In the immediate preceding chapters we have been presenting the biblical description of the state of bondage that sinners know. They are slaves of their own depraved natures, serving "various lusts and pleasures" (Titus 3:3), "fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind" (Eph. 2:3), "whose god is their belly" (Phil. 3:19), etc. They are also prisoners in shackles, as Paul said - "But the Scripture has imprisoned everything under sin's power" (Romans 11:32). As previously cited, Meyer's commentary said, sin has "brought all into ward under sin...sin has them, as it were, under lock and key." Sinful man is shackled and possessed by a wicked spirit, just like the Gadarene demoniac that was referred to earlier.
Wrote the great John Gill in his "Of Redemption by Christ" (Body of Doctrinal Divinity):
"...redemption stands in the first place and is a principal and most important blessing and doctrine of grace..." (see here)
I trust that those who have followed me in this series can give a hearty amen to this affirmation of the great doctor of theology.
Emancipation Of Sin's Prisoners
"I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house." (Isa. 42: 6-7)
"Thus saith the LORD, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages; That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Shew yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and their pastures shall be in all high places." (Isa. 49: 8-9)
Remember that this deliverance from prison is a case of redemption. This fact in seen in the popular movie "Shawshank Redemption," involving several elements of "redemption" as it involves prisoners.
First, there was deliverance, or an "escaping" (it hardly can be called a "release"); Although in this case the one redeemed effected his own deliverance or redemption by his own wit, will, and perseverance (unlike redemption by Christ). Second, there was "vindication" of the prisoner, a setting things right as regards justice, against a tyrannical warden. Third, there was "restoration" of lost fortunes via his deliverance and redemption. Thus, in these ways, Andy Dufresne, the escaped prisoner in the movie, experienced "redemption."
This deliverance from the bondage of sin or "bondage of corruption/depravity" to freedom in Christ occurs first in conversion, when a soul is "set free" from both the penalty of the law (justification) and from the tyrannical governing power of sin (transformation begun). Through the preaching of the gospel the Spirit brings sinners to faith and repentance and thus "breaks the power of canceled sin." In the gospel sinners imprisoned by their moral depravity are called to "go forth." Some who are called to this freedom reject the call, however, to their own loss.
As we have shown in previous postings, originally, "redemption" often denoted the payment of a price to secure the release of a prisoner of war. The word also came to be used of the release of a slave and sometimes of a person under sentence of death (Exod. 21:28-30). Redemption always means the payment of a price to secure release as well as the actual release of the prisoner or slave.
Commenting upon Isaiah 42:7, one of the passages cited at the head of this chapter, Dr. Gill wrote the following in his commentary:
To open the blind eyes - Of the idolatrous Gentiles, who were spiritually blind, and knew not the wretchedness of their case; the exceeding sinfulness of sin; their need of a Saviour, and who he was; as they did, when their eyes were opened by means of the Gospel sent among them, through the energy of the divine Spirit; for this is a work of almighty power and efficacious grace: to bring out the prisoners from the prison;
who were concluded in sin, shut up in unbelief, and under the law, the captives of Satan, and held fast prisoners by him and their own lusts, under the dominion of which they were: and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house:
of sin, Satan, and the law; being under which, they were in a state of darkness and ignorance as to things divine and spiritual. The allusion is to prisons, which are commonly dark places.
Commenting upon Isaiah 49: 9 he wrote:
That thou mayest say to the prisoners, go forth - God's covenant people, while unconverted, are prisoners; they are in the prison of sin, under the power and dominion of it, and under the guilt of it, and obligation to punishment for it; and they are in the prison of the law, they are transgressors of it, and are accused and convicted by it, and are condemned, and put in prison, and held there; and they are also Satan's prisoners, and are held and led captive by him at his will; and by virtue of the covenant, and the blood of it, these prisoners are set free; and Christ in the Gospel speaks unto them, and proclaims liberty to them; and by the knowledge of the truth they are made free, and are brought into the liberty of the children of God; and are bid to go forth, and they are brought forth from their prison houses; and bid to go to the house of God, and walk at liberty, enjoying all the privileges and ordinances of the Gospel: to them that are in darkness...in a state of nature and unregeneracy, which is a state of infidelity and ignorance; when men are in the dark, and know not themselves, nor their lost state and condition; nor the exceeding sinfulness of sin; nor Christ, and the way of salvation by him; nor the Spirit, and the operations of his grace; nor the Scriptures, and the doctrines of them..."
The experience of redemption occurs first in conversion and is continuously experienced in greater length as the believer is progressively transformed into the image of Christ in sanctification.
Debtor's Prisons
Wrote Gill:
"The buying again of an Israelite, waxen poor, and sold to another, by any near akin to him; is a lively representation of the purchase and redemption of the Lord's poor people, #Le 25:47-49 who, in a state of nature, are poor, and wretched, and miserable; even so as to be like beggars on the dunghill; when such was the grace of Christ, who, though rich, for their sakes became poor, that they, through his poverty might be made rich; and to such a degree, as to be raised from the dunghill and sit among princes, and inherit the throne of glory. Though some may not sell themselves to work wickedness, as Ahab did, yet all are sold under sin; for if this was the case of the apostle Paul, though regenerate, much more must it be the case of an unregenerate man; who, through sin, is brought into subjection to it, a servant of it, and a slave to it; as the poor Israelite, sold to a stranger, was a bondman to him: and such an one cannot redeem himself, being without strength, unable to fulfil the law, and to make atonement for sin; nor can any of his friends, though ever so rich, redeem him, or give to God a ransom for him; such may redeem a poor relation, or friend from a prison, by paying his pecuniary debts for him; but cannot redeem his soul from hell and destruction; may give a ransom price to man for one in slavery and bondage; but cannot give to God a ransom to deliver from wrath to come: only Christ, the near Kinsman of his people, can do this, and has done it; he that is their "Gaol", their near "Kinsman", partaker of the same flesh and blood with them, is their Redeemer, who has given himself a ransom for them."
Debtor's prisons were outlawed in this country in 1833 and for good reason. (Note: sadly, they are making a comeback in this country! But, that is another story) But, throughout the history of the world there has been many a person who spent much, if not all, of their lives in prison for not being able to pay a debt. This certainly was true in Jesus' day. (See for instance Matt. 18: 23-33)
When a sinner turns to the Lord in repentance and faith, his sins are immediately discharged or forgiven. This is what the apostles preached everywhere to every man. "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out" (Acts 3: 19 KJV).
Gill continued:
"The delivery of a debtor from prison, by paying his debts for him, is an emblem of deliverance and redemption by Christ: a man that is in debt, is liable to be arrested, and cast into prison, as is often the case; where he must lie till the debt his discharged, by himself or another: sins are debts; and a sinner owes more than ten thousand talents, and has nothing to pay; he cannot answer to the justice of God for one debt of a thousand; nor can he, by paying a debt of obedience he owes to God, pay off one debt of sin, or obligation to punishment; and so is liable to a prison, and is in one; is concluded under sin, under the guilt of it, which exposes him to punishment; and he is held with the cords and fetters of it; which he cannot loose himself from; and he is shut up under the law, in which he is held, until delivered and released by Christ; who, as he has engaged to pay the debts of his people, has paid them, cleared the whole score, and blotted out the hand writing that was against them; in consequence of which is proclaimed, in the gospel, liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; and in the effectual calling Christ says "to the prisoners", "Go forth", opening the prison doors for them; and to them that sit in darkness, in the gloomy cells of the prison, "show yourselves"; all which is done in virtue of the redemption price paid by Christ for his people."
Deliverance from debtor prison is a case of redemption.
Gill continued:
"...redemption by Christ is nothing more nor less than buying his people out of the hands of justice, in which they are held for sin; and that is with the price of his blood and in virtue of this they are delivered from the dominion of sin; for though this is done in the effectual calling, by the power of divine grace, it is in virtue of redemption by Christ, by whom sin is crucified, and the body of it destroyed; so that it shall not reign in them, or have dominion over them: one branch of redemption lies in being delivered from a vain conversation; and, ere long, the redeemed shall be delivered from the very being of sin; when their redemption, as to the application of it, will be complete; as it will be in the resurrection; when the soul will not only be among the spirits of just men made perfect; but the body will be clear of sin, mortality, and death; which is called redemption that draws near, the redemption of the body waited for, and the day of redemption, #Lu 21:28 Ro 8:23 Eph 1:14 4:30."
Notice that Gill says that deliverance from a vain conversation is "one branch of redemption." This is the very point I have been stressing in the past few chapters in this series.
Prisoners Of Hope
"As for thee also, by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water. Turn you to the strong hold, ye prisoners of hope: even to day do I declare that I will render double unto thee; When I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow with Ephraim, and raised up thy sons, O Zion, against thy sons, O Greece, and made thee as the sword of a mighty man." (Zech. 9:11-13)
In preaching upon these verses the venerable C.H. Spurgeon said:
"Do all of you, dear friends, know anything about the pit wherein is no water? Were you ever conscious of being in it? Regarding it as a state of spiritual distress, do you understand what it means to be in such a comfortless condition? It was a common custom, in the past, to put prisoners into deep pits which had been dug in the earth. The sides were usually steep and perpendicular—and the prisoner who was dropped down into such a pit must remain there without any hope of escape. According to our text, there was no water there, and, apparently, no food of any kind. The objective of the captors was to leave the prisoner there to be forgotten as a dead man out of mind. Have you ever, in your experience, realized anything like that? There was a time, with some of us, when we suddenly woke up to find that all our fancied goodness had vanished, that all our hopes had perished, and that we, ourselves, were in the comfortless condition of men in a pit without even a single drop of water to mitigate our burning thirst!...If I sought after water in my comfortless condition, I only found myself to be more intensely eaten up with thirst! Do you know what all this means? You need to know it, for this is the condition into which God usually brings His children before He reveals Himself to them!"
Spurgeon continued:
"The condition of being shut up in a pit wherein is no water is not only comfortless, but it is also hopeless. How can such a prisoner escape? He looks up out of the pit, and sees, far above him, a little circle of light, but he knows that it is impossible for him to climb up there. Perhaps he attempts it, but, if so, he falls back and injures himself—and there must he lie, out of sight, and out of hearing, at the bottom of that deep pit—with none to help him, and quite unable to help himself. Such is the condition into which an awakened conscience brings a man. He sees himself to be lost through his sin, and he discovers that the law of God is so intensely severe—though not unduly so—and the justice of God is so stern, though not too stern—that he cannot possibly hope for any help from them in his efforts to escape out of the pit in which he lies fallen as a helpless, hopeless prisoner!"
Spurgeon, like his predecessor, believed that it is in being converted that a sinner experiences his coming out of the prison of sin. Spurgeon also said - "But concerning those who have believed in Jesus, our text is true, and God can say, “I have sent forth your prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water.”
Spurgeon said further:
"There is this further comfort that if He has set us free, we are free indeed. It is only God who can deliver a conscience in bondage—and when it is delivered by Him, it need not be afraid of being dragged back to prison anymore. If a criminal breaks out of his cell, and is found at any time by the officers of the law, he may be arrested, and taken back to prison. But if the sovereign of the realm has set him free, he is not afraid of all the policemen in the world! He walks about the streets as a man who has a right to his liberty because of the authority which has granted it to him. Now, believer, God has brought you up out of all your trouble because of your sin. He has delivered you from all sense of guilt concerning it, and as He has done it, you are not afraid that it has been done unjustly, and you are, therefore, not afraid that you will be re-committed to prison..."
In our next entry we will continue looking at present redemption via conversion and sanctification.
Thursday, December 20, 2018
Wednesday, December 19, 2018
Elder Grigg Thompson & Neo Hardshellism
All Hardshells consider Elder Wilson Thompson to be one of the founding fathers of their denomination. This has always been surprising to me seeing he held some very strange views. He would not be accepted into their fellowship were he to appear today. However, Wilson's eldest son, Grigg, was also a first generation leader of the "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists, preaching extensively among them in the important decades of the 1830s through the 1850s. He was the one generally called upon to defend the new Hardshell denomination in public debate on the issues involved in the separation. His published sermons and other writings are generally looked highly favorably upon by Hardshells since his day. I have cited from his writings many times over the years and have used them to show how far removed today's Pbs are from their original moorings.
In talking about "regeneration" Grigg Thompson wrote (emphasis mine):
"It is not a mere change of conduct, but a change of state and condition, they that were once darkness are now light in the Lord; Eph., v, 8; they that were dead in sin are now quickened with Christ; Eph., ii, 5. The soul that was filled with despair and felt that he was under the wrath of God, and that his sins must forever separate him from his God, sees the thick cloud removed, the Sun of righteousness shines upon his soul, and God comforts him; Isa., xil, 1. You that have felt this change, will never forget "that day," that happy day, "when Jesus took your guilt away," and filled your soul with hope and love. It was the day of your espousal when the mutual pledges of love were given, and without a doubt or fear you could say, "My beloved is mine, and I am his;" Songs, ii, 16."
Can you not see, my Hardshell brothers, how this description of "regeneration" is far removed from how it is described by you all today? Isn't Thompson's description of regeneration more like conversion? It certainly is contrary to the view of Elder Sarrels and his "systematic theology" of Hardshell doctrine. To Sarrels, a person who is "regenerated" has learned nothing. It is all "below the level of consciousness." The truth is, the first generation of Hardshells did not believe a man was "born again," or made a new creature in Christ, until he was converted and made a conscious believer in Jesus.
Does regeneration make one sad or happy? It seems clear that Grigg believed that it made one happy. I have written on this previously. See Does Regeneration Make Sinners Happy? (here)
Thompson continued:
"Whatever have been the trials, afflictions, doubts, and fears, you have passed through since "that day," you still look back to and date your spiritual existence from that time. Paul never forgot the day when he traveled towards Damascus, and the light shone around him, and by the power of God's grace and Spirit, he was changed from a persecutor to a servant and friend of Jesus. "If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature;" in regeneration the affections of his soul are changed so that he loves the things he once hated. His conscience was dead, seared as, with a hot iron, hard and without feeling, full of guilt and condemnation, but is now made alive, is purged, is tender, watchful, and full of peace; Heb.. ix, 14. His will was rebellious, inflexible, and opposed to God, but is now obedient to the will of the Lord; Ps., ex, 3. His desires were once carnal, sensual, and pursued the vanities of the world, but now delight in God; Isa., xxvi, 8. His love was fixed upon earthly objects, was carnal and fleshly, now it is swallowed up in the infinite excellencies of God and of Christ; Ps., cxix, 97. The joys and delights of the soul were once in the trifles and vanities of this world, now its rejoicing is in Christ Jesus; Phil., iii, 3. His cares and his fears were once about worldly things, now he loves, fears, and reverences God; Acts, ix, 31. Once sin was his delight, now it is the object of his dread; II-Cor., 7, 11. Once his expectations raised no higher than this world, and were of the world, but now from above; Heb. vi, 19. And look not to the things that are seen, but to the things that are not seen; II Cor., iv, 18. Once they yielded their members servants to uncleanness and iniquity, but now to righteousness and holiness; Rom. vi, 19. The change is a great one and those who have experienced it may well be called new creatures, created in Christ Jesus unto good works; Eph., ii, 10." (From "The Primitive Preacher," and section titled "A New Creature," by Elder Grigg Thompson)
Is that not clear?
In talking about "regeneration" Grigg Thompson wrote (emphasis mine):
"It is not a mere change of conduct, but a change of state and condition, they that were once darkness are now light in the Lord; Eph., v, 8; they that were dead in sin are now quickened with Christ; Eph., ii, 5. The soul that was filled with despair and felt that he was under the wrath of God, and that his sins must forever separate him from his God, sees the thick cloud removed, the Sun of righteousness shines upon his soul, and God comforts him; Isa., xil, 1. You that have felt this change, will never forget "that day," that happy day, "when Jesus took your guilt away," and filled your soul with hope and love. It was the day of your espousal when the mutual pledges of love were given, and without a doubt or fear you could say, "My beloved is mine, and I am his;" Songs, ii, 16."
Can you not see, my Hardshell brothers, how this description of "regeneration" is far removed from how it is described by you all today? Isn't Thompson's description of regeneration more like conversion? It certainly is contrary to the view of Elder Sarrels and his "systematic theology" of Hardshell doctrine. To Sarrels, a person who is "regenerated" has learned nothing. It is all "below the level of consciousness." The truth is, the first generation of Hardshells did not believe a man was "born again," or made a new creature in Christ, until he was converted and made a conscious believer in Jesus.
Does regeneration make one sad or happy? It seems clear that Grigg believed that it made one happy. I have written on this previously. See Does Regeneration Make Sinners Happy? (here)
Thompson continued:
"Whatever have been the trials, afflictions, doubts, and fears, you have passed through since "that day," you still look back to and date your spiritual existence from that time. Paul never forgot the day when he traveled towards Damascus, and the light shone around him, and by the power of God's grace and Spirit, he was changed from a persecutor to a servant and friend of Jesus. "If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature;" in regeneration the affections of his soul are changed so that he loves the things he once hated. His conscience was dead, seared as, with a hot iron, hard and without feeling, full of guilt and condemnation, but is now made alive, is purged, is tender, watchful, and full of peace; Heb.. ix, 14. His will was rebellious, inflexible, and opposed to God, but is now obedient to the will of the Lord; Ps., ex, 3. His desires were once carnal, sensual, and pursued the vanities of the world, but now delight in God; Isa., xxvi, 8. His love was fixed upon earthly objects, was carnal and fleshly, now it is swallowed up in the infinite excellencies of God and of Christ; Ps., cxix, 97. The joys and delights of the soul were once in the trifles and vanities of this world, now its rejoicing is in Christ Jesus; Phil., iii, 3. His cares and his fears were once about worldly things, now he loves, fears, and reverences God; Acts, ix, 31. Once sin was his delight, now it is the object of his dread; II-Cor., 7, 11. Once his expectations raised no higher than this world, and were of the world, but now from above; Heb. vi, 19. And look not to the things that are seen, but to the things that are not seen; II Cor., iv, 18. Once they yielded their members servants to uncleanness and iniquity, but now to righteousness and holiness; Rom. vi, 19. The change is a great one and those who have experienced it may well be called new creatures, created in Christ Jesus unto good works; Eph., ii, 10." (From "The Primitive Preacher," and section titled "A New Creature," by Elder Grigg Thompson)
Is that not clear?
Hardshell Mysticism & Esoteric Christianity
In previous postings I have contended that "The Primitive Baptist Church" of today has become a cult, a secret society, a kind of "mystery religion." In some of those postings I cited these words from Hardshell leaders of the past and present.
Elder Lasserre Bradley, Jr. wrote:
"Mysticism has had its influence among our people."
Elder Lemuel Potter (Hardshell leader at the end of the 19th century) wrote:
"About half a century ago metaphysics was introduced among the Old School Baptists..."
(See my posting here for these citations)
See Also These Postings
Hardshell Cults "Key"
Hardshellism & Masonry & The Irony
In an Internet article we find this heading:
Question: "What is Esoteric Christianity?" (here)
Here is the reply:
Answer: Esoteric means “requiring special knowledge to understand; designed for only a select few.” Esoteric Christianity, then, would be a version of “Christianity” that can only be understood or practiced by those who have been properly initiated in secret knowledge. Esoteric Christianity teaches that Christianity is a mystery religion and that only a small minority of people ever achieve the enlightenment necessary to crack the arcane teachings of the Bible and truly know God.
Esoteric Christianity views “salvation” as a stepping stone to greater truths. The Christian should not be satisfied with just being “saved” but with being “enlightened” and reaching “spiritual liberation.” Esoteric Christianity promotes introspection with the goal of attaining the knowledge of Self. Repentance, to an Esoteric Christian, is the “turning in” of one’s thoughts toward oneself and away from the world.
For those of us who have been in this cult, we know how true this description is of "The Primitive Baptist Church" as we generally find it today.
Next, from his fine work Christianity Through The Centuries (CTTC) noted Church historian Dr. Earle Cairns tells us that:
"The Quakers appeared on the English religious scene during the chaotic period of the Civil War and the Commonwealth. They set aside the doctrines of an organized church and the Bible as the sole and final revelation of God’s will in favor of the doctrine of the Inner Light, by which they meant that the Holy Spirit can give immediate and direct knowledge of God apart from the Bible." (381)
Is this not what Hardshells also teach?
Elder Lasserre Bradley, Jr. wrote:
"Mysticism has had its influence among our people."
Elder Lemuel Potter (Hardshell leader at the end of the 19th century) wrote:
"About half a century ago metaphysics was introduced among the Old School Baptists..."
(See my posting here for these citations)
See Also These Postings
Hardshell Cults "Key"
Hardshellism & Masonry & The Irony
In an Internet article we find this heading:
Question: "What is Esoteric Christianity?" (here)
Here is the reply:
Answer: Esoteric means “requiring special knowledge to understand; designed for only a select few.” Esoteric Christianity, then, would be a version of “Christianity” that can only be understood or practiced by those who have been properly initiated in secret knowledge. Esoteric Christianity teaches that Christianity is a mystery religion and that only a small minority of people ever achieve the enlightenment necessary to crack the arcane teachings of the Bible and truly know God.
Esoteric Christianity views “salvation” as a stepping stone to greater truths. The Christian should not be satisfied with just being “saved” but with being “enlightened” and reaching “spiritual liberation.” Esoteric Christianity promotes introspection with the goal of attaining the knowledge of Self. Repentance, to an Esoteric Christian, is the “turning in” of one’s thoughts toward oneself and away from the world.
For those of us who have been in this cult, we know how true this description is of "The Primitive Baptist Church" as we generally find it today.
Next, from his fine work Christianity Through The Centuries (CTTC) noted Church historian Dr. Earle Cairns tells us that:
"The Quakers appeared on the English religious scene during the chaotic period of the Civil War and the Commonwealth. They set aside the doctrines of an organized church and the Bible as the sole and final revelation of God’s will in favor of the doctrine of the Inner Light, by which they meant that the Holy Spirit can give immediate and direct knowledge of God apart from the Bible." (381)
Is this not what Hardshells also teach?
Tuesday, December 18, 2018
"They That Are Christ's" (ii)
In this short follow up, I want to share some of my notes on this passage that were not included in the previous posting.
John MacArthur wrote:
"In each of those three passages, “crucified” is simply a vivid and dramatic way to say “killed,” or “executed.” In the first two passages Paul is teaching that at salvation his old, sinful, unregenerate self was executed and he was born a new man in Christ Jesus. In the third passage he is saying that the world has been executed and is now dead to him, so that it is no longer his master, holding him in bondage. He is therefore now free to serve the Lord."
MacArthur also wrote:
"Obviously, in none of those passages does Paul mean to imply that the crucifixion analogy carries the idea of total death, in which all influence ceases. Sin was still a reality in his life, and so was the temptation of the world. But there was a sense in which the power of the old self and of the world was broken. Those influences no longer dominated him."
I agree. But, more on this shortly. However, instead of saying "total death," I would have rather said that in conversion the sinner by faith nails his "old man," or "the flesh," including "the self" (or "ego"), "the world," etc., to the cross and this act begins the death process. Death by crucifixion was not instantaneous but slow. So it is with the death of the flesh with its affections and lusts.
MacArthur wrote:
"In the text of Galatians 5:24, Paul is saying that the flesh has been executed. But how could that be in light of what he has just said in this chapter about believers having a constant war with the ever-present flesh? In what sense is the flesh killed at conversion?
UBS Handbook writes that have crucified "is, of course, a figurative expression, suggesting a connection between this action of the believer and the death of Jesus Christ on the cross. The verb is in the aorist tense, suggesting either that the action took place in the past (at conversion...) or that the action resulted in a complete and decisive change...this action is presently reflected in the experience of every believer... (The United Bible Societies' New Testament Handbook Series)
Beet "Notice three crucifixions in this Epistle; of Paul, of the flesh and its desires, and of the world. Each of these implies the others. In each case crucified denotes death in virtue of Christ’s death on the cross and by union with the Crucified.
Constable - The Christian has crucified the flesh in the sense that when he or she trusted Christ God broke the domination of his or her sinful nature. While we still have a sinful human nature, it does not control us as it did before we trusted in Christ (cf. Ro 6:6–7). Paul said we, not God, have crucified it. We did this when we trusted in Jesus Christ as our Savior (cf. Gal 2:20). Therefore it is inconsistent for us to return to the flesh. “Passions” (Gr. pathemata, cf. Ro 7:5) are the outward expression of inner “desires” (Gr. epithumiai, cf. Gal 5:16). In another sense we need to continually crucify the flesh by choosing to yield to the Spirit (Gal 5:16, 18, 25; Ro 8:13; Col. 3:5). (Galatians)
Yes, what was first done in conversion and regeneration is done continuously. Did we repent when we were born again? Have we stopped repenting? Did we believe when we came to Christ? Have we stopped believing? Did we turn our backs upon our egos, upon the world, and upon trusting in our own works for salvation, when the Lord taught us by his word and Spirit? Did we stop or did we continue to turn our backs?
Spurgeon in the Christian Illustrator wrote the following on Crucifixion of the flesh.
Crucifixion of the flesh: — Men who believe in Jesus become purer, holier, better. They are saved from living as they used to live — saved from licentiousness, dishonesty, drunkenness, selfishness, and any other sin they may have lived in. They are different men. There is a change in their heart and soul, conduct and conversation.
I. THE RECEPTION OF JESUS CHRIST BY FAITH IS, IN ITSELF, AN AVOWAL THAT WE HAVE CRUCIFIED THE FLESH, WITH THE AFFECTIONS AND LUSTS.
Christ died in our room and stead. By faith we regard ourselves as dead with Him.
II. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE RECEPTION OF CHRIST IS ATTENDED WITH THE CRUCIFIXION OF SIN.
Every truly converted man is a proof of this.
III. THE RECEPTION OF JESUS CHRIST INTO THE HEART BY SIMPLE FAITH IS CALCULATED TO CRUCIFY THE FLESH.
1. The believer has seen the evil of sin. It is a deicide — a killing of God.
2. He has seen in the death of Christ an amazing instance of the great grace of God.
3. He has had a view of the justice of God.
4. He has seen the amazing love of Jesus. How, then, can he go on grieving and offending Him?
IV. THE HOLY SPIRIT IS WITH THE GOSPEL, AND WHERE HE IS HOLINESS MUST BE PROMOTED.
Wherever Jesus Christ is preached, there is present One sublime in rank and high in degree — the ever-blessed Spirit of God. He takes of the things of Christ, and shows them unto men. His power changes the current of men’s desires, making them crucify the flesh and its affections, and love things holy, just, and true."
John Stott, the well known theologian and bible commentator, wrote (emphasis mine):
"We must crucify the flesh...This verse is frequently misunderstood. Please notice that the ‘crucifixion’ of the flesh described here is something that is done not to us but by us. It is we ourselves who are said to ‘have crucified the flesh’."
This is what was emphasized in my previous posting on this subject. Though the crucifixion is done by the sinner in his conversion, it is nevertheless certain that all those who belong to Christ are by the grace and power of God made to do so.
Stott continued:
"Perhaps I can best expose the popular misconception by saying that Galatians 5:24 does not teach the same truth as Galatians 2:20 or Romans 6:6. In those verses we are told that by faith-union with Christ we have been crucified with Him. But here it is we who have taken action. We ‘have crucified’ our old nature. It is not now a ‘dying’ which we have experienced through union with Christ; it is rather a deliberate ‘putting to death’.
What does it mean? Paul borrows the image of crucifixion, of course, from Christ Himself who said:
If any man would come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me (Mk. 8:34)
To ‘take up the cross’ was our Lord’s vivid figure of speech for self-denial. Every follower of Christ is to behave like a condemned criminal and carry his cross to the place of execution. Now Paul takes the metaphor to its logical conclusion. We must not only take up our cross and walk with it, but actually see that the execution takes place. We are actually to take the flesh, our willful and wayward self, and (metaphorically speaking) nail it to the cross. This is Paul’s graphic description of repentance, of turning our back on the old life of selfishness and sin, repudiating it finally and utterly..."
Stott continued:
"The Greek verb is in the aorist tense, indicating that this is something we did decisively at the moment of conversion. When we came to Jesus Christ, we repented. We ‘crucified’ everything we knew to be wrong. We took our old self-centered nature, with all its sinful passions and desires, and nailed it to the cross. And this repentance of ours was decisive, as decisive as a crucifixion. So, Paul says, if we crucified the flesh, we must leave it there to die. We must renew every day this attitude towards sin of ruthless and uncompromising rejection. In the language of Jesus, as Luke records it, every Christian must take up his cross daily (Luke 9:23)." (Stott, J. R. W. The Message of Galatians: Only one way. Leicester, England; Downer's Grove, Ill., U.S.A.: Inter-Varsity Press)
That is clearly "spot on."
Stott continued:
"J. Brown describes the continual putting to death of the flesh with all its sinful passions and desires in this way:
“Crucifixion…produced death not suddenly but gradually...True Christians do not succeed in completely destroying it (that is the flesh) while here below; but they have fixed it to the cross and they are determined to keep it there till it expires.”
That is well stated! The action of conversion, of repentance, is the action of nailing the flesh, the world, etc., to the cross! And, we are determined to keep it there and watch it die!
James Montgomery Boice explains that in Galatians 5:24 Paul...
"reminds his readers that when they came to Christ, they repented fully of the works of the flesh and indeed turned their backs on them forever. This act they must sustain. In speaking of this radical repentance, Paul uses the vivid image of crucifixion. This is an image he has used in other places; it was a favorite with him. But here he uses it in a slightly different way from the way he used it in Romans 6:6 or Galatians 2:20, for example. In these other instances, the verb is in the passive voice ("was crucified," "have been crucified"), and the reference is to what has been done for the believer as a result of Christ's death. But in this passage the verb is in the active voice ("have crucified") and points rather to what the believer has himself done and must continue to regard as being done. The proper term to describe this act is repentance. Thus the believer in Christ has already repented of his former way of life to the degree of actually having executed the old nature. This does not mean that the battle is thereby over forever. As in an actual crucifixion, life lingers even though the criminal has been nailed to the cross. Nevertheless, the believer is to regard the decisive act as having been done. He is not to seek to remove from the cross what has once been nailed there." (Gaebelein, F, Editor: Expositor's Bible Commentary 6-Volume New Testament. Zondervan Publishing)
Again, well said!
Wrote John Gill in his commentary:
"And in consequence of this crucifixion of the body of sin, with Christ upon the cross, when he finished and made an end of it, sin, with its passions and lusts, is crucified by the Spirit of God in regeneration and sanctification; so that it loses its governing power, and has not the dominion it had before: not but that the flesh, or corrupt nature, with its evil affections, and carnal lusts, are still in being, and are alive; as a person fastened to a cross may be alive, though he cannot act and move as before, being under restraints, so the old man, though crucified, and under the restraints of mighty grace, and cannot reign and govern as before, yet is alive, and acts, and operates, and oftentimes has great sway and influence; but whereas he is deprived of his reigning power, he is said to be crucified: and though this act is ascribed to them that are Christ's, yet not as done by them in their own strength, who are not able to grapple with one corruption, but as under the influence of the grace of Christ, and through the power of his Spirit; see (Romans 8:13)."
Again, all these great men have truly explained how the experience of crucifixion is initially experienced in evangelical repentance and such a crucifixion guarantees that the thing crucified will in fact die. It is inevitable. Only fake believers would think of taking self and the flesh from off the cross and sparing their final death.
Have you crucified the flesh, sin, and the world? Are you determined to see them destroyed?
John MacArthur wrote:
"In each of those three passages, “crucified” is simply a vivid and dramatic way to say “killed,” or “executed.” In the first two passages Paul is teaching that at salvation his old, sinful, unregenerate self was executed and he was born a new man in Christ Jesus. In the third passage he is saying that the world has been executed and is now dead to him, so that it is no longer his master, holding him in bondage. He is therefore now free to serve the Lord."
MacArthur also wrote:
"Obviously, in none of those passages does Paul mean to imply that the crucifixion analogy carries the idea of total death, in which all influence ceases. Sin was still a reality in his life, and so was the temptation of the world. But there was a sense in which the power of the old self and of the world was broken. Those influences no longer dominated him."
I agree. But, more on this shortly. However, instead of saying "total death," I would have rather said that in conversion the sinner by faith nails his "old man," or "the flesh," including "the self" (or "ego"), "the world," etc., to the cross and this act begins the death process. Death by crucifixion was not instantaneous but slow. So it is with the death of the flesh with its affections and lusts.
MacArthur wrote:
"In the text of Galatians 5:24, Paul is saying that the flesh has been executed. But how could that be in light of what he has just said in this chapter about believers having a constant war with the ever-present flesh? In what sense is the flesh killed at conversion?
UBS Handbook writes that have crucified "is, of course, a figurative expression, suggesting a connection between this action of the believer and the death of Jesus Christ on the cross. The verb is in the aorist tense, suggesting either that the action took place in the past (at conversion...) or that the action resulted in a complete and decisive change...this action is presently reflected in the experience of every believer... (The United Bible Societies' New Testament Handbook Series)
Beet "Notice three crucifixions in this Epistle; of Paul, of the flesh and its desires, and of the world. Each of these implies the others. In each case crucified denotes death in virtue of Christ’s death on the cross and by union with the Crucified.
Constable - The Christian has crucified the flesh in the sense that when he or she trusted Christ God broke the domination of his or her sinful nature. While we still have a sinful human nature, it does not control us as it did before we trusted in Christ (cf. Ro 6:6–7). Paul said we, not God, have crucified it. We did this when we trusted in Jesus Christ as our Savior (cf. Gal 2:20). Therefore it is inconsistent for us to return to the flesh. “Passions” (Gr. pathemata, cf. Ro 7:5) are the outward expression of inner “desires” (Gr. epithumiai, cf. Gal 5:16). In another sense we need to continually crucify the flesh by choosing to yield to the Spirit (Gal 5:16, 18, 25; Ro 8:13; Col. 3:5). (Galatians)
Yes, what was first done in conversion and regeneration is done continuously. Did we repent when we were born again? Have we stopped repenting? Did we believe when we came to Christ? Have we stopped believing? Did we turn our backs upon our egos, upon the world, and upon trusting in our own works for salvation, when the Lord taught us by his word and Spirit? Did we stop or did we continue to turn our backs?
Spurgeon in the Christian Illustrator wrote the following on Crucifixion of the flesh.
Crucifixion of the flesh: — Men who believe in Jesus become purer, holier, better. They are saved from living as they used to live — saved from licentiousness, dishonesty, drunkenness, selfishness, and any other sin they may have lived in. They are different men. There is a change in their heart and soul, conduct and conversation.
I. THE RECEPTION OF JESUS CHRIST BY FAITH IS, IN ITSELF, AN AVOWAL THAT WE HAVE CRUCIFIED THE FLESH, WITH THE AFFECTIONS AND LUSTS.
Christ died in our room and stead. By faith we regard ourselves as dead with Him.
II. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE RECEPTION OF CHRIST IS ATTENDED WITH THE CRUCIFIXION OF SIN.
Every truly converted man is a proof of this.
III. THE RECEPTION OF JESUS CHRIST INTO THE HEART BY SIMPLE FAITH IS CALCULATED TO CRUCIFY THE FLESH.
1. The believer has seen the evil of sin. It is a deicide — a killing of God.
2. He has seen in the death of Christ an amazing instance of the great grace of God.
3. He has had a view of the justice of God.
4. He has seen the amazing love of Jesus. How, then, can he go on grieving and offending Him?
IV. THE HOLY SPIRIT IS WITH THE GOSPEL, AND WHERE HE IS HOLINESS MUST BE PROMOTED.
Wherever Jesus Christ is preached, there is present One sublime in rank and high in degree — the ever-blessed Spirit of God. He takes of the things of Christ, and shows them unto men. His power changes the current of men’s desires, making them crucify the flesh and its affections, and love things holy, just, and true."
John Stott, the well known theologian and bible commentator, wrote (emphasis mine):
"We must crucify the flesh...This verse is frequently misunderstood. Please notice that the ‘crucifixion’ of the flesh described here is something that is done not to us but by us. It is we ourselves who are said to ‘have crucified the flesh’."
This is what was emphasized in my previous posting on this subject. Though the crucifixion is done by the sinner in his conversion, it is nevertheless certain that all those who belong to Christ are by the grace and power of God made to do so.
Stott continued:
"Perhaps I can best expose the popular misconception by saying that Galatians 5:24 does not teach the same truth as Galatians 2:20 or Romans 6:6. In those verses we are told that by faith-union with Christ we have been crucified with Him. But here it is we who have taken action. We ‘have crucified’ our old nature. It is not now a ‘dying’ which we have experienced through union with Christ; it is rather a deliberate ‘putting to death’.
What does it mean? Paul borrows the image of crucifixion, of course, from Christ Himself who said:
If any man would come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me (Mk. 8:34)
To ‘take up the cross’ was our Lord’s vivid figure of speech for self-denial. Every follower of Christ is to behave like a condemned criminal and carry his cross to the place of execution. Now Paul takes the metaphor to its logical conclusion. We must not only take up our cross and walk with it, but actually see that the execution takes place. We are actually to take the flesh, our willful and wayward self, and (metaphorically speaking) nail it to the cross. This is Paul’s graphic description of repentance, of turning our back on the old life of selfishness and sin, repudiating it finally and utterly..."
Stott continued:
"The Greek verb is in the aorist tense, indicating that this is something we did decisively at the moment of conversion. When we came to Jesus Christ, we repented. We ‘crucified’ everything we knew to be wrong. We took our old self-centered nature, with all its sinful passions and desires, and nailed it to the cross. And this repentance of ours was decisive, as decisive as a crucifixion. So, Paul says, if we crucified the flesh, we must leave it there to die. We must renew every day this attitude towards sin of ruthless and uncompromising rejection. In the language of Jesus, as Luke records it, every Christian must take up his cross daily (Luke 9:23)." (Stott, J. R. W. The Message of Galatians: Only one way. Leicester, England; Downer's Grove, Ill., U.S.A.: Inter-Varsity Press)
That is clearly "spot on."
Stott continued:
"J. Brown describes the continual putting to death of the flesh with all its sinful passions and desires in this way:
“Crucifixion…produced death not suddenly but gradually...True Christians do not succeed in completely destroying it (that is the flesh) while here below; but they have fixed it to the cross and they are determined to keep it there till it expires.”
That is well stated! The action of conversion, of repentance, is the action of nailing the flesh, the world, etc., to the cross! And, we are determined to keep it there and watch it die!
James Montgomery Boice explains that in Galatians 5:24 Paul...
"reminds his readers that when they came to Christ, they repented fully of the works of the flesh and indeed turned their backs on them forever. This act they must sustain. In speaking of this radical repentance, Paul uses the vivid image of crucifixion. This is an image he has used in other places; it was a favorite with him. But here he uses it in a slightly different way from the way he used it in Romans 6:6 or Galatians 2:20, for example. In these other instances, the verb is in the passive voice ("was crucified," "have been crucified"), and the reference is to what has been done for the believer as a result of Christ's death. But in this passage the verb is in the active voice ("have crucified") and points rather to what the believer has himself done and must continue to regard as being done. The proper term to describe this act is repentance. Thus the believer in Christ has already repented of his former way of life to the degree of actually having executed the old nature. This does not mean that the battle is thereby over forever. As in an actual crucifixion, life lingers even though the criminal has been nailed to the cross. Nevertheless, the believer is to regard the decisive act as having been done. He is not to seek to remove from the cross what has once been nailed there." (Gaebelein, F, Editor: Expositor's Bible Commentary 6-Volume New Testament. Zondervan Publishing)
Again, well said!
Wrote John Gill in his commentary:
"And in consequence of this crucifixion of the body of sin, with Christ upon the cross, when he finished and made an end of it, sin, with its passions and lusts, is crucified by the Spirit of God in regeneration and sanctification; so that it loses its governing power, and has not the dominion it had before: not but that the flesh, or corrupt nature, with its evil affections, and carnal lusts, are still in being, and are alive; as a person fastened to a cross may be alive, though he cannot act and move as before, being under restraints, so the old man, though crucified, and under the restraints of mighty grace, and cannot reign and govern as before, yet is alive, and acts, and operates, and oftentimes has great sway and influence; but whereas he is deprived of his reigning power, he is said to be crucified: and though this act is ascribed to them that are Christ's, yet not as done by them in their own strength, who are not able to grapple with one corruption, but as under the influence of the grace of Christ, and through the power of his Spirit; see (Romans 8:13)."
Again, all these great men have truly explained how the experience of crucifixion is initially experienced in evangelical repentance and such a crucifixion guarantees that the thing crucified will in fact die. It is inevitable. Only fake believers would think of taking self and the flesh from off the cross and sparing their final death.
Have you crucified the flesh, sin, and the world? Are you determined to see them destroyed?
Hall Answers Hyper Calvinism's Pelagian Reasoning
In a follow up to my previous postings citing the old Baptist minister, Robert Hall, I want to post these words from that eminent servant on issues involving the errors of the Hardshells and other Hyper Calvinists together with some comments.
Wrote Hall (emphasis mine)
"The Spirit of God in the word, in describing the character of real saints, beareth witness with our spirits, which are conscious of a real change, that we are the children of God; and if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ Jesus. Rom. viii. 16, 17. Therefore, he that believeth on the Son of God, hath the witness in himself. That is, he is conscious of the acts of his own soul, that they are in nature and kind, however they are deficient in degree, what the people of God in the Scriptures are described by. Every Christian, therefore, habitually believes that such persons as answer to the description of saints, whether themselves or others, shall have everlasting life, (and that no other but such shall be saved). He that believeth not God, hath made him a liar, because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son; and this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life; and this life is in his Son; 1 John, v. 10, 11."
This is not the description of a "saint" or "child of God" that one will get from the Hardshells. Hardshells see regeneration or the new birth as a totally subconscious experience, unaccompanied by any cognition. Every "believer" is "conscious of the acts of his own soul," of his act of faith in Christ. Further, he is no temporary believer, but is one who "habitually believes."
Wrote Hall:
"Divine requirements being superior to the ability of men in their present fallen condition, have been exceedingly perplexing to many (amen to that! SG); especially such as feel themselves without strength, which the Scriptures declare them to be for whom Christ died, (Rom. v. 6.) and to whom he says, Without me ye can do nothing, John, xv.5, whose experience of their utter inability and absolute dependence on the Lord coincides with what the apostle expresses concerning himself and his brethren, who were even able ministers of the New Testament. Their language is, Who is sufficient for these things? 2 Cor. ii. 16. We are not sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God. 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6. From a consciousness of personal inability, joined with a conviction of their absolute and necessary obligation to obedience, arise various difficulties relating to the equity of God in requiring that of his creatures which he knows and declares is not in their power to perform. To assert and maintain that men have an inherent power to turn to God and embrace the gospel, and glorify him in a course of holy obedience to his law, without the infusion of supernatural principles, is to oppose the positive declarations of God's word respecting the necessity of regeneration, and the impossibility of those who are in the flesh doing any thing pleasing and acceptable to God. See Rom. viii. 5, 8. But those who oppose the doctrine of free grace are constrained to plead for the power of man to love and obey God, representing men's inability as absolutely inconsistent with scriptural commands and exhortations to obedience and faith; these, on the one hand, declaim with an air of triumph on the absurdity of supposing God to require impossibilities; in which those heartily concur who hold the truth in unrighteousness, and represent men as quite blameless, though disobedient, because they have no power of themselves to obey. Various methods have been taken to apologize for man's imperfections, and extenuate his guilt." (pgs. 205-09)
This is a Hardshell and Pelagian error that Hall describes. These represent man's "inability" to be "inconsistent with scriptural commands and exhortations to obedience and faith." Hardshells constantly affirm that the gospel is not addressed to "dead" sinners because they are unable to hear and believe it. They affirm that it is no sin for the unregenerate to reject Christ and the gospel for they are not under any obligation to accept Christ and believe. It is for this reason that Hardshells have been styled as "Antinomian." (See the series "Hardshell Antinomianism")
Wrote Hall:
"Another method of accounting for God’s requiring perfect obedience of imperfect men, is the consideration of our being represented by Adam in the covenant which was made with him. The reasoning of many eminent men has been thus:—“We had in Adam full and adequate ability every way proportionable to the nature and extent of duty; and though men have lost their power to obey, God has neither lost nor given up his authority to command: therefore it is our duty to exert not only the strength we are now possessed of, but likewise the strength we should have had, supposing our first parent had continued in that state of purity and power.”
That is indeed one answer to the charge that depraved impotent sinners are not obligated to obey any divine requirement.
Wrote Hall:
"...it seems contrary to the common or known rules of justice and equity, to punish on the account of not performing what is naturally impossible to be performed. Hence, some who have endeavored to hold up the doctrines of grace as objects of ridicule and contempt, have boldly asserted, that according to these doctrines, future judgment would be a mere farce. For that God might as justly punish slow moving animals for deficiency in swiftness, and those for not flying who have no wings to fly with, nor in any respect formed for such a motion, as to punish men for not doing what they cannot possibly accomplish, but is as much above their power as to create a world. Such kind of checks the adherents to truth have frequently met with. And such reasoning, or rather declamation, has been very stumbling to weak Christians. Some have been severely tried by the above misrepresentation of gospel truths, and tempted to think what they dare not utter."
And it certainly has been "very stumbling" to our Hardshell brethren!
Wrote Hall:
"For the relief of such, I would propose to their calm and candid consideration a distinction between natural and moral inability which seems necessary to be well understood in order to obtain consistent views of Divine revelation, relating to the requirements of God's righteous law and the nature of his precious gospel. By Natural inability, is intended a want of a natural capacity or opportunity to know and do what is commanded, or an absolute defect in the natural powers of a man's mind or body, by which he is rendered incapable of acting although his will were bent upon the performance of his duty. Whatever totally prevents, or is in absolute obstruction in the way of a person's knowing or doing any thing, which renders the acquirement impossible, though he be ever so desirous of accomplishing it, is what I wish to have considered as included in natural inability. Moral inability consists in a disinclination to what is good, or a dislike of, and aversion to, what God has made a person's duty."(ibid)
We discussed this at length in our series "Hardshell Pelagianism" and cited from numerous great theologians on this point. I have heard Hardshells and some other Calvinists speak of lost man's inability as being physical or natural, affirming that man's inability is like the inability of a worm to fly. Such an erroneous view of what it means to be "degenerate" has led our Hardshell brothers to have erroneous views of what it means to be "regenerate." To them, regeneration gives a man additional physical or natural abilities.
Wrote Hall:
"Men are dead in sin, but that death does not consist in a deprivation of natural faculties...Duty is ever measured by natural ability."
Exactly!
Wrote Hall:
"In regeneration the Holy Spirit does not create new faculties, or bestow a new set of natural powers; he does not produce “a new head, but a new heart,” by infusing new principles and holy dispositions. But if a deficiency in natural powers was the fountain of fault, or the source of blame, from whence criminal actions proceed, there would be a necessity for the production of new faculties, or otherwise a removal of their natural deficiencies. And if so, the surest evidences of a gracious change would be a strong memory, a fertile imagination, a fund of wit, and a profound, deep understanding, or clear ideas, and strong reasoning. In short, an assemblage of fine brilliant parts would, in that case, be the best proof of true holiness."
This is what the great Jonathan Edwards wrote at length about and from whom I cited in the above series. We cited from several others on this point. The great Andrew Fuller also wrote much on this.
Wrote Hall:
"He requires nothing naturally impossible to be performed. He has not made any thing the duty of his creatures which exceeds their natural ability, nor does he punish them for not acquiring or doing what is naturally beyond their power to perform."
My views exactly!
Wrote Hall (emphasis mine)
"The Spirit of God in the word, in describing the character of real saints, beareth witness with our spirits, which are conscious of a real change, that we are the children of God; and if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ Jesus. Rom. viii. 16, 17. Therefore, he that believeth on the Son of God, hath the witness in himself. That is, he is conscious of the acts of his own soul, that they are in nature and kind, however they are deficient in degree, what the people of God in the Scriptures are described by. Every Christian, therefore, habitually believes that such persons as answer to the description of saints, whether themselves or others, shall have everlasting life, (and that no other but such shall be saved). He that believeth not God, hath made him a liar, because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son; and this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life; and this life is in his Son; 1 John, v. 10, 11."
This is not the description of a "saint" or "child of God" that one will get from the Hardshells. Hardshells see regeneration or the new birth as a totally subconscious experience, unaccompanied by any cognition. Every "believer" is "conscious of the acts of his own soul," of his act of faith in Christ. Further, he is no temporary believer, but is one who "habitually believes."
Wrote Hall:
"Divine requirements being superior to the ability of men in their present fallen condition, have been exceedingly perplexing to many (amen to that! SG); especially such as feel themselves without strength, which the Scriptures declare them to be for whom Christ died, (Rom. v. 6.) and to whom he says, Without me ye can do nothing, John, xv.5, whose experience of their utter inability and absolute dependence on the Lord coincides with what the apostle expresses concerning himself and his brethren, who were even able ministers of the New Testament. Their language is, Who is sufficient for these things? 2 Cor. ii. 16. We are not sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God. 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6. From a consciousness of personal inability, joined with a conviction of their absolute and necessary obligation to obedience, arise various difficulties relating to the equity of God in requiring that of his creatures which he knows and declares is not in their power to perform. To assert and maintain that men have an inherent power to turn to God and embrace the gospel, and glorify him in a course of holy obedience to his law, without the infusion of supernatural principles, is to oppose the positive declarations of God's word respecting the necessity of regeneration, and the impossibility of those who are in the flesh doing any thing pleasing and acceptable to God. See Rom. viii. 5, 8. But those who oppose the doctrine of free grace are constrained to plead for the power of man to love and obey God, representing men's inability as absolutely inconsistent with scriptural commands and exhortations to obedience and faith; these, on the one hand, declaim with an air of triumph on the absurdity of supposing God to require impossibilities; in which those heartily concur who hold the truth in unrighteousness, and represent men as quite blameless, though disobedient, because they have no power of themselves to obey. Various methods have been taken to apologize for man's imperfections, and extenuate his guilt." (pgs. 205-09)
This is a Hardshell and Pelagian error that Hall describes. These represent man's "inability" to be "inconsistent with scriptural commands and exhortations to obedience and faith." Hardshells constantly affirm that the gospel is not addressed to "dead" sinners because they are unable to hear and believe it. They affirm that it is no sin for the unregenerate to reject Christ and the gospel for they are not under any obligation to accept Christ and believe. It is for this reason that Hardshells have been styled as "Antinomian." (See the series "Hardshell Antinomianism")
Wrote Hall:
"Another method of accounting for God’s requiring perfect obedience of imperfect men, is the consideration of our being represented by Adam in the covenant which was made with him. The reasoning of many eminent men has been thus:—“We had in Adam full and adequate ability every way proportionable to the nature and extent of duty; and though men have lost their power to obey, God has neither lost nor given up his authority to command: therefore it is our duty to exert not only the strength we are now possessed of, but likewise the strength we should have had, supposing our first parent had continued in that state of purity and power.”
That is indeed one answer to the charge that depraved impotent sinners are not obligated to obey any divine requirement.
Wrote Hall:
"...it seems contrary to the common or known rules of justice and equity, to punish on the account of not performing what is naturally impossible to be performed. Hence, some who have endeavored to hold up the doctrines of grace as objects of ridicule and contempt, have boldly asserted, that according to these doctrines, future judgment would be a mere farce. For that God might as justly punish slow moving animals for deficiency in swiftness, and those for not flying who have no wings to fly with, nor in any respect formed for such a motion, as to punish men for not doing what they cannot possibly accomplish, but is as much above their power as to create a world. Such kind of checks the adherents to truth have frequently met with. And such reasoning, or rather declamation, has been very stumbling to weak Christians. Some have been severely tried by the above misrepresentation of gospel truths, and tempted to think what they dare not utter."
And it certainly has been "very stumbling" to our Hardshell brethren!
Wrote Hall:
"For the relief of such, I would propose to their calm and candid consideration a distinction between natural and moral inability which seems necessary to be well understood in order to obtain consistent views of Divine revelation, relating to the requirements of God's righteous law and the nature of his precious gospel. By Natural inability, is intended a want of a natural capacity or opportunity to know and do what is commanded, or an absolute defect in the natural powers of a man's mind or body, by which he is rendered incapable of acting although his will were bent upon the performance of his duty. Whatever totally prevents, or is in absolute obstruction in the way of a person's knowing or doing any thing, which renders the acquirement impossible, though he be ever so desirous of accomplishing it, is what I wish to have considered as included in natural inability. Moral inability consists in a disinclination to what is good, or a dislike of, and aversion to, what God has made a person's duty."(ibid)
We discussed this at length in our series "Hardshell Pelagianism" and cited from numerous great theologians on this point. I have heard Hardshells and some other Calvinists speak of lost man's inability as being physical or natural, affirming that man's inability is like the inability of a worm to fly. Such an erroneous view of what it means to be "degenerate" has led our Hardshell brothers to have erroneous views of what it means to be "regenerate." To them, regeneration gives a man additional physical or natural abilities.
Wrote Hall:
"Men are dead in sin, but that death does not consist in a deprivation of natural faculties...Duty is ever measured by natural ability."
Exactly!
Wrote Hall:
"In regeneration the Holy Spirit does not create new faculties, or bestow a new set of natural powers; he does not produce “a new head, but a new heart,” by infusing new principles and holy dispositions. But if a deficiency in natural powers was the fountain of fault, or the source of blame, from whence criminal actions proceed, there would be a necessity for the production of new faculties, or otherwise a removal of their natural deficiencies. And if so, the surest evidences of a gracious change would be a strong memory, a fertile imagination, a fund of wit, and a profound, deep understanding, or clear ideas, and strong reasoning. In short, an assemblage of fine brilliant parts would, in that case, be the best proof of true holiness."
This is what the great Jonathan Edwards wrote at length about and from whom I cited in the above series. We cited from several others on this point. The great Andrew Fuller also wrote much on this.
Wrote Hall:
"He requires nothing naturally impossible to be performed. He has not made any thing the duty of his creatures which exceeds their natural ability, nor does he punish them for not acquiring or doing what is naturally beyond their power to perform."
My views exactly!
Monday, December 17, 2018
Watch This & Be Blessed!
Kevin Pendergrass of the "Church of Christ" along with two other ministers have made a video entitled "CONFESSIONS OF FORMER LEGALISTS" and I was so blessed to watch it. I recommend that you watch it and be blessed.
I have been reading some of the writings of brother Pendergrass for awhile now and cited from him on the adultery question in my recent series on that subject.
To watch the video see here
See also these two videos
Being Legalistic
and
A Different Kind Of Poison
I have been reading some of the writings of brother Pendergrass for awhile now and cited from him on the adultery question in my recent series on that subject.
To watch the video see here
See also these two videos
Being Legalistic
and
A Different Kind Of Poison
Sunday, December 16, 2018
"They That Are Christ's"
"they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." (Gal. v. 24)
Here is another passage to add to the list of scripture texts that prove to be insurmountable to overcome for promoters and defenders of the leading tenets of Hardshellism. Let us see why. Let us analyze the words of the apostle by using the rhetorical or Socratic method.
Let us ask the text, and ourselves, some questions.
First, do not the words "they who belong to Christ" equate with "they who are saved"?
Answer: yes. It could mean "all the elect who belong to Christ via the everlasting covenant" or "all elect who have been regenerated or born again via conversion." The latter, however, is the obvious choice here, because this act of crucifying the flesh is something that "they who are Christ's" personally do, and therefore not something done for them in eternity past.
Second, is the predicate "have crucified the flesh..." a universal or limited categorical proposition?
Answer: It is clearly a universal proposition. All s is p. In other words, all "they" have "crucified the flesh." Paul does not say "some who belong to Christ have crucified..."
Third, to what point in time does the apostle point, in the experience of "they who belong to Christ," when they crucify the flesh? Is it conversion? Regeneration?
Will our Hardshell brethren gives us their answer to these questions on this text?
Possessed By Christ
Means that Christ has taken possession of the person, that he comes into the very heart and soul of a person, and "takes over." When men speak of "demon possession" they interpret that as meaning that a demon spirit has entered into the psyche and takes control. So, when we speak of "Christ possession," we mean that Christ enters into the psyche and takes control. That is what Paul is talking about when he speaks of "they who are Christ's."
To whom do you belong?
Have you experienced Christ's crucifixion? You cannot experience his resurrection without experiencing his death. If you have not crucified the flesh, then you cannot be among those who belong to Christ. That is against Hardshellism.
In other passages Paul refers to the believer's crucifixion.
"knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, that our body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin." (Rom. 6: 6)
"I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me." (Gal 2: 20)
Does this not refer to conversion and make conversion necessary for being one who belongs to Christ?
Here is another passage to add to the list of scripture texts that prove to be insurmountable to overcome for promoters and defenders of the leading tenets of Hardshellism. Let us see why. Let us analyze the words of the apostle by using the rhetorical or Socratic method.
Let us ask the text, and ourselves, some questions.
First, do not the words "they who belong to Christ" equate with "they who are saved"?
Answer: yes. It could mean "all the elect who belong to Christ via the everlasting covenant" or "all elect who have been regenerated or born again via conversion." The latter, however, is the obvious choice here, because this act of crucifying the flesh is something that "they who are Christ's" personally do, and therefore not something done for them in eternity past.
Second, is the predicate "have crucified the flesh..." a universal or limited categorical proposition?
Answer: It is clearly a universal proposition. All s is p. In other words, all "they" have "crucified the flesh." Paul does not say "some who belong to Christ have crucified..."
Third, to what point in time does the apostle point, in the experience of "they who belong to Christ," when they crucify the flesh? Is it conversion? Regeneration?
Will our Hardshell brethren gives us their answer to these questions on this text?
Possessed By Christ
Means that Christ has taken possession of the person, that he comes into the very heart and soul of a person, and "takes over." When men speak of "demon possession" they interpret that as meaning that a demon spirit has entered into the psyche and takes control. So, when we speak of "Christ possession," we mean that Christ enters into the psyche and takes control. That is what Paul is talking about when he speaks of "they who are Christ's."
To whom do you belong?
Have you experienced Christ's crucifixion? You cannot experience his resurrection without experiencing his death. If you have not crucified the flesh, then you cannot be among those who belong to Christ. That is against Hardshellism.
In other passages Paul refers to the believer's crucifixion.
"knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, that our body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin." (Rom. 6: 6)
"I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me." (Gal 2: 20)
Does this not refer to conversion and make conversion necessary for being one who belongs to Christ?
Friday, December 14, 2018
Sophist Preachers
Introduction
It is my intention to write a new series with the above title and this first posting will be an introduction. It is my intention to finish my series on "Redemption," this being a priority, and to also continue my commentary on the "Apocalypse." In this series we will look at the history of the Sophists in Greek and Roman society in the time of the Apostles and how the apostle Paul in particular, in his Corinthian epistles, spoke against the beliefs, values, and tactics of the Sophists prevalent in Corinth. We will see that the beliefs and practices of the ancient Sophists are still prevalent in the world today.
The worldview of the Sophists, with their values and recipes for living life, are accepted, taught, and practiced by nearly the whole world today. Christians, however, cannot accept the basic beliefs and practices of the Sophists. To the degree that professing Christians accept and practice the teachings of the Sophists, to that degree they are yet "carnal" and "think (or reason) as natural men," as Paul stated in his opening words of his first epistle to the Corinthian Christians. For them to become more "spiritual," and less "carnal," they would have to rid themselves of the philosophy of the Sophists and of all worldly thinking.
In this Introduction I wish to cite from Dr. Henry B. Waiters and his article "What preachers have become" (see here). Wrote Waiters (emphasis mine):
"During the Classical period of Ancient Greece, the Sophists (a class of teachers of rhetoric, philosophy and the art of successful living) perfected the art of speech writing and public speaking. Central to their study was rhetoric which is defined as the skill of using language and speech effectively and persuasively.
Sophists were experts, professors, teachers and authorities on presenting arguments, earning a reputation of “extravagant displays of language for astonishing audiences with their brilliant styles, colorful appearances and flamboyant personalities.” Frequently a Sophist, as a professional orator, would offer his services for pay, generally for legal purposes or entertainment in the public square. They razzled and dazzled the audience with their mastery of persuasive discourse.
The Sophists became controversial for several reasons, particularly for their view of truth. For them, truth was not found in transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality, but in the persuasive power of words projected, rather than objective truth. In other words, skilled Sophists became the source of — as opposed to the tools or bearers — of truth. In this sense truth is not transcendent, but subjective intervention.
There is a sense that the majority of current preachers have become modern-day Sophists, concerned with the use of flattering words in the pulpit, as opposed to gospel truth, with the intent to entertain an audience that would rather have amusing discourse than preaching that “Convicts, Converts and Subverts.”
With the “platform grandstanding and showmanship” adorned in polished rhetoric, they preach to itching ears rather than wounded hearts. At the end of the day preaching becomes an act of entertainment in the interest of delighting the audience. Truth is dressed up with lavish garments of eloquence and style, turning it into something else.
Preaching is not to amuse but to amend the hearers. It is not manipulating the crowd using techniques that excite and stir and move people’s emotions to achieve results, but being the messenger of God with God’s Word and God’s Wisdom in God’s Power preaching the Scriptures."
Well, amen to all that!
Where do we see the Sophists today? Are they still not seen in colleges and universities? Are these professors not generally liberal in their thinking as the Sophists of old? Do they not think that absolute truth, like Christians believe is found in the Bible, is a myth? Do they not think that truth is relative? Like those judges who deny divine or natural law, in favor of the Realist view (in legal philosophy) that right (or law) is "whatever the judge says it is," Sophists believe that "truth" is whatever they say it is, or at least is what they can convince the majority is "truth." They convince people that they, because of their education and speaking skills, are the experts and know best, and that people should simply believe them for that reason. Sound familiar today?
Not only do we find Sophists in teaching positions, where they are paid for their sophistic teaching, but we find them in the legal profession still today. An eloquent and artful attorney has often been able to sway a jury and subvert truth and justice. Not only do we find Sophists plenty in teaching positions in schools and colleges, and in the legal profession, but in politics. How many politicians are Sophists?
We could multiply the list of occupations where Sophists are prevalent. But, it is not my intention to focus on Sophists in the secular world, but on how Sophist thinking is prevalent even among Christians, and certainly among those who make it a living to preach. We will contrast Sophist ideas with those of the Scriptures, as did Paul in his first Corinthian epistle.
I graduated college with a double major, in Sociology and Communication. I studied rhetoric, persuasion, debate, and other such subjects that are part of the core curriculum of a Communication's major. But, all students, whatever their major, had to take classes in speech and communication. The idea is that you cannot succeed if you do not learn to speak well.
I am not condemning speaking well. I am condemning the abuse of the thing, not the thing itself. I am not condoning a preacher butchering the king's English either. Preachers have a need to be "skilled in the word of righteousness" (Hebrews 5:13) and to have "the tongue of the learned" (Isa. 50:4). Some of this is "art," the result of being gifted by God, while some is "science," being a skill that is learned.
I also do not want to focus on merely how preachers today have become Sophists in their teaching and practice, but also on how ordinary Christians remain carnal and do not become more spiritual because of their acceptance of Sophistic thought.
It is my intention to write a new series with the above title and this first posting will be an introduction. It is my intention to finish my series on "Redemption," this being a priority, and to also continue my commentary on the "Apocalypse." In this series we will look at the history of the Sophists in Greek and Roman society in the time of the Apostles and how the apostle Paul in particular, in his Corinthian epistles, spoke against the beliefs, values, and tactics of the Sophists prevalent in Corinth. We will see that the beliefs and practices of the ancient Sophists are still prevalent in the world today.
The worldview of the Sophists, with their values and recipes for living life, are accepted, taught, and practiced by nearly the whole world today. Christians, however, cannot accept the basic beliefs and practices of the Sophists. To the degree that professing Christians accept and practice the teachings of the Sophists, to that degree they are yet "carnal" and "think (or reason) as natural men," as Paul stated in his opening words of his first epistle to the Corinthian Christians. For them to become more "spiritual," and less "carnal," they would have to rid themselves of the philosophy of the Sophists and of all worldly thinking.
In this Introduction I wish to cite from Dr. Henry B. Waiters and his article "What preachers have become" (see here). Wrote Waiters (emphasis mine):
"During the Classical period of Ancient Greece, the Sophists (a class of teachers of rhetoric, philosophy and the art of successful living) perfected the art of speech writing and public speaking. Central to their study was rhetoric which is defined as the skill of using language and speech effectively and persuasively.
Sophists were experts, professors, teachers and authorities on presenting arguments, earning a reputation of “extravagant displays of language for astonishing audiences with their brilliant styles, colorful appearances and flamboyant personalities.” Frequently a Sophist, as a professional orator, would offer his services for pay, generally for legal purposes or entertainment in the public square. They razzled and dazzled the audience with their mastery of persuasive discourse.
The Sophists became controversial for several reasons, particularly for their view of truth. For them, truth was not found in transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality, but in the persuasive power of words projected, rather than objective truth. In other words, skilled Sophists became the source of — as opposed to the tools or bearers — of truth. In this sense truth is not transcendent, but subjective intervention.
There is a sense that the majority of current preachers have become modern-day Sophists, concerned with the use of flattering words in the pulpit, as opposed to gospel truth, with the intent to entertain an audience that would rather have amusing discourse than preaching that “Convicts, Converts and Subverts.”
With the “platform grandstanding and showmanship” adorned in polished rhetoric, they preach to itching ears rather than wounded hearts. At the end of the day preaching becomes an act of entertainment in the interest of delighting the audience. Truth is dressed up with lavish garments of eloquence and style, turning it into something else.
Preaching is not to amuse but to amend the hearers. It is not manipulating the crowd using techniques that excite and stir and move people’s emotions to achieve results, but being the messenger of God with God’s Word and God’s Wisdom in God’s Power preaching the Scriptures."
Well, amen to all that!
Where do we see the Sophists today? Are they still not seen in colleges and universities? Are these professors not generally liberal in their thinking as the Sophists of old? Do they not think that absolute truth, like Christians believe is found in the Bible, is a myth? Do they not think that truth is relative? Like those judges who deny divine or natural law, in favor of the Realist view (in legal philosophy) that right (or law) is "whatever the judge says it is," Sophists believe that "truth" is whatever they say it is, or at least is what they can convince the majority is "truth." They convince people that they, because of their education and speaking skills, are the experts and know best, and that people should simply believe them for that reason. Sound familiar today?
Not only do we find Sophists in teaching positions, where they are paid for their sophistic teaching, but we find them in the legal profession still today. An eloquent and artful attorney has often been able to sway a jury and subvert truth and justice. Not only do we find Sophists plenty in teaching positions in schools and colleges, and in the legal profession, but in politics. How many politicians are Sophists?
We could multiply the list of occupations where Sophists are prevalent. But, it is not my intention to focus on Sophists in the secular world, but on how Sophist thinking is prevalent even among Christians, and certainly among those who make it a living to preach. We will contrast Sophist ideas with those of the Scriptures, as did Paul in his first Corinthian epistle.
I graduated college with a double major, in Sociology and Communication. I studied rhetoric, persuasion, debate, and other such subjects that are part of the core curriculum of a Communication's major. But, all students, whatever their major, had to take classes in speech and communication. The idea is that you cannot succeed if you do not learn to speak well.
I am not condemning speaking well. I am condemning the abuse of the thing, not the thing itself. I am not condoning a preacher butchering the king's English either. Preachers have a need to be "skilled in the word of righteousness" (Hebrews 5:13) and to have "the tongue of the learned" (Isa. 50:4). Some of this is "art," the result of being gifted by God, while some is "science," being a skill that is learned.
I also do not want to focus on merely how preachers today have become Sophists in their teaching and practice, but also on how ordinary Christians remain carnal and do not become more spiritual because of their acceptance of Sophistic thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)