Believing that ten pages of a great author are more rewarding than a hundred of a third-rate one, the present writer recently took up — not for the first time — the sixth volume of Thomas Goodwin. His intention was to redeem a spare hour of time in the fellowship of this deep divine, writing on the subject 'Of the Work of the Holy Ghost in our Salvation'.

A hungry congregation as well as a hungry soul of his own, drives the active pastor to search many a time for deeper wells of salvation than he can dig himself unaided. Having on the occasion no hope of reading or re­reading the entire treatise, yet believing that there is profit in making a brief sortie into a good writer, we began at the Contents page and found our eye drawn to the fourth chapter of Book II, where the heading occurs: 'Reasons why God suffers his elect, grown unto riper years, to continue for some time in a state of sin'. Here, surely, was a theme fit for a spare hour. The results of our subsequent enquiry we put down here in the belief that they might be of profit to others.

If the art of teaching lies in asking good questions, Thomas Goodwin — and all the other eminent Puritans — must be reckoned to excel. For here was a highly fruitful area for theological meditation: Why should God see fit to leave his elect so long in their sins before regenerating them? Are there advantages in their being left in sin, commonly, till they grow to maturity, or would it be advantageous for them all rather to be saved in early childhood, or even in infancy? A pastor's instinct led the present writer to suspect that Goodwin was here on to a point of practical divinity which would serve as a first-class theme for discussion in a house-meeting or at the next informal meeting of the brethren. That Goodwin himself regarded this theological question as especially interesting is clear from the fact that he spends no fewer than five chapters of the above treatise in handling it.

When looked at with attention, the statement of Paul in Romans 6:17 is quite surprising: 'But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin...' The present writer had normally read that verse with his eye on the conclud­ing clause: 'ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you'. It seemed impossible to understand Paul's statement to mean that he thanked God for the fact that they had once been the slaves of sin! Goodwin thought so too. He calls this 'a strange thanksgiving'. 'Had the apostle ended here', he says, 'you would have deemed it blasphemy'.

To this all readily agree. But here is what struck this writer for its origin­ality. Paul, according to Goodwin, here 'blesseth God complexly'. That is to say, Paul thanks God for both their regeneration and their having been once in a state which required regeneration. To explain the point, he illustrates by reminding the reader that in a picture it is the shadow that sets off the portrait. The shadow is not welcome of itself, but it is welcome as it throws emphasis and light on the subject of the picture. So the state of sin may be said to throw light on the subsequent state of grace, 'That (the state of grace) is the main thing he blesses God for, yet withal he admires and extols God's workmanship and art in taking the advantage of so great and dark a shadow as an estate of sinning is ... to be a foil to this bright image of his holiness'. That is the insight which Goodwin offers on the first part of Romans 6:17. It is arresting and startling.

Roused now with curiosity the writer set aside the old volume of Thomas Goodwin and went to the study in search of commentaries on the Epistle to the Romans. Which of the other expositors of this passage had allowed him­self to think with Goodwin? The search was revealing, and was much as one might predict. None of those writers to whom we naturally turn had any fancy for Goodwin's insight. Calvin comments: 'And he gives thanks, not as to that time during which they were the servants of sin, but for the liberation which followed, when they ceased to be what they were before'. Haldane is very explicit: 'To suppose, as some do, that sin itself could be a matter of thankfulness, is a most palpable error, than which nothing can be more remote from the meaning of this passage'. True, but does that really do justice to Goodwin's point? Hardly.

Charles Hodge writes: 'The expression in the first member of this verse is somewhat unusual, although the sense is plain'. Hodge places emphasis on the fact that they were (past tense) the slaves of sin. Paul's thanks are offered for the fact that they are slaves no more. 'This slavery is past', he comments. Professor John Murray follows Hodge in placing the emphasis on the past tense: 'The emphasis rests upon the past tense and in order to express the thought in English we have to use some such conjunction as "whereas" or "although"'. Dr Lloyd-Jones explains the difficulty in the first part of this text in the following way: 'When you first read the verse you may well think that the apostle is thanking God that these people were once the servants of sin. But, of course, he could not possibly thank God for that which is the tragedy of mankind'.

Goodwin, of course, agrees in his exposition of Romans 6:17 with practi­cally all that the above writers say. It is not that he and they are in significant disagreement. What is singular about his handling of the text is that he sees in it a 'complex' thanksgiving. It is worthy of note that none of our standard expositors appears to have taken up this insight offered by the great Puritan writer. Further, one might ask why Paul, if he had not in mind the very point that Goodwin is making, did not explicitly put in the word 'although' in the first part of the verse. May it not be, after all, that he is blessing God 'complexly'?

Perhaps we shall never know the answer to the question for certain in this life. Who can say whether or not Paul, when writing Romans 6:17, blessed God for the single fact of their deliverance from sin or for the additional consideration mentioned? It must be a point on which expositors may think and let think.

Goodwin's insight, however, is good in any case. For the fact remains, whatever view one takes of Romans 6:17, that God does in fact allow very many of his elect to remain for years in a state of sin prior to their regenera­tion. This well-known fact calls for observation and beckons our theological attention. Why should it be, unless there are certain advantages in it? And what, if there are such advantages, may we suppose them to be? Goodwin's answers to this question are convincing and we shall give them briefly in a moment.

But first, let us be clear on certain points which may confuse us if we do not proceed with care. It must be agreed by all that it is a wicked and a fearful thing for any man to be in a state of sin. Sin is exceedingly offensive to a holy God and those who are its servants are under his just wrath and condemnation. Then, secondly, a Christian who is converted in his mature years must always lament that he was not converted earlier. It is of the nature of things that when we receive grace we deplore our former selves. No Christian can think back to his dark unregenerate days without pain and disgust. Such disgust does no violence to the absolute sovereignty of God. Then, thirdly, we must strive to have our own and others' children converted at as early an age as possible. Parents ought not to expect their children to become rebellious towards the gospel at a certain age, but rather they ought to teach and train them devotedly in the things of God. The younger our children come to the Saviour, the better we shall, as their parents, like it. The above things are here said for clarification.

The point which we, following Thomas Goodwin, must now attend to, is this: If God sees fit in his wisdom to call very many of his elect to himself as adults and not as children, what may be conceived to be the reasons for this? Goodwin believed the answer, to this question to be as follows, (See Of the Work of the Holy Ghost in our Salvation, Book II: chapters 4-8).

It is firstly 'to give an illustration and demonstration' of God's love, mercy and grace. The measure of a monarch's glory is the multitude of his subjects. So it is with the grace of God. It 'reigns through righteousness' (Romans 5:21), argues Goodwin. Just so does the free grace of God find illustration in this life, and before our eyes. Its very glory and wonder is that it can save sinners who, like Manasseh, have thrown up in their lives 'actual transgressions as high as heaven'. Such a demonstration of divine grace could not be made if all the elect were converted in infancy or in childhood.

Another reason is this. The people of God are benefited by this arrange­ment in more ways than one. Those converted in later life, like Paul, never cease to wonder at the goodness and mercy of God towards themselves. They rehearse to themselves and to others again and again the guilty course of their former lives, and they bear witness whenever they have due opportunity to the abounding grace of God which changed them. This could not be if all were converted in childhood.

Then, too, this arrangement affords scope to believers to win their lost friends and relations to Christ. In a fine passage Goodwin observed that Christ 'went to heaven on purpose to leave the actual conversion of souls unto us his brethren'. This is not to overlook the necessity of divine grace but to call attention to our privilege as instruments in the work of converting men. Christ, he goes on, 'would not take that work out of our hands' as Christians. 'He knew how great a joy it would be to a father to win his child, a wife to convert her husband...' 'He knew there was no greater joy, next to joy in God himself, (that) can befall a Christian, than to convert a sinner'. Christ does not employ angels in this work but reserves the honour of it to us men.

There is a design in this arrangement also as concerns evil men who are finally lost. It is a source of deep conviction to the wicked when they see one of their number converted to God by his wonderful grace. Hence the impenitent will be rendered still more guilty in the day of judgment that they did not repent at the sight of their companions' repentance. In this way God prepares the impenitent for the judgment to come.

There is a design in this which looks also to the angels in heaven and to the demons in hell. The conversion of sinners who have long gone on in sin affords matter of very great joy to all the angels. Goodwin uses a vivid illustration at this point. God, he says with fine insight, 'entertains' the angels here and now with this ongoing work of saving sinners. As Roman emperors once treated their citizens to their spectacula ('shows'), so God now delights all his angels with the continual work of conversion carried out on earth. What a majestic thought!

On the other hand, God aims to confound Satan. He delights to disap­point and frustrate the devil in this way. By saving his elect in their ripe years God fulfils to Satan the ancient oracle uttered in Eden that there would be 'enmity' between the serpent's seed and the woman's seed forever (Genesis 3:15). Before conversion 'the devil rules and reigns as fully in one that is elect, as any other man, and finds no difference, Ephesians 2:2'. But then God comes to deliver. 'Now consider what a confusion it must needs be to the devil, that when for ten or twenty years he hath possessed a man in peace ... (thinking) that he is his own, and that he shall have him in hell with him, all of a sudden God delivers that man by an act of gracious power. Christ says that Satan in such cases 'walks in dry places, like one banished, that is melancholy, and seeks solitariness, an heath or a wilderness, as being ashamed to shew his head'.

These, if Thomas Goodwin is correct, are among the reasons why God chooses to let many of his elect ripen in sin before he delivers them. Were all converted in their mother's womb these advantages would not occur. God's wisdom is justified of its children.

The author's hour with Goodwin was not misspent. He is now glad to be able to share the spoils with others.