3. “But I lay it down as an undoubted truth, the fruit of the Spirit is the witness of the Spirit.” Not undoubted; thousands doubt of, yea flatly deny it: but to let that pass. “If this witness be sufficient, there is no need of any other. But it is sufficient, unless in one of these cases, 1. The total absence of the fruit of the Spirit.” And this is the case, when the direct witness is first given: 2. “The not perceiving it. But to contend for it in this case, is to contend for beingin the favour of God, and not knowing it.” True, not knowing it at that time any otherwise, than by the testimony which is given for that end. And this we do contend for: we contend, that the direct witness may shine clear, even while the indirect one is under a cloud.
4. It is objected, secondly, “The design of the witness contended for, is to prove that the profession we make is genuine. But it does not prove this.” I answer, the proving this, is not the design of it. It is antecedent to our making any profession at all, but that of being lost, undone, guilty, helpless sinners. It is designed to assure those to whom it is given, that they are the children of God; that they are justified freely by his grace, thro’ the redemption that is in Jesus Christ. And this does not suppose, that their preceeding thoughts, words and actions, are conformable to the rule of scripture. It supposes quite the reverse, namely, That they are sinners all over, sinners both in heart and life. Were it otherwise, God would justify the godly; and their own works would be counted to them for righteousness. And I cannot but fear that a supposition of our being justified by works, is at the root of all their objections. For who ever cordially believes, that God imputes to all that are justified, righteousness without works, will find no difficulty in allowing the witness of his Spirit, preceding the fruit of it.
5. It is objected, thirdly, “One evangelist says, your heavenly Father will give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him. The other evangelist calls the same thing good gifts; abundantly demonstrating, that the Spirit’s way of bearing witness, is by giving good gifts.” Nay, here is nothing at all about bearing witness, either in one text, or the other. Therefore ’till this demonstration is better demonstrated, I let it stand as it is.
6. It is objected, fourthly, “The scripture says, the tree is known by its fruits. Prove all things. Try the spirits. Examine yourselves.” Most true: therefore let every man who believes he hath the witness in himself, try whether it be of God; if the fruit follow, it is, otherwise it is not. For certainly the tree is known by its fruit: Hereby we prove, if it be of God. “But the direct witness is never referred to in the book of God.” Not as standing alone, not as a single witness, but as connected with the other: As giving a joint testimony, testifying with our spirit, that we are children of God. And who is able to prove, that it is not thus referred to, in this very scripture, Examine yourselves whether ye be in the faith: prove your ownselves. Know ye not yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you? It is by no means clear, that they did not know this, by a direct as well as a remote witness. How is it proved, that they did not know it, first, by aninward consciousness, and then by love, joy and peace?
7. “But the testimony arising from the internal and external change, is constantly referred to in the bible.” It is so. And we constantly refer thereto, to confirm the testimony of the Spirit.
“Nay, all the marks you have given, whereby to distinguish the operations of God’s Spirit from delusion, refer to the change wrought in us and upon us.” This likewise is undoubtedly true.
8. It is objected, fifthly, that “The direct witness of the Spirit, does not secure us from the greatest delusion. And is that a witness fit to be trusted, whose testimony cannot be depended on? That is forced to fly to something else, to prove what it asserts?” I answer. To secure us from all delusion, God gives us two witnesses that we are his children. And this they testify conjointly. Therefore what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. And while they are joined, we cannot be deluded: their testimony can be depended on. They are fit to be trusted in the highest degree, and need nothing else to prove what they assert.
“Nay, the direct witness only asserts, but does not prove any thing.” By two witnesses shall every word be established. And when the Spirit witnesses with our Spirit, as God designs it to do, then it fully proves that we are children of God.
9. It is objected, sixthly, “You own the change wrought is a sufficient testimony, unless in the case of severe trials, such as that of our Saviour upon the cross. But none of us can be tried in that manner.” But you or I may be tried in such a manner, and so may any other child of God, that it will be impossible for us to keep our filial confidence in God, without the direct witness of his Spirit.
10. It is objected, lastly, “The greatest contenders for it, are some of the proudest and most uncharitable of men.” Perhaps some of the hottest contenders for it, are both proud and uncharitable. But many of the firmest contenders for it, are eminently meek and lowly in heart: and indeed in all other respects also,