SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Articles and Sermons : Entire sanctification A necessity by Dougan Clark, M. D.

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Entire sanctification A necessity by Dougan Clark, M. D.

The Theology of Holiness

by
Dougan Clark, M. D.

Chapter I

Entire sanctification A necessity.

Science is a systematic presentation of truth. Theology is the most important of all sciences. It is the science that treats of God and of man in his relation to God. It is a systematic presentation of revealed truth. As the basis of Astronomy is the universe of worlds revealed by the telescope, and as the basis of Geology is the crust of the earth, so the basis of Theology is the Divine revelation found in the Holy Scriptures. The Theology of Entire Sanctification, therefore, is a systematic presentation of the doctrine of entire sanctification as derived from the written word of God. Such a presentation we hope—­with the help of the Holy Spirit, which we here and now earnestly invoke—­to attempt to give in this book. May God bless the endeavor, and overrule our human weakness, to the glory of His Name. Amen.

It is a lamentable fact that there is a large class of Christians to whom the subject of entire sanctification is a matter of indifference. They hope, with or without sufficient reason, that their sins are forgiven. They propose to live moral and useful lives, and trust, again with or without sufficient reason, that they will go to heaven when they die. The subject of holiness does not interest them. They suppose themselves to be doing well enough without it.

There are others claiming to be Christians, to whom the subject is even positively distasteful. It is an offence to them. They do not want to hear it preached. They regard those who claim it as cranks. They look upon holiness meetings as being hotbeds of delusion and spiritual pride. They turn away from the whole subject not only with indifference, but with disdain.

There are still others, and these God’s children, as we may charitably believe, who do not even regard holiness as a desirable thing. They assert that it is needful and salutary to retain some sin in the heart as long as we live, in order to keep us humble. It is true that they are never able to tell how much sin it takes to have this beneficial effect, but a certain amount they are bent on having.

Another class takes the opposite view. They regard holiness as very desirable, and a very lovely thing to gaze upon and think upon, but they also regard it as quite impossible of attainment. They hope to grow towards it all the days of their lives, and to get it at the moment of death. Not sooner than the dying hour, do they believe any human being can be made holy. Not till death is separating the soul from the body can even God Himself separate sin from the soul. The whole doctrine of entire sanctification, therefore, they regard as a beautiful theory, but wholly impossible as an experience, and wholly impracticable as a life.

In general terms, we may say that carnal Christians, as described by Paul in I. Corinthians 3:1-4, are opposed to the doctrine of entire sanctification. “The carnal mind is enmity against God,” and the carnal mind is irreconcilably opposed to holiness. This opposition may take one of the forms already described, or, possibly, some other forms which have been overlooked, but the root of the hostility is the same in all. Wherever “our old man” has his home in a Christian’s heart, there entire sanctification will be rejected.

But we must not forget that there are many exceptions. There are thousands of sincere, believing hearts in all Christian denominations, in whom inbred sin still exists, but not with the consent of the will. They are tired—­very tired of the tyrant that rules them, or of the ceaseless struggles by which, with God’s added and assisting grace, they are enabled to keep him under. They long for deliverance. They are hungering for full salvation, and rejoice to hear the message of entire sanctification through the baptism with the Holy Ghost and fire. The Lord bless all these hungering multitudes, and give them the desire of their hearts by saving them to the uttermost, and may their numbers be vastly increased, so that the banner of Christ’s church may everywhere be unfurled—­the banner on which is inscribed the glorious motto of Holiness to the Lord.

Now we meet all objections to the doctrine of entire sanctification—­ whether in the form of indifference, or dislike, or undesirableness, or impossibility—­with the simple proposition, It is necessary. If this proposition can be established, all objections, of whatever character, must fall to the ground, and the eager cry of every Christian heart must be, How can I obtain that priceless blessing which is essential to my eternal bliss, which is indispensable, and without which I shall never see the Lord?

For this is the language of the Holy Ghost in Heb. 12:14, “Follow peace with all men, and holiness without which no man shall see the Lord,” and in the Revised Version, “Follow after peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no man shall see the Lord.” This can mean nothing short of entire sanctification, or the removal of inbred sin. And, surely, it is hardly necessary to argue the question as to the indispensableness of this blessed experience, in order to gain an entrance into heaven. Everyone will admit that God Himself is a perfectly and absolutely holy Being, and He has ever told His followers in all ages, “Be ye holy for I am holy"—­making His own perfect and entire holiness the sufficient reason for requiring the same quality in His people. And, although the holiness of the highest created being will always fall infinitely short of that of the Infinite God, as regards quantity, it will be the same in quality, for Jesus tells us, “Be ye perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect,” not, of course, with the unmeasurable amount of perfection which appertains to Him, but with the same kind of perfection so far as it goes. And again in Rev. 21:27, we are told that “There shall in no wise enter into it” (the heavenly city) “anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination or maketh a lie.” Heaven is a holy place, and occupied with none but holy inhabitants.

But if holiness of heart is a necessity in order that we may reach the blissful abode of the glory land, when is this stupendous blessing to be obtained? It is by no means, thoughtlessly, that I write obtained and not attained. It is very generally spoken of as an attainment, and this form of expression has a tendency to discourage the seeker by magnifying the difficulty of receiving this blessing. The thought contained in the word attainment is that of something earnestly striven for, struggled after, persistently pursued with much labor and toil and effort, until, at last, the coveted prize is attained. A very few of the multitudes who went to California, soon after gold was discovered there, attained fortune; but it was after years of hard labor and privation and hardship. The majority died on the way, or while mining for the precious metal, or returned as poor as they went.

On the other hand, the idea of an obtainment is simply that of a gift. And entire sanctification is precisely a gift, “merely this and nothing more.” It is not received by struggle, nor effort, nor merit of our own; it is not a great and laborious enterprise to be undertaken; not the fruit of a long journey or a perilous voyage; not by doing, nor trying, nor suffering, nor resolving, nor achieving, but by stretching out the hand of faith and taking. Praise the Lord.

And, therefore, we ask again when is this indispensable gift to be obtained? The Roman Catholic and the Restorationist answer, in purgatorial fire, or in some kind of a second probation after death. But the Holy Scriptures tell us absolutely nothing either of a purgatory or a post-mortem probation. On the contrary, they clearly teach us that our destiny for all eternity is to be determined in one probation, which is allotted to us in the present life. Let no one suppose, for a moment, that he can be made fit for heaven at any time, nor in any place, nor by any means, after he has left this mundane sphere. “Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.”

But all the Calvinistic churches by their creeds, and also a large portion of the membership of Arminian denominations, without regard to their creeds, if asked when are we to obtain entire sanctification as an essential meetness for heaven, would answer, at death. The prevailing idea on this subject, among Christian believers, seems to be as follows: First, through repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, we are converted. Our past sins are pardoned, and we are born again. After that, our sole business is to grow in grace, and by this growth to approach nearer and nearer to the standard of entire sanctification, but never even suppose that we can reach that standard until the moment of death.

Now, grace is the gift of God, and we cannot, possibly, grow in grace until we receive it. And we can never grow into grace, but grow in it after we get it. We can grow, it is true, in the grace of justification to a limited degree and for a limited time. The degree is limited because of the presence of inbred sin, which is the great, if indeed, not the only hindrance of growth. The time is limited in most cases, at least, because if the justified Christian is brought to see the need and the possibility of entire sanctification, and yet fails, as so many do, to enter into the blessing, because of unbelief, he is very prone either to backslide, in which case, of course, there will be a cessation of growth, or, like the Galatians, he will submit to the bondage of legalism, and after having begun in the Spirit, he will seek to be perfected in the flesh; in which case Paul’s verdict to that beloved church was not ye are growing in grace, but, “ye are fallen from grace.”

It is plain, therefore, that we can never grow into the blessing of entire sanctification. That blessing is to be received by faith, as the gift of God in Christ Jesus and through the Holy Spirit; and when the grace has once been obtained in this manner, then we can grow in it indefinitely and for a lifetime, possibly even for an eternity. Growth in grace is a most blessed thing in its right place, and when rightly understood and experienced, but it can never bring us to the death of the old man, nor to the experience of entire sanctification.

And as growth cannot do this, neither can death. Death is nowhere mentioned in Scripture as a sanctifier. Death can separate the soul from the body, but to separate sin from the soul is a work which God can only do. Jesus Christ is our sanctification, and the Holy Spirit is our sanctifier, and even if the work is performed in the article of death, it is still the Holy Spirit and not death that performs it. And if He can perform it in the hour and article of death, where is the hindrance to His performing it a week, a month, a year, or forty years before death—­if only the conditions are fulfilled on our part. Do we say that He cannot perform it before death; then where is His omnipotence? Do we say that He will not do it before death; then where is His own holiness? In either case, we dishonor God and rob ourselves of an inestimable and indispensable blessing. God save us from such folly.

Scripture, reason and experience, therefore, all unite in the sentiment that entire sanctification is to be sought and obtained now, and if now, then it is to be obtained instantaneously, and if instantaneously and now, it follows, also, that it is to be obtained by faith, and from these premises the further conclusion is logically deducible, that we cannot make ourselves any better in order to receive it, but that we must take it as we are. And so we arrive at and adopt the pithy precept of John Wesley, “Expect it by faith—­expect it as you are—­expect it now.”

In these remarks we have necessarily anticipated some things which belong more accurately to the next chapter; but we are not seeking so much for a perfectly methodical arrangement, as for a clear and Scriptural presentation of the subject. And we proceed to affirm now that entire sanctification is not only essential as the condition of entering heaven, but that it is also necessary for the highest results of the Christian life on earth. It is not only an indispensable blessing to die by, but, if we would fulfill our Father’s will in this world, it is indispensable to live by.

But before leaving entirely the subject of growth in grace, having demonstrated, as we trust, that we can never grow into entire sanctification, we ought, perhaps, to explain what we mean by the statement that we can grow indefinitely in that precious grace after, and not before, we receive it. Entire sanctification has two sides or aspects. It has a positive side and a negative side. Its negative side is the removal of inbred sin, and is, therefore, a matter of subtraction. And herein, we may remark in passing, is a characteristic difference between entire sanctification and regeneration. The latter is a matter of addition, because it implies the impartation of a new life to the soul which has hitherto been “dead in trespasses and sins.” Now in this negative aspect of entire sanctification there can be no growth. If a heart is pure it cannot be more pure. If it is free from sin it cannot be more free from sin. An empty vessel, as some one has said, cannot be more empty. There can be no increase in purity.

http://www.swartzentrover.com/cotor/E-Books/holiness/DouganClark/Theology/TTHindex.htm

 2013/8/5 8:19









 Re: Entire sanctification A necessity by Dougan Clark, M. D.

Quote:
But before leaving entirely the subject of growth in grace, having demonstrated, as we trust, that we can never grow into entire sanctification, we ought, perhaps, to explain what we mean by the statement that we can grow indefinitely in that precious grace after, and not before, we receive it. Entire sanctification has two sides or aspects. It has a positive side and a negative side. Its negative side is the removal of inbred sin, and is, therefore, a matter of subtraction. And herein, we may remark in passing, is a characteristic difference between entire sanctification and regeneration. The latter is a matter of addition, because it implies the impartation of a new life to the soul which has hitherto been “dead in trespasses and sins.” Now in this negative aspect of entire sanctification there can be no growth. If a heart is pure it cannot be more pure. If it is free from sin it cannot be more free from sin. An empty vessel, as some one has said, cannot be more empty. There can be no increase in purity.




This is just philosophical clap trap.

Apart from that it is the spirit which is born of the Spirit and thus is regenerated. The soul is not regenerated it is renewed in conduct through conformity or obedience.

Be you renewed in your minds that you may prove that perfect and acceptable will of God.

Like I say philosophical clap trap!

 2013/8/5 14:08
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1529
Scotland, UK

 Re:

Quote by armKelly: Apart from that it is the spirit which is born of the Spirit and thus is regenerated. The soul is not regenerated it is renewed in conduct through conformity or obedience.

Ezekiel 36:26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.

The soul or heart (I can link the two through scripture if needed) is renewed but not through conformity or obedience. God promises he will take the heart of stone out of our flesh and he also promises to give us a heart of flesh. You can try and obey unto renewal until your blue in the face but the heart will never change until the spirit does that transforming work..

Quote by armKelly: Be you renewed in your minds that you may prove that perfect and acceptable will of God.
It funny how we can quote things without really “see” what we are quoting.

I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. Romans 12:1-2

That quote you mention is tied in with scripture that deals with consecration, sanctification and holiness, but not only that it lets us know how it will be accomplished, through the renewing of the mind…

So what is the mind, is it not a part of the soul? The soul is the mind will and emotions and again if needed I can show you that the heart in the bible is the exact same thing as your mind will and emotions. So with that said the renewing of our mind is not achieved through “through conformity or obedience” but because God has made us a promise to give us a new heart, and if we believe him then he will change our heart our mind will and emotions.

Let’s look at it a bit more closely we are renewed in our mind by a transformation (no mention of obedience or conformance). The greek work used here “metamorphosis”. Metamorphosis means a complete change of form, structure, or substance, as transformation by magic or witchcraft. In this case we know that it’s not magic or witchcraft but the Spirit of God transforming us because of the promise he gave us that he will take away the heart of stone and give us a heart of flesh.

So to round up we are metamorphosed by being given a new heart.


_________________
Colin Murray

 2013/8/5 17:04Profile









 Re:

Quote:
That quote you mention is tied in with scripture that deals with consecration, sanctification and holiness, but not only that it lets us know how it will be accomplished, through the renewing of the mind…

So what is the mind, is it not a part of the soul? The soul is the mind will and emotions and again if needed I can show you that the heart in the bible is the exact same thing as your mind will and emotions. So with that said the renewing of our mind is not achieved through “through conformity or obedience” but because God has made us a promise to give us a new heart, and if we believe him then he will change our heart our mind will and emotions. Colin



I will address just one small part of this Colin.


The soul is not “a spirit” or even “spiritual” in nature. The soul is the man. It is natural. The man is a mind of two parts intellect and emotions. He is sentient and so has will or else the power to choose. I think, I feel, I am, I am not, I will, and so on. This “will” is a power and it is called volition. The soul can be disobedient or obedient. It is never spiritual. It is not by nature spiritual. It was not made a spirit it was made a living soul. Even after the fall the soul lived on. God said in the day you eat thereof you shall die. Did Adam die? Yes or no? Is God a liar yes or no? Adam did not die he lived for over nine hundred years. Is God a liar? Yes or no? Did Adam die? Yes or no? Adam died. His spirit fell into sin and became separate from God. He died spiritually. Did Adam lose his soul? Did he become an automaton? Did he forever lose his ability to feel emotions? No Adam continued to exercise his whole being; mind, heart and volition.

Reject this distinction and you have no basis for interpreting scripture in many parts.

The soul cannot be born again because although the soul can choose to sin it cannot posses eternal life. The soul was always going to live forever, even in a state of sin. Those who are eventually found in the second death will not have eternal life as those who are born again have eternal life. The soul suffers forever or else it rejoices forever yet the thing which separates these eternal conditions is the life of Christ Himself. It is either in Christ or in the Second Death. The one born again can still do that which is sinful. The one who is unregenerate can do that which agrees with God. The man who takes a wife stands in obedience to God. The man who feeds his children stands in agreement with God. Any natural man can obey God in many parts. All men are restrained by God in their bodies and their souls agree with it and freely obey the restraint. Unbelievers and believers do many similar things. Their is no distinction between the soul of an unbeliever and the soul of a believer. They are the same in substance and purpose. They are altogether a man. The man who shakes his fist at God in anger expresses the emotion of the soul, yet may be born again. The unbeliever may rejoice at the sight of his new born son and momentarily thank God. The spirit is not the soul and the soul is not the spirit. They are different organs. The one is from God and is of God, it is spirit, as God is Spirit, the other is a gift of a natural life from God yet it is a natural man. The one is a new creature the other is the same soul which lives forever whether it is regenerate or unregenerate.

As to the matter of a heart of flesh or stone it is written in the first instance to Israel and it has to do with their rejection of Christ and their eventual reception by God through delivering them from their hearts of stone. The soul is not born again. It does not receive an instantaneous permanent transformation. It must be renewed through a process of obedience daily. If it does not obey it becomes like a dog to the vomit. Its behaviour afterwards is necessarily worse than it was before. If you don’t believe me go and seek out some genuine reprobates and see what I mean. The spirit on the other hand is instantaneously made alive and cannot sin. Apart from that the article is attempting to present a number of heretical doctrines and I will have no part in it. So if I do comment on such things it will inevitably be contra wise.

συνσχηματίζεσθε τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ, ἀλλὰ μεταμορφοῦσθε (transformed in the renewing [of the mind]) are both in the present continuous tense, and therefore speaks of a change in schema (ability) attendant to the physical brain (neurology and pathology), being psyche in its meta physical nature and therefore meta in its philological usage. And, character or moral outcome being attendant to a complete change or transformation, being substance or power, morph. The change is not a once and for all time change it is a full and complete change immanently (experienced), yet this change cannot be self perpetuating and thus its power cannot be of ones self. Hence the dog to the vomit. The implication of the way sinless perfection is being presented on this site is that the renewing of the mind is a literal, physical and permanent change which cannot be reversed. This is a lie. Unless you resist it explicitly you will be misleading others into thinking that they can live a sinless and perfect life. Now say to me that a man can live a sinless and perfect life and I will say let it be so by all means, but let him comprehend by what power he lives in such sinless perfection and he will all at once know that his strength is his weakness and his weakness is his victory. Then he will go about in fear and trembling and become a perfect example to others. Hence why these words transformed and renewing are linked to the physical body of the preceding verse in Romans 12:1-2 from which verses are the words taken.

So when I say “the soul is not regenerated, it is renewed in conduct through conformity or obedience” I am not speaking about self effort producing some good outcome, I am speaking about the meta physical reality of the psyche (mind) which is the instrument that must needs cooperate in an act of obedience by denying oneself in a taking account of the body of sin (the physical body). The instrument of cooperation by which this is accomplished is the will (psyche) and the place in which this takes place is in the first instance Christ’ own body on the cross. Only then can it be worked out in experience. The renewed spirit on the other hand is complete in Christ and already possesses that which is necessary to become a new creature. The spirit co-exists within the body and is wrapped in the soul which ordinarily amounts to self expression, yet the spirit does not depend on nor can it be affected by either the soul or the body in the sense that it can be harmed by them. The soul and the body are dependent on each other. They do not co-exist they are co-dependent and so the soul can harm the body and the body can harm the soul by its lusts and the power of sin working in its members.

Which brings me to your usage of the term magic or witchcraft. Magic is nothing more than the power of the soul stirred up and expressed through physical realities attendant to the physical body itself. When the body is denied, then the power is simply soulish. It may be miraculous or impressive yet it is for all that different to what happens when the body itself becomes the vitalising influence of the soul. In Galatians 5:20 it is expressed as sorcery and it is a natural fruit of the flesh. It is true witchcraft and it is in the grasp of every man women and child. When the scripture speaks of being transformed by or in the renewing of the mind it is precisely the opposite of what witchcraft means. The power of witchcraft is the physical body or rather its pharmakia (body chemistry), stimulating the mind (Psyche or soul) to strengthen and determine the direction of the souls own power and strength. In such circumstances a man can become super human and behave like a devil. In this agreement even demons themselves will participate to inform the effect and then you have a truly wicked man.

So what I am speaking about both denies a one time for all time effect and outcome to living a holy life pleasing to God, and at the same time firmly presents the idea that it is power which lies at the back of transformations (metamorphosis); either the power of God working through a renewed spirit or else the power of the physical body itself. The soul on the other hand it largely neutral in the sense that it is capable of both good and evil deeds of itself apart from God. In short what we are really speaking of as the root presentation of sinless perfection is true gnosis. Which is to say gnosticism. You may well ask how this can be true. I would say it is because the experience which informs this doctrine of sinless perfection (where valid) is in reality revelation of the knowledge of God, giving rise to a conviction (feeling) that knowledge (gnosis) itself produces and makes certain it's meaning. True revelation of God, even Christ crucified for sin and our inclusion in His body, is a basis for repentance and not a basis for walking, of itself. The power to walk is not found in revelation it is the indwelling Spirit of God working through our own spirit. To attest to the knowledge, no matter how wonderful, is to miss the issue of power in our daily lives. This formula is the basis of gnosticism in the churches. It is to give more credence to knowledge than to life itself. It is the very thing which the apostle Paul determined he would never do. No amount of knowledge whether by way of true revelation of God or else by learning will provide the basis for walking in true holiness. Even a knowledge of the cross itself only makes certain that we comprehend the body of sin and deny its power by that means. Holiness cannot be knowledge it must be obedience and self denial. It is in essence a willingness to suffer that will make the difference. Not self pity because we have already suffered at the hands of some other when we were too weak to resist.

Whatever we say on this subject of holiness we will find that we are on very dangerous ground if we get it wrong. Hence why I am prepared to write a great deal or else just a few words. So as I said before hand Colin the article is a load of philosophical clap trap. And that is being polite.

 2013/8/5 20:01









 Re:

Colin wrote "Let’s look at it a bit more closely we are renewed in our mind by a transformation (no mention of obedience or conformance). The greek work used here “metamorphosis”. Metamorphosis means a complete change of form, structure, or substance, as transformation by magic or witchcraft. In this case we know that it’s not magic or witchcraft but the Spirit of God transforming us because of the promise he gave us that he will take away the heart of stone and give us a heart of flesh.

So to round up we are metamorphosed by being given a new heart."

Amen!

Andrew wrote "The soul on the other hand it largely neutral in the sense that it is capable of both good and evil deeds of itself apart from God."

Agreed. The soul of man acts according to whatever he has chosen to submit his will to, either the Spirit of God which dwells in the spirit of man if he has chosen accordingly, or self will which is in opposition to God and therefore comes under the jurisdiction of Satan. We are under the ruling of one or the other. Man was made to serve another. In order to serve God we must have the new heart which has been transformed, made new but in the present tense of being in a transformed form, and not in a permanently changed form. Man is never permanently changed in this way, he can always revert back to self rule.

"I would say it is because the experience which informs this doctrine of sinless perfection (where valid) is in reality revelation of the knowledge of God, giving rise to a conviction (feeling) that knowledge (gnosis) itself produces and makes certain it's meaning. True revelation of God, even Christ crucified for sin and our inclusion in His body, is a basis for repentance and not a basis for walking, of itself. The power to walk is not found in revelation it is the indwelling Spirit of God working through our own spirit."

Agreed. It is not knowledge, it is only through the indwelling of the Spirit of God that the renewed heart, can now serve God and will only remain renewed so long so the power for its working is coming from the indwelling Spirit of God.



 2013/8/6 3:05
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1529
Scotland, UK

 Re:

Quote by armkelly: The soul is not “a spirit” or even “spiritual” in nature.

I agree that it’s not a Spirit but I disagree that it’s not “spiritual” in nature; I would go as far to say it’s highly spiritual in nature, the soul in a man is the gateway between the spiritual and the natural world.

Quote: Did Adam lose his soul? Did he become an automaton? Did he forever lose his ability to feel emotions? No Adam continued to exercise his whole being; mind, heart and volition.

Back to the garden of Eden, what did man eat in the garden the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, how did that affect man or the soul of man. With Adams spirit being dead what stepped up to plate, the soul which was empowered by eating of the fruit. So we went from being led by the spirit to being led by the soul.

Quote by Armkelly: The soul cannot be born again because although the soul can choose to sin it cannot posses eternal life. The soul was always going to live forever, even in a state of sin. Those who are eventually found in the second death will not have eternal life as those who are born again have eternal life.

You say it can’t have eternal life but yet it suffers forever is that not eternal? Can something that is natural live for eternity?

Quote by armkelly: The one born again can still do that which is sinful.

Yes and the one who is born again can also remain addicted, when the born again addict is set free from the addiction what part changes? The desire is removed or we could say the “lust”. But where is that lust residing? Do they come from the source of defilement which is soul (heart)?

Man’s problem is twofold his spirit is dead while his soul (heart) is defiled by sin.

Quote by Armkelly: As to the matter of a heart of flesh or stone it is written in the first instance to Israel and it has to do with their rejection of Christ and their eventual reception by God through delivering them from their hearts of stone.

It’s a new covenant promise, because the old covenant didn’t deal with issue, in the old covenant if you obeyed God’s law then he promised to be your God. In the new covenant the promise is “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you” and he will be our God.

Quote by armkelly: Which brings me to your usage of the term magic or witchcraft.

I used it because the dictionary used these words to describe “metamorphosis” if you think about the caterpillar and the butterfly as an example of the change that Paul sees taking place.

Quote by armkeely: The soul on the other hand it largely neutral in the sense that it is capable of both good and evil deeds of itself apart from God.

That’s not what scripture says, let me capture something you said earlier “the body and the body can harm the soul by its lusts” and “soul on the other hand it largely neutral” You seem to have it the wrong way around. You have the body having lusts and the soul in neutral.

I put it to you that the soul (the heart) is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked Jeremiah 17:9, while the body is neutral…

The Gnostics taught that the body was evil, just as you have done by claiming the body has lusts so let’s be careful what we write.

Let me say to this to end the new covenant promise is that he will “cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments”. So God has to make changes to us so that obedience that God has planned for us can be fulfilled. This obedience is beyond the work of man it is an obedience accomplished only by the Spirit of God within us. He must “cause you” to walk in His ways. We cannot cause ourselves to walk in His ways………not to the degree God is after.

The level of love and obedience that Jesus came to produce in us by the Spirit is far beyond that of the first covenant. We need to take heed to the promises, lest we find ourselves deceived into thinking that we are pleasing Christ and obeying Him in fullness when we really are not. “Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.”


_________________
Colin Murray

 2013/8/6 5:12Profile
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1529
Scotland, UK

 Re:

Quote by Kartfu: Andrew wrote "The soul on the other hand it largely neutral in the sense that it is capable of both good and evil deeds of itself apart from God."

"The heart in Scripture is sometimes used for the mind and understanding, sometimes for the will, sometimes for the affections, sometimes for the conscience, sometimes for the whole soul. Generally, it denotes the whole soul of man and all the faculties of it, as a principle of moral operations.

The corruption of human nature is clearly taught in Scripture and brought into connection with the heart (soul).

It is "uncircumcised" (Jeremiah 9:26 Ezekiel 44:7); and "hardened" (Exodus 4:21); "wicked" (Proverbs 26:23); "perverse" (Proverbs 11:20); "godless" (Job 36:13); "deceitful and desperately wicked" (Jeremiah 17:9). It defiles the whole man (Matthew 15:19, 20); resists, as in the case of Pharaoh, the repeated call of God (Exodus 7:13)

The soul is far from being neutral…


_________________
Colin Murray

 2013/8/6 5:38Profile









 Re:

Colin wrote "The corruption of human nature is clearly taught in Scripture and brought into connection with the heart (soul)."

Yes it is true that it is corrupt, but that is due to its serving Satan. In itself it is neutral. It becomes what it serves. When God performs the miracle of a new heart, and it is washed clean, then it is freed to serve God.

Not everything in man's nature is corrupted though. The instincts God gave him are not sin. They can serve sin though.

 2013/8/6 5:52









 Re:

Quote:
I agree that it’s not a Spirit but I disagree that it’s not “spiritual” in nature; I would go as far to say it’s highly spiritual in nature, the soul in a man is the gateway between the spiritual and the natural world.

Quote: Did Adam lose his soul? Did he become an automaton? Did he forever lose his ability to feel emotions? No Adam continued to exercise his whole being; mind, heart and volition.

Back to the garden of Eden, what did man eat in the garden the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, how did that affect man or the soul of man. With Adams spirit being dead what stepped up to plate, the soul which was empowered by eating of the fruit. So we went from being led by the spirit to being led by the soul Colin



Just to address one small part Colin of what you have shared.


There are many threads or truths in what is being said by all parties on this subject of entire sanctification and what that means. I know that some brethren do understand that in the fullest and most pressing sense of what sanctification means to the believer, it it understood firstly as Christ our sanctifier in His own body. This itself has to do with the spirit. It is only the spirit of a man which first benefits from Christ’ death and resurrection. After this there is the matter of personal sanctification or walking or else personal holiness.

What I am concerned with is not the first or the second but a third claim which has to do with a one time event, and which has been called the second blessing. Behind this teaching lies a number of very real and profound heresies. This fact does not need to be argued because the effect is clearly visible even in the posts which seek to assert the claim on this site. It would be possible to go into these heresies and list them one by one and demonstrate their fault and the wrong emphasis which they impute in the minds of others who receive them as well as the lies which arise out of these assertions. Yet that would be to do no more than many others have done and it would produce the same inevitable outcome. In truth it would produce even more heresies and even more divisions because it would divide that which is in fact unified. This unity is the purpose of the Father in Christ Jesus to all men regardless of the attitudes and activities of men.

To circumnavigate these heresies and lies it is necessary to see things from the Father’s point of view. This is what I am trying to do, hence why I use natural realities of life itself to make the point. Some brethren just love theologies and systems. I hate them because they make room for every kind of error by their very nature. Truth is not a system or a theology. It is manifestly Christ Himself and all that is in Him.

So for example you speak about the heart being wicked and deceitful above all else as a way of drawing attention to the soul. In this you say the soul is not neutral. Yet when Jesus dealt with the presentation of truth to the moms and dads who were listening to Him He drew attention to more than one simple reality. “If you being evil know how to give good things” is a saying which Jesus addressed to the common people, with regard to feeding their children. So how can it be that a man can be both evil and yet at the same time do good things? For me the answer lies in the very nature of the soul and what it is. Why it is both evil in the sense which the Lord comprehended and spoke of and why it is capable of doing good as well. The evil is the Father’ estimation of that which motivates the individual and the good is the restraint naturally speaking which men and women do when they do that which is a restraint of God in their lives. It is for this reason that we say someone who is cruel and perverse with their children are “unnatural”. Nothing is more fundamental than feeding your children. To withhold food is unnatural yet in the very act of feeding your children you are serving yourself because they come from your own body as well by reason of a natural restraint of God to do so in the body itself. The same is true of marriage of a man to a woman and vice versa. In order to do otherwise it is necessary to actually act unnaturally. In short to desire a man as a man is to act unnaturally. To refuse to feed your children and yet to eat yourself it unnatural.

Why do men desire women? It is because this is the very restraining influence which is on all men. To have any other desire is to overthrown the nature which God gave. Yet in that endeavour the soul itself is drawn by the body and the body by the soul in unclean and perverse thoughts to sin. It is in simplicity a giving up by agreement with oneself and ones own body, being led along into an unnatural outcome by reason of desiring it. In the end homosexuality benefits the man or the woman no more than eating straw benefits the body by reason of being full. It is entirely a sensation of the body. If we then justify these things we make of them a mind to persist in it and a claim that it is natural and reasonable. It is like claiming that to eat straw is natural and reasonable. Until the death which results from such activities finally comes about the soul may never comprehend the snare of agreeing with a physical sensation and making of it an unnatural mind of desire.

The scripture tells us that he who loves his wife loves himself. If the woman did not produce an effect of physical sensations and affection for the man he would not desire a woman at all. For me the problem arises in a failure to comprehend Adam’s sin in the first instance. Theology would assert so many doctrines about what happened in Genesis and in that would lay claim to Satan’s ambition, as if this could have been Adam’s at all; as well as claiming things for Adam which are not explicitly stated. So we continuously read that Adam himself wanted to be like God even as Satan desires to be like God. This is insightful as far as how men in all generations can behave, yet it has nothing whatsoever to do with what happened to Adam and nor is it the explanation as to why he sinned or what his sin really was. As to what Adam’s sin was therefore it is not necessary to look any further than his love for his wife both physically and emotionally.

To speak therefore of the heart being desperately wicked above all else is to speak of a condition arising from sin which makes all men permanently inclined to selfishness. All selfishness is a denial of God, as it does in fact set oneself above God. At best we could say that self awareness and self interest is an inclination to always be independent. Yet all such independence is a denial of the Father and ultimately it is a denial of the works of the Father which were given to the Son, even Christ.

Why then did God make man in such a way that it was “not a good” for him [man] to dwell alone? If dwelling alone had been Adam’s portion and nature, he would have been content to do so. As it was he was unable to comprehend in all other creatures a similitude of soul and an abscence of a desire to know any creature come into his presence, physically. This is the meaning of naming the creatures it is a zoological exercise in naming, by reason of comprehending the nature and character of all created things as defined by Genesis. None whatsoever, even in their perfect estate, were equal to him or possessed a soul like his own. They were not his to fellowship with emotionally or physically as though his equal. They were inadequate even though they were good. They could not meet his most basic physical and emotional needs.

This is why I believe the Lord always addressed peoples lives at their most basis level. Relationships with others, food and clothes are the sum of them. It isn’t necessary to move beyond these things to comprehend what the Father has accomplished in Christ. To do so is to press into knowledge [gnosis] and to become content with that which is not naturally speaking capable of providing contentment. This is Paul’s “with these things shall we be content” saying. Knowledge does not produce contentment only obedience can produce true contentment and only then when we are satisfied with the most basis things in life.

This business of entire sanctification and all of its offshoots is well beyond what is necessary for obedience. If we were constrained by natural and reasonable affections we would be more fully obedient to God than if we were simply driven or else informed [gnosticism] by knowledge and how we perceive such knowledge benefits us. Without knowledge we will perish yet we have to ask ourselves did the Father really intend us to be theologians and purveyors of systems? The soul and the body are intrinsically linked in a way in which the spirit is not. When Jesus died He gave up His spirit to the Father’s keeping in heaven. Yet his soul went down into Sheol where He preached freedom for those in captivity. The soul is bound up with the physical body until it is parted by physical death of the body. Yet in life it takes from the body itself a dependancy of effects and restraints which when it attends to them are good things or else evil by reason of the power of sin and death working in its members. Such is marriage of a man to a woman, food for the body and for our children and clothes.

In speaking about the evil heart we are really speaking about the self reliance and independent inclination which arise after the fall. Yet even Adam though innocent and without sin, being deceived not, created first and in the knowledge of God, found in experience that he was inclined by self interest to listen to the voice of his wife, and neglected obedience to God. No man has sinned after the likeness of Adam’s sin. Why? Because no one was ever become a fully grown man and innocent. Yet Adam for all of his innocence sinned. Unless we understand why this is possible we will have no way of arriving at a simple and truly biblical understanding of why the heart is evil, yet the soul is capable of doing good. Christ became a fully grown man and was without sin. He was innocent, without guilt of sin yet He would not permit Himself to be called good. The sufferings of Christ are more fully comprehended in His treatment by men, giving rise to temptations, slanders, insults than are visible in His physical death by the cross. This is because in all of these things Christ denied Himself. He denied the very same physical and emotional needs which all other men have including the need not to be alone. Yet He was in the end alone even unto death of the cross.

Entire sanctification when constructed into a theology attempts to address this inherent problem of self yet it does so by implicitly inferring or else stating (as in some instances) that the soul itself is regenerated and so if this is true then there must be a basis for saying “I sin no more”. I am afraid I reject this explanation completely and I do not see it as an answer to the continued problem of sin in the life of the believer who is truly regenerate in their spirit, but their soul’s being dependent and bound up with the body of sin, cannot but take account of these affects save by one means. It is the cross of Christ. It is more specifically “One died for all therefore all have died”. It is “a body Thou hast prepared for me” it is Christ own body crucified for sin. No one can annihilate the self inclinations of the soul. They can only be denied by the power of a crucified life hidden in Christ, being born again of His Spirit. It is all Christ and none of a man.

The original article does what men are inclined to do if they do not see things from the Father’s perspective. They seek to lay wast to those things which they see as errors in others thinking, by making yet more doctrines and theologies; things which are useless to the saints and never will produce true godliness.

 2013/8/6 7:40
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1529
Scotland, UK

 Re:

Quote by armkelly: What I am concerned with is not the first or the second but a third claim which has to do with a one time event, and which has been called the second blessing.

The second blessing is simply a purifying the heart by faith it is a work of the Spirit, there is two sides of baptism of the Spirit one is the gifts while the other is cleansing of the heart. Unfortunately in the church today we focus on the gifts and not the cleansing from Sin and Self.

Quote by armkelly: this teaching lies a number of very real and profound heresies.

Like any truth the devil will always send his false ministers in to pervert the truth and to bring reproach.

Quote by armkelly: To speak therefore of the heart being desperately wicked above all else is to speak of a condition arising from sin which makes all men permanently inclined to selfishness.

In God’s Kingdom, Jesus is Lord, in the world satan’s kingdom self is lord.

Quote by armkelly: In speaking about the evil heart we are really speaking about the self reliance and independent inclination which arise after the fall.

Quote by armkelly: It is “a body Thou hast prepared for me” it is Christ own body crucified for sin. No one can annihilate the self inclinations of the soul.

Now one word from our Lord Jesus (Matt. 22:37): "Jesus said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart."

You can feed your kids, you can be good to your wife but can have a heart that doesn’t love God… Then we can become a Christian and that selfish heart that independent inclination remains after conversion so you don’t love God with all your heart.

When you say the self-inclinations can’t be annihilated, I ask myself what do you mean, the desire for food, the desire to be sustained then I would agree it can’t be annihilated. If you mean the pride of life and the lust of the flesh then I would disagree with you because the Holy Spirit is more than able to transform us and to cause us to say with the whole heart I love you God

This scripture is often limited -- "The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts." It has been understood it means the love of God to us. The love of God is always the love of God in its fullness, a love of God to me that leaps back to Him in love, and overflows to our fellow men in love….

"The fruit of the Spirit is love." It is love that conquers and expels our selfishness.


_________________
Colin Murray

 2013/8/6 10:26Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy