ua"e we are "born atrain/' 2. Change of external circumstances. '!'his is a helpful acc~sso;y of more effcctuai'means, but it is not sufficient in itself, because sin is:intern~l, and no change of scene will effect a change of heart. A man may cross the Atla_nt1c, but he will be the same being in America that he was in England. He may ~e. lifted from the dun"bill to a throne but if he ·bad a vicious nature in his low cond1t10n ho 11ill carry that with him to his new sphere. Dase meta.I does not become gold by re- Cl !vin~ the :!ninca's stamp. Sanitary arrangement~, education, reforming iulluences, etc., OH. u. 1-37.J 'l'HE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. 33
are all helpful, but none are fundamental enough to effect the complete change, The stains are too ingrained for any such washing to remove them. IV. IN THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST WE MAY BEE THE MEANS FOB CLEANSING BOTH THE GUILT OF oiliBAOTEB AND THE STAIN OF INDWELLING BIN. 1. Guilt is shown to be removed by the free forgiveness of God in Christ, for no merits of our own, but for the sake of his work and sacrifice; by no effort of ours, but on condition of repentance and the faith which trusts l,im as our Saviour, and submits to him as our Lord (Acts :x. 43). 2. The stain of indwelling sin is shown to be removed by the renewal of our nature, so that we are born "from above" and "of the Spirit" (John iii. 3-8), and become new creatures in Christ by means of the same faith of trust and submission (2 Cor. v. 17). Vers. 35-31.-False confidence. I. THE GROUNDS ·oF FALSE CONFIDENCE. 1. .Assumed innocence. Israel says, "I am innocent;" "I have not sinned." This assumption may result from (1) self-deception, or (2) hypocrisy. 2. A claim to be favoured by God. Israel says again, "His anger has turned from me." Present peace is taken as a warrant for expecting continued security, so that the very forbearance of God is converted into an excuse for presumption and indifference. Perhaps, too, pride comes in and nids the assumption that the guilty people are special favourites of Heaven and will be protected, whatever wrong they do. 'l'his was the mistake of the contempora1i.es·ofour Lord when they relied on the mere fact that they were Abraham's ~hildren (John viii. 39). 3. Trust in human aid. Judah turned first to Assyria, and then to Egypt. So men look to worldly associations for security in trouble. 4. Re- liance on diplomatic skill. Israel turned from Assyria to Egypt when the former power failed and the latter was in the ascendancy. Men think to protect themselves by their own ingenuity. . II. THE FAILURE OF FALSE CONFIDEN0E. The reasons of this may be noted: 1. The reality of sin. This is not the less real because it is denied. God still sees it. It still bears its necessary fruits. 2. The rejection of God. Israel turned from God to man. How then could he expect God's continued protection? 3. Lack of principle. Israel turned about from Egypt to Assyria. There was no settled policy. When expediency is the sole guide of conduct we are sure to be landed in ultimate failure. 4. The character and/ate of the human objects of confidence. These were rejected by God. 'l'hey who trust ~hem must share their doom. It is always vain to "put confidence in princes" (Ps. cxviii. 9). But when these are bad men, godless men, rejected hy God, the consequences of trust in them will be fatal. We are always involved in the fate of what we trust ourselves to. If we trust to the world, to human aid, to errors and falsehoods, to evil things, the certain overthrow of these must involve us in its rnin.