$15. THE PARABLE OF THE SOWER.

"When much people were gathered together, and were come to him out of every city, he spake by a parable: A sower went out to sow his seed; and as he sowed, some fell by the way-side; and it was trodden down, and fowls of the air devoured it. And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it. And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be? And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of Ged: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand. Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God, Those by the way-side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.-But that on the good ground are they, which, in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience." Luke 8: 4–15.

REMARKS.

1. We learn from this parable that there is an original difference in the characters of men-a difference which is not produced by the gospel, but which exists before the gospel is heard, and is in fact the cause of the different consequences resulting from the gospel in different persons. The word of God' (which includes all the influences of the gospel) is represented as seed falling upon different sorts of ground, and becoming productive or unproductive according to the quality of the soil on which it falls. The good and bad qualities of the soil, of course, are not produced by the seed, but exist before the seed is sown, and determine its product. The plain purport of the representation is that some men's hearts are hard, sterile and deceptive, and others honest and good,' before the word of God' comes to them; and that this antecedent difference in their characters determines the effect of the word of God upon them.

2. We learn that the grace of the gospel is given to all, and that the only reason of its failure to effect salvation in some is the depravity of their hearts, and not the illiberality or partiality of God, or the defectiveness of the gospel. The seed was sown by the way-side, on the stony ground, and among the thorns, as well as on the good ground. The sower was liberal enough and the seed was good enough to have secured a harvest on the whole field. The only reason that parts of the field were unproductive was the evil nature of the soil. So the gospel is sent to all men. God is good enough and his word is fruitful enough to save the whole world. The only reason that some never will be saved, is that their hearts are not adapted to receive and profit by the goodness of God and the word of his grace.

3. We learn that the hearts of some in their primary state, are not 'totally depraved' in the fullest sense of the expression, but are so far honest and good' that the word of God when it comes finds sympathy in them. This truth, however, does not imply that such persons, before receiving the grace of the gospel, are 'children of God,' and have no need of salvation. Ground may be good, and yet, for want of seed and cultivation, it may produce nothing good. Nay, its very fertility may give a ranker growth to evil seed. In order that good may be produced, there must be not only good ground, but good seed. So men may have 'honest and good hearts' in the sense intended by the parable, and yet, without the word of God, they may produce nothing good; but on the contrary, evil in proportion to their fertility. Their goodness is negative, or perhaps we should say receptive, in distinction from that which is positive and active; and as such, is equally adapted to foster either good or evil influences from without. In order to constitute one a righteous man, and a child of God,' there must be not only a primaily honest and good heart,' but an infusion of the word of God. The 'children of the kingdom' are not saved by nature, but they are adapted by nature to be saved by grace. Being primarily in the devil's possession, the soil of their hearts produces nothing but evil, till God takes possession of them by the gospel. They are therefore by nature children of wrath even as others,' and can only be saved by being born again.

4. We learn by comparing this parable with another which immediately follows it in Matthew's account of Christ's instructions, that the good and evil natures which men have in their primary state, are the offspring of the Son of man on the one hand, and the devil on the other. This parable, by itself, would be liable to question. One might say-If the gospel is productive or unproductive according as the hearts on which it falls are good or evil, still there is a difficulty back of all this. How came the hearts of men, in their primary state, to be good and evil?' Christ therefore proceeds directly to answer this question, by propounding the parable of the tares and wheat. We will simply quote the explanation of that parable, leaving the text itself to the memory of the reader.

"He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man: the field is the world: the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tures are the children of the wicked one. The enemy that sowed them is the devil." Matt. 13: 37-39.

It will be seen that whereas in the former parable the field is mankind and the seed is the word of God, in this parable the field is the world and the seed is mankind. In other words, the different sorts of men who are represented by the good and evil ground in the first, are represented by the good and evil seed in the second. So that to the question- How came men to have such hearts as are represented by the way-side, stony and thorny ground?' Christ answers, He that soweth them is the devil: and to the question-How came men to have honest and good hearts?' he answers, 'He that soweth them is the Son of man.' This ends the matter. There is no room for question still further back; for as the Son of man was good from the beginning,' so the devil was evil from the beginning.' We

have reached the two eternal causes of good and evil; and we have no more reason to ask, 'How came the devil to be evil?-than 'How came the Son of man to be good?'

These views leave on the character of God no just imputation of illiberality or partiality, either in respect to the gifts of nature or of grace; while they ascribe salvation, both in respect to the honest and good heart' which is its antecedent condition, and the word of the gospel, which is its efficient cause, to the Son of man.

$16. THE PARENTAGE OF SIN AND HOLINESS.

"WHEN lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin.' James 1:15. The Greek word translated lust in this passage, means simply desire. It is so translated in Luke 22: 15, Phil. 1: 28, and is used there and elsewhere in a good sense. James is not to be understood as intimating (as the usual meaning of the word lust would seem to intimate) that there is sin in lust or desire previous to the conception and birth of sin. He means that the natural desires of human nature, which are not sinful in themselves, are to sin what the mother is to the child.

Now in every case of conception and birth, there is not only a mother, but a father. Who then is the father of sin? By whom does lust conceive'? The obvious answer is-The Wicked One. Sin is the product of the joint agency of human desire and the spirit of Satan. So it was in the original transgression. Eve's natural desire of food and wisdom was not sinful, but it was a womb in which the serpent, by words of falsehood, begot sin. The transgression was the consequence of a spiritual conjunction between her desire and his wickedness. So it was in the treason of Judas. His love of money was provoked and inflamed by the affair of the alabaster box, and then Satan entered into him.' Hence the conception and birth of his horrible crime. So in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, Peter asked Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost? Their lie was a child begotten in their hearts by Satan. Accordingly John says 'the devil is a liar and the FATHER of it."

In natural generation the Father gives his own image to the child, and the same mother may bear children of one complexion by one husband, and children of a different complexion by another. So human desire, or the mother of moral action, may conceive by conjuction with the spirit of God, as well as with the Spirit of Satan; and in that case (since the child bears the image of the father) the product will be righteousness, as in the other case it was sin. So that the counterpart of our former statement is also true, viz., righteousness is the product of the joint agency of human desire and the spirit of God. Peter's strong susceptibilities in conjunction with the spirit of Satan, produced impudent resistance to Christ, and afterward a

lying denial of him. And those same susceptibilities in conjunction with the spirit of God after the day of Pentecost, brought forth innumerable acts of nndaunted righteousness. Paul, with his fiery zeal, while he had Satan for his husband, persecuted the flock of God without mercy. When he was married to Christ, the fruits of the same fiery zeal were gigantic labors of love. By the following specimens it will be seen that the language of scripture concerning the conception and birth of righteousness, is the counterpart of James' description of the generation of sin. Being made free from sin and become servants to God, [that is subjects of his Spirit,] ye have your fruit unto holiness.' Rom. 5: 22. Ye are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye should be married to another, even to him that is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.' Rom. 7:4. See also John 15: 5, Gal. 5: 22.

The Bible theory, then, of the parentage of moral action is briefly this: Human nature is a female which conceives and brings forth sin or righteousness, according as it has Satan on God for its husband.

PRACTICAL REMARKS. 1. We see the folly of attempting to prevent sin by the law, or by any means that operate only to hinder actual transgression. While man is married to the devil, commerce between them must continue, and conception must take place. All the law can do is to forbid the birth, i. e. attempt to produce abortion, or condemn the offspring when it is born. The only effectual way is to bring about a divorce, and stop the commerce and conception. This can be done only by the power of God.

2. We see that the true way to produce righteousness is to preach Christ and the ministration of the Spirit. Let man be married to God by faith and spiritual conjunction, and righteousness will be brought forth, by a process as sure as that of natural generation.

17. THE CAUSE AND THE CURE.

THEY that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.' So they that are sick, will not call the right physician, or apply the right remedy, unless they know the worst of their case-the inward depth and final cause of their malady.

Antiquated and unfashionable as our doctrine may seem in these days of scientific discovery, we feel bound to proclaim in the ears of all who will hear us, the old Bible theory of universal disease-the pathology of Jesus Christ and his apostles, who constantly ascribed all the spiritual, moral, intellectual and physical maladies of human nature to the POWER OF THE DEVIL. We confess, that the more we investigate, the more we are attached to Bible notions and Bible language on this subject. If a man is afflicted with fever or epilepsy, instead of looking into his blood or his nerves, his hereditary constitution or his diet, for the ultimate cause, we go back with

Jesus Christ to the vital principle, and ascribe his disease to the power of an evil spirit. (See Acts 10: 38, Luke 13: 11-16, &c.) If a man's mind is dark and impervious to the beams of truth, instead of regarding this as the effect simply of the structure of his brain, or of his lack of education or attention, we take Paul's account of the matter and believe that 'the god of this world hath blinded him.' (2Cor. 4: 4.) When men commit immoralities, instead of laying the blame on external temptation, we hold with Peter that they work wickedness because Satan hath filled their hearts.' (Acts 5: 3, John 13: 2.) If men's spirits are hard, impenitent and dead to all the attractions of heaven, we find the ultimate cause of the fact, not in their individual wills, but in the dominion which the 'prince of the power of the air' exercises over them. (Eph. 2: 2, 2Tim. 2: 26.) Unphilosophical and superstitious as we may be deemed for this avowal, we are persuaded that even scientific investigation is progressing directly toward this very theory, and that when the wisdom of this world has run through its whole circle of discovery, it will find itself brought back to its most ancient starting point, and will die acknowledging the truth of the Bible philosophy of life.

In holding these views of the ultimate cause of human maladies, we are not obliged to overlook or disregard secondary causes. All those external influences and acts which are ordinarily regarded by physicians and metaphysicians as the causes, we admit are the occasions of disorder in the economy of human nature, and we attach due importance to them as such. If a man in a state of perspiration exposes himself to a current of air, takes cold, is prostrated by fever, and dies, we do not attribute his death to the devil irrespective of his own acts and the physical influences which operated upon him. But we call the action of the air upon his body, and the consequent corruption of his blood, the predisposing causes or occasions of his death, and the power of the devil the ultimate cause. We say that by his imprudence he exposed himself to a fatal influx of spiritual poison, and so the devil killed him. If a ship strikes a rock, springs a leak, and finally sinks, the collision and the leak are, in popular language, the causes of the disaster. But strictly speaking, the water which run in at the leak, sunk the ship. So the cold and the fever may properly be called, in common language, the causes of the man's death; but, strictly speaking, the power of the devil which rushed in at the opening made by the cold and the fever, killed him. So, too, outward immoralities are properly regarded as the occasions of spiritual disease and death. Men are alienated [from God] by wicked works. Col. 1: 21. But the most deadly result of wicked works is not the direct mischief which they work either objectively or subjectively, but the breach in the spirit' and the influx of Satanic influence which they

occasion.

For the purpose of embarrassing our position, physiologists may ask whether a man might hold his hand in the fire without injury, if there was no devil? We answer; unless a proper miracle (as in the case of Shadrach and his companions) should suspend the laws of nature, the man's hand would undoubtedly be burned and he would suffer pain. But there would be this difference between his case and ordinary cases at present; viz., there