|
Author
|
Topic: ARE THERE CARNAL CHRISTIANS?
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
'CARNAL' CHRISTIANS - SAVED or NOT??
>
> The following quote from Leonard Ravenhill caused the biggest
> reaction yet on our Facebook page. We are now discussing it on
> our new website - where ANYONE can now comment (not just
> members). Here is the quote and a few of the replies-
>
> The QUOTE:
>
> "Get rid of this bunkum about the 'carnal Christian'. Forget it! If
> you're carnal, you're not saved." - Leonard Ravenhill.
>
> Some REPLIES:
>
> A.M - "Well the Bible is white and black, there is no gray, either
> you're with Christ or you are against Him.
> "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather
> with me, scatters.""
>
> R.B - "I have enjoyed reading through all the comments regarding
> this quote. In my opinion, and correct me if am wrong Andrew, but
> I feel that the meaning of this quote is refing to those who
habitually
> live in carnality. I think that every Christian falls into carnallity
from
> time
> to time, does that make them "unsaved"? I don't think so."
>
> L.C - "Well I don't agree on this one! The Bible speaks of carnal
> "Christians"! In 1 Corinthians 3:1-3 Paul is speaking to the
> Corinthian BELIEVERS when he tells them he couldn't speak to
> them as spiritual (one governed by the Spirit) but as carnal, mere
> infants in Christ."
>
> A.M - "If you read 1 Corinthians, Paul is rebuking them for
> being carnal, not condoning it."
>
> Olive Branch - "Without the phrase ('Carnal Christian') many so
> called Christians have no way of justifying their sin."
>
> Do you have something important that you would like to say about
> this topic? Please add your comment at the following website-
>
> http://www.JohntheBaptistTV.com/
>
> God bless you all!
>
> Andrew Strom.
>
> --
> YES! - You have permission to post these emails to friends
> or other groups, boards, etc - unless there is something
> different written in the Copyright notice above.
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged | 
|
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by barrykind:
your sick
Does this mean you ran out of intelligent rebuttals?
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
barrykind
Advanced Member
Member # 35
|
posted
your sick
--------------------
The HEART of the issue is truly the issue of the HEART!
John 3:3;Mark 8:34-38;James 1:27
Posts: 3529 | From: Orange, Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
becauseHElives
quote:
For centuries, one of the most debated topics among Christians is that of "Eternal Security". Eternal Security is the concept that states that once a person has become born again in the spirit, they are assured of their salvation no matter what terrible sins they subsequently commit. Many also refer to this as "once saved, always saved". Many adherents also say that those with unrepented sins will go unpunished since they believe that all rewards in heaven are equal.
Romans 3:8 (NLT)
And some people even slander us by claiming that we say, “The more we sin, the better it is!” Those who say such things deserve to be condemned.
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
The Security of the Seal
By Pastor Ricky Kurth
(From a message preached at Faith Bible Church, Pastor Kurth's home church in Steger, Illinois)
"And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption" (Eph. 4:30).
What does it mean to be "sealed" by the Spirit, and how secure does this seal make us? Words mean things, and we are not allowed to ascribe arbitrary meanings to Bible words. But a careful study of the Bible use of this word "seal" will develop it's meaning for us and fortify our faith.
In Esther 8:8, the king of Persia ordered that a decree be issued, and commanded: "seal it with the king's ring." When the king's ring was pressed against the hot wax that sealed a document in those days, the sealed scroll then bore an imprint that identified it with the king. Similarly, when you and I were baptized into Christ the moment we believed the gospel, we were identified with Christ, and to this day we bear the unseen imprint of the Holy Spirit. And while I like to identify with our Chicago sports teams only until they start losing, how good to know that God remains identified with us even when we grieve Him!
Esther 8:8 also teaches us that a decree sealed with the king's ring "may no man reverse!" Not even the king himself could overturn an order sealed with his ring. How reassuring to know that no matter how we grieve His Spirit, God Himself cannot reverse the eternal destiny of a believer that bears His seal. When Daniel was tossed into the lion's den, the king sealed the den with his own signet "that the purpose might not be changed concerning Daniel" (Dan. 6:17).
Moving on in our study of the seal, we see that Job enjoyed absolute confidence in his security (Job 19:25-27) because he knew that his sin was "sealed up in a bag" (14:17). He knew that no one could break the seal of God and release his sin. But how much more secure should we feel! Christ has done more than seal our sins in a bag, He has "put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (Heb. 9:26) and sealed us with His Spirit!
Next in our study of the seal, Jeremiah 32:9,10 tells us that Jeremiah bought some land and "sealed" the deed, here called "the evidence of the purchase" (v. 11). Well does this writer remember as a young boy sending away for prizes advertised on the back of cereal boxes. The prizes were "free," but required two or three "proof of purchase" seals found on each box of cereal. That's what the Spirit is for us, proof that our pardon has been purchased by the blood of Christ, "evidence" that could be presented were we ever to be called to stand before God's bar of justice.
Just as there were "witnesses" (v. 10) to Jeremiah's purchase, we know that there were angelic witnesses to the purchase of our redemption, holy ones who watched in wonder as the Son of God purchased our redemption on Calvary, then rejoiced when we believed the gospel (Luke 15:10) and sealed the deal.
The evidence of purchase in Jeremiah's day came in two parts, "both that which was sealed according to the law and custom, and that which was open" (v. 11), an open deed left available for examination in the event of land disputes, and a sealed deed kept safe for security purposes. These deeds were identical. We know that criminal embezzlers often keep two different sets of books—one to show the authorities, and one that accurately reflects their wrongdoing! But Jeremiah's land deeds were the same, "both that which was sealed…and that which was open," reminding us that, while our Spirit seal is invisible (since "your life is hid with Christ in God"—Col. 3:3), our public lives should read the same as our title deed, for our open seal is "known and read of all men" (II Cor. 3:2,3). The Apostle Paul put it this way:
"Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this SEAL, The Lord knoweth them that are His. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity" (II Tim. 2:19).
Jeremiah's land deeds were placed "in an earthen vessel" for safekeeping (Jer. 32:14). Likewise, God placed the proof of our purchase within us, within these jars of clay that make up our physical bodies (Gen. 2:7; II Cor. 4:7). Wouldn't Jeremiah's deeds have been safer in the temple? Well, which lasted longer, Israel's temple or the Dead Sea Scrolls found recently after nearly two thousand years—in earthen vessels! God knows precisely what He is doing when He leaves your seal in the earthen vessel of your physical body, for it is secured by the power of His almighty arm.
Jeremiah was told to place his deed in an earthen vessel, "that they may continue many days" (Jer. 32:14). How many days? Well, Israel was about to be overrun by Babylon, meaning that even though Jeremiah held the deed to the land, the property would be out of his control for seventy years. When Jeremiah questioned the Lord about the wisdom of His command to buy the land (v. 24,25), the Lord assured him that the captivity would someday end, and the land would no longer be out of his control (v. 44). How this reminds us that when the Lord Jesus redeemed us, He knew that even though He would hold the deed to our hearts, we would be out of His control for about seventy years (Ps. 90:10). Thankfully He, like Jeremiah, went ahead and made the purchase anyway!
We learn more about the Bible meaning of the word "seal" in Ezekiel 28:12, where it is said of Lucifer, "Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty." Here we learn that something that is sealed is perfect and complete. Not a single thing could be added to Lucifer to make him wiser or more beautiful. Similarly, God has not needed to add a single star since the original creation, since in the beginning He "sealeth up the stars" (Job 9:7). And wonder of wonders, not a single thing needs to be added to believers today who are sealed with the Spirit, for we are "complete in Him" (Col. 2:10).
In Jeremiah's day, both the seller and the buyer of land had to affix their seal to the deed to testify to the transaction. But what about the transaction of our redemption? John 3:33 says:
"He that hath received His testimony hath set to his seal that God is true."
How does a man "set to his seal" that God is true? Simply by receiving His testimony and believing on Christ (v. 36).
And speaking of the Lord Jesus Christ, John 6:27 says, "Him hath God the Father sealed." To what could John be referring to but our Lord's experience at His baptism when "the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon Him" (Luke 3:22). If this be the case, the conclusion we can draw from this is almost too precious to believe. If the "seal" with which God the Father sealed our Savior is the Holy Spirit, then you and I are sealed with the same seal with which the Lord Jesus Christ was sealed. If that doesn't make you feel secure, I'm not sure what will!
But why would the Lord need such a secure seal? Perhaps in some sense this would enable Him in His humanity to bear the awful load of sin that was placed upon Him at Calvary. If this be so, we have further proof that we need never fear the loss of salvation due to our sin. If all the sins of all the world were not sufficient to break His seal of the Spirit, then surely your comparatively small load of sin will never avail to break your seal of the Spirit.
Romans 4:11 teaches us that Abraham "received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised." Abraham's seal was a wonderful illustration of our own in two blessed ways. First, circumcision was irreversible, re-inforcing our conviction that our seal is likewise permanent and irrevocable. Second, Abraham's seal went with him wherever he went. I'd forget my head if it weren't attached to my shoulders! And just as sure as getting pulled over by a policeman the day you forget your wallet, you know you'd die the day you forgot your seal, if it was something you had to remember. Bless God, it isn't!
In Revelation 7:1,2, John describes how in the coming Tribulation four angels will be given power "to hurt the earth and the sea." But before they can act, they are told, "Hurt not the earth....till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads" (v. 3). Imagine how secure those believers will feel with the visible seal of the Lord "written in their foreheads" (Rev. 14:1). Many believers today refuse to believe in their seal because they cannot see it, but I don't know of any believer today who refuses to breathe the air because he cannot see it. Believers today can and should enjoy the same assurance as these 144,000 (v. 4), for while our seal is not visible, "we walk by faith, not by sight" (II Cor. 5:7). Our spiritual seal is just as real as their visible one, just as our spiritual circumcision and our spiritual baptism (Col. 2:10-12) are just as real as Israel's visible circumcision and baptism.
These 144,000 sealed ones offer us dynamic proof of the security of our seal. Revelation 12 describes how in the middle of the Tribulation they are "caught up unto God, and to His throne" (v. 5). We see them next standing with the Lamb in the heavenly Mount Sion (Rev. 14:1), "redeemed from the earth" (v. 3), just as we will be someday (Rom. 8:23; 13:11), and they haven't lost a single sealed one! They still number 144,000! Likewise, at the Rapture, the Lord will not misplace a single sealed member of "the church which is His body." Talk about "signed, sealed and delivered!"
Sometimes the doctrine of the eternal security of the believer is challenged with the notion that while our seal renders us safe from external dangers such as Satan and his host, God's seal of the Spirit cannot protect us from within, from ourselves. An alligator's powerful jaws can exert 3,000 pounds of pressure per square inch when closing, but once closed can be held shut with a man's bare hands. It is argued by some that God's seal works the same way, protecting us mightily from without, but helpless to keep us sealed should we sin too much from within.
Obviously, our Lord's seal in John 6:27 was designed to protect Him from external dangers, for there was certainly no danger that He would sin from within and break the seal. So what assurance do we have in Scripture that God's seal cannot be broken from the inside out? Surely this is powerfully answered in Revelation 20, where we are told that during the millennial kingdom God will take the devil and "shut him up and set a seal upon him" (v. 1-3). Imagine Satan's frustration when after a lifetime of failing to break the seal of individual believers from without, he finds himself sealed up and helpless to break the seal from within! My dear Christian friend, if even the devil with his awesome power of evil can't break God's seal from within, what makes you think you can with your comparatively puny power of evil? In a great type of Christ, Noah was told to seal the ark "within and without with pitch" (Gen. 6:14). Once "the Lord shut him in" (Gen. 7:16), no water was going to get in, and no one was going to get out until it came time for God to break the seal and release the sojourners into the new world.
Will God ever break our seal? Not until it is time to usher us sojourners into our new world! We have a dramatic picture of this in Romans 15:26, where Paul talks about the collection that he had taken among the Gentile churches "for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem." Whilst this money was in Paul's hands, it was sealed and absolutely safe and secure. Even though Paul was "in prisons more frequent" than just about anyone (II Cor. 11:23), and bribing your way out of prison was commonplace in that day (Acts 24:26), you wouldn't catch Paul missappropriating funds for his own personal use to save his life! Speaking then of his plan to deliver this money personally to Jerusalem, he tells the Romans in Verse 28:
"When therefore I have performed this, and have sealed to them this fruit, I will come by you into Spain."
Paul determined to make sure that the transfer of this sizeable collection was sealed air-tight to the possession of the people for whom it was taken. What a lesson for all those who handle the Lord's money today! And what a picture of the sacred transfer that will take place at the Rapture! We have seen in this study that the seal of the believer in this life goes infinitely beyond what the world calls "hermetic," but what happens when it comes time for us to be ushered into the new world? Ah remember, Paul says that you and I are "sealed unto the day of redemption" (Eph. 4:30), that is, "the redemption of our body" at the Rapture (Rom. 8:23). There will be no last minute fumble when the Body of Christ is joined to the host of heaven, for the Lord Jesus Himself will have "sealed to them this fruit," this fruit of the church which is His Body. Just as our nation's space shuttle remains sealed until it docks with the space station, even so the individual believer today will remain sealed unto our rendezvous with eternity.
The very honor of God is at stake in this matter of the security of our seal. II Corinthians 1:20 says that "all the promises of God in Him are yea, and in Him Amen, unto the glory of God by us." What are some of these unconditional promises that we have in Christ? Well, Verse 22 speaks of God....
"Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts."
If God's promise were broken and sealed believers were somehow lost, God would get no glory "by us." Indeed, the loss of a single Spirit-sealed saint would be a thrust at His integrity, for the soundness of the believer's seal depends not on his works but on the solemn promise of God. We know this is so because Paul does not make mention of the Spirit's seal exclusively to the spiritual Ephesians, but here includes the carnal Corinthians when speaking of this precious blessing. Thus we know that the most backslidden believer need never fear that he has sinned too deeply, broken his seal, and endangered his soul.
This is why we must be careful to "grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption." When God's Spirit was "grieved" at man before the Flood, God vowed to "destroy" man from the face of the earth (Gen. 6:6,7). When Israel "grieved" the Lord for forty years in the wilderness, God swore in His wrath that that generation would not enter the Promised Land (Ps. 95:10,11). But, when you as a believer grieve Him at His heart, your seal remains intact as the Spirit just stands there and takes it, choosing to respond with grace, not wrath. How it behooves each blood-bought believer to tremble at the thought of presuming upon such grace.
Imagine a Christian Secret Service agent, assigned to protect a president that continually took the Lord's name in vain. This president knows that his speech grieves the agent, but he could care less! Until one day the agent saves his life! Surely now he will amend his speech! But no, he continues to blaspheme and the agent, though grieved, continues to keep him safe. Before you holler, "What an ingrate!", remember that when you sin against the Spirit that saved you and keeps you sealed, you have more in common with this ungrateful president than you would care to admit.
What is it specifically that grieves the Lord? Well, if Paul had warned us not to grieve "the Lonely Spirit," we would know not to ignore Him and make Him to feel left out. If Paul had cautioned us not to grieve "the Shy Spirit," we might grieve Him by showering Him with the same attention as our Pentecostal friends! But it is "the Holy Spirit" that Paul tells us not to grieve, and His name says it all! It is the ungodly and unholy behavior of the context (Eph. 4:25-31) that grieves Him at His heart. Thus may each of us determine in our hearts to "grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption."
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
ETERNAL SECURITY vs.
THE SIN AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST
For centuries, one of the most debated topics among Christians is that of "Eternal Security". Eternal Security is the concept that states that once a person has become born again in the spirit, they are assured of their salvation no matter what terrible sins they subsequently commit. Many also refer to this as "once saved, always saved". Many adherents also say that those with unrepented sins will go unpunished since they believe that all rewards in heaven are equal. Please refer to my essay on Varying Rewards in Heaven and Hell which shows the Bible teaches that all receive differing rewards based on our obedience to God's will.
The whole foundation of this doctrine rests upon the belief that no one sin exists which the blood of Christ can not wash away. Such a sin, according to detractors of this doctrine, is the "Sin Against the Holy Ghost". This is mentioned in all three of the synoptic gospels but the one which is the most discussed by proponents of Eternal Security is Mark 3:22-30. After reading Christ's statements through verse 29, the proponents claim that Mark's words in verse 30 refer back only to verse 29 which contains the warning against the sin against the Holy Ghost. What this does is to allow the proponents to claim that the sin against the Holy Ghost is to say that Jesus Christ is (was) demon possessed, thereby freeing all Christians from ever committing the sin since Christians obviously would or ever could claim that Christ was demon possessed.
There are several flaws in this interpretation. The first is in assuming that verse 30 only refers back to verse 29 instead of referring to all of Christ's words which began in the last half of verse 23 through verse 29. This is easily proven since verse 30 is not a sentence or statement in and of itself. It is a dependent clause. This means that it is dependent upon another clause to be understood. It can not stand by itself and make sense. In this case it is dependent upon the first half of verse 23 before Mark begins to quote Christ. Any Red Letter Edition can confirm where Mark's words end and Christ's begin. If you take verse 30 and place it at the end of Mark's words in verse 23, it would read, "And He called them to Himself and began speaking to them in parables because they were saying, 'He has an unclean spirit'"(NASB). Or how about, "Because they were saying 'He has an unclean spirit', He called them to Himself and began speaking to them in parables". Both are complete thoughts and makes perfect sense. This idea is also supported by the fact that the Greek word for "because" is not capitalized thereby further substantiating the claim of its dependence upon the previous clause in verse 23. By placing verse 30 prior to the beginning of Christ's words in verse 23, it would also sound the same as people talk today when quoting someone else and would confirm the fact that verse 30 refers to all of Christ's quote and not just verse 29.
Another interesting finding comes from the accounts in Matthew and Luke pertaining not to the sin against the Holy Ghost, but rather to the wording of the warning about sinning against the Son ( Matt.12:32,Lk.12:10). As opposed to the account in Mark which talks about blasphemy, the accounts in Matthew and Luke state that anyone who will "...speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him ..." This tells us the reason Christ gave this parable! They were speaking out against Him! He undoubtedly included the sin against the Holy Ghost to warn us of its serious nature and consequences.
The proponents also fail to realize that 1 Cor.12:3 says that only spirit filled believers can say that Jesus is Lord. Anyone who is not a believer is likely to attribute Christ's miracles to demon possession. If the proponents' position is correct, then almost everyone is guilty of the sin. It is quite clear in Mark that the Scribes had no intention of committing a sin against the Holy Ghost. Their purpose was to refute Christ's authority by which He cast out the devils. In their opinion, Jesus was an ordinary man. Ordinary men can not cast out demons unless, according to the Scribes, he himself is demon possessed. They obviously overlooked the possibility of Him having God's power. They wouldn't dare admit that possibility since that would refute their own beliefs. John the Baptist received the same treatment from the Scribes. Therefore, Christ, in defending His own authority, questioned the Scribes about their rejection of John. Mk.11:27-33.
Another problem exists for the proponents in the other readings of the sin against the Holy Ghost in Matthew and Luke. Matthew's complete account is found in chapter 12:24-37. Please note that no reason, similar to the one in Mk.3:30, is found thereby eliminating the possibility of the proponents to use the Matthew reading to back up their claims. An even worse situation for the proponents is found in the Lukan account in chapter 12:1-10. Here the Savior is speaking to the disciples, not the Scribes. Obviously Christ gave this account on a separate occasion. The problem this verse causes for the proponents is that they claim that it is impossible for believers to commit the sin against the Holy Ghost. Why would Christ warn believers against committing this sin if it were impossible for them to commit it in the first place? Since the sin against the Holy Ghost is the most serious sin which can be committed and since no forgiveness can obtained, wouldn't it justify having its explanation found in more than just one version of the quote?
The obvious question that the proponents must answer is, "How is the Holy Ghost blasphemed by saying that Christ was demon possessed?" The only possible way that I can imagine is that by making that claim, one is denying the Holy Ghost's mission and power to cast out demons. This is the only way that I know of, in the given set of circumstances, to sin against the Holy Ghost Himself and not sin against Christ. As I pointed out earlier, the Scribes were attempting to discredit the Savior and by making their accusation of demon possession, they were sinning against Christ, not the Holy Ghost. The problem with the proponents' argument is that you must assume that the mission of the Holy Ghost, in part at least, is to cast out demons. If this can be disproven, any remaining credibility of the proponent's argument is then removed. If the Holy Ghost has no such part, then stating so is obviously not a sin since it is the truth. One could also claim that the Holy Ghost did not die for our sins and not be guilty of a sin since we are only stating a fact. An often used legal axiom states that the truth is the best defense against the charge of slander. This could also be said of blasphemy as well.
The best one word description of the Holy Ghost is found in Jn.14:16,26,15:26,and 16:7. Here the Savior uses the Greek word "Parakletos" which means advocate, spokesman, intercessor, representative, friend, and comforter. In other words, the function of the Holy Ghost is to be God's representative to us in God's absence (Acts 5:1-4) as well as Christ's (Jn.16:7). He gives us comfort, God's will for our lives, and testifies to us of the truthfulness of the Gospel and to the reality of Christ's atonement for our sins. Through the Holy Ghost, God bestows upon us certain spiritual gifts such as speaking in tongues and their interpretation. The Holy Ghost has no involvement in the casting out of demons. The power to cast out demons comes from the priesthood given by Christ (Mk.3:14-15) combined with faith, prayer, and fasting (Matt.17:14-21). Many believe though that by simply using the name of Christ, one can cast out demons. This is clearly disproven in Acts 19:13-16.
Now that we have examined what the sin against the Holy Ghost is not, we now have to define what it is and determine if believers and/or non believers can commit it. Another scripture that alludes to a sin which can not be repented of is Hebrews 6:4-6. It reads:
4. For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5. and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6. and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God, and put Him to open shame. (NASB)
-or-
4. For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5. and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6. if they then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt. (RSV)
Here, Paul goes out of his way to explain that this refers only to believers. Please note that the people have been enlightened, have tasted of (or experienced) the heavenly gift (either gifts of the Spirit or salvation. What other heavenly gifts are there? Please note that the major proponents of Eternal Security are also the ones who claim that only saved believers can experience these gifts), and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit (born again in the Spirit) and have experienced the Gospel and the power of the priesthood. It also speaks of it being impossible "if they shall fall away to renew them again unto repentance". How can a non-believer "renew again unto repentance" if they haven't been renewed to begin with? Verses 4 and 5 are given as qualifiers for verse 6 to show that only believers can commit this sin. The proponents, in defending their position, often claim that these verses refer to those who seem to be believers but are not, despite their familiarity with true believers and the Gospel message. As shown above, this is not the case. What non-believer could possibly meet the above mentioned criteria, especially being "enlightened" and a "partaker of the Holy Ghost"? Why also would God not allow a non-believer from ever becoming a spirit filled Christian? The proponents also claim that the Greek word for "falling away" ("parapipto", Strong's word #3895) isn't the same as the word for "apostasy"("apostacia", Strong's word #646), therefore it can not apply to believers. My Strong's Greek lexicon states that these two words mean the exact same thing. There is no difference in how they are defined. The proponents state that "parapipto" means to "turn or swerve aside" which would allow a believer to backslide without rejecting Christ. The Greek word for this is "ektrepo" (Strong's word #1624).
Another scripture that alludes to the fact that Christians can commit sins that cause them to lose their salvation is 2 Peter 2:20-22. With this scripture in mind, ask yourself how a Christian can have an eventual fate that is worse than non believers (v.21), especially if unrepentant non believers are destined to Hell? Another scripture that talks about this is Heb. 10:38-39 which talks about believers who "live by faith" who then "draw back unto perdition". How can a non believer walk by faith or draw back unto perdition? Col. 1:23 also talks about our salvation hinging upon us not moving from the Gospel. These all help us understand the true meaning of the sin against the Holy Ghost. The sin against the Holy Ghost is denying the Gospel message of Christ and His atonement for our sins after we have become born again and had the Holy Ghost indwell us and testify to us that the Gospel and the atonement are real and in effect in our own lives. This is how such "again crucify to themselves the Son of God". Please take a few minutes to review the scriptures discussed in these last four paragraphs and see if my definition of the sin against the Holy Ghost makes sense with them in mind.
The proponents of Eternal Security, in attempting to defend their position, quote scriptures, which they claim deny the possibility of losing one's salvation. One of the major proponents has published a flyer listing scriptures they claim support their argument. To their credit, they also list scriptures used by their detractors. The pro-security scriptures fall into 6 basic categories:
1. God Will Never Cast Out Believers - Jn. 6:37, 10:27-29; Rom. 8:32-39; 1 Jn.4:4
2. Faith Is All That Is Needed -Jn. 3:16; Rom. 1:16,17; Eph. 2:8,9; 1 Peter 1:3-10
3. Those In Christ Are Saved - Rom. 8:1,v.9-11; 1 Jn. 5:11-13; Ps. 37:28, Ps. 121
4. God Has Predestined All Believers To Heaven - Rom. 8:28-31; Eph. 1:2-6
5. Various Other Scriptures - Rom. 11:29; 1 Cor. 5:4,5; Ps. 40:11
6. Scriptures That Make No Sense To Me - Zech. 4:6; Jn. 6:29; Gal. 3:1; Phil. 1:6; 1 Jn. 3:2
Our definition of the sin against the Holy Ghost allows us to accept the first three arguments since such a sinner is no longer a believer. Please reread our definition to make this point clear. God would never cast out believers, but they are no longer believers and therefore have no faith in Christ or are "in Christ". The proponents often quote 1 Cor. 6:19,20 to prove that believers can be held against their will since they are not their own. The believer is purchased through the blood of Christ (Acts 20:28). Please refer to Heb. 10:26-29 below to see how believers can cancel the sale through rejecting the blood. Previously quoted scriptures establish the fact that believers can fall from grace as well. The fourth category causes as many problems for the proponents as it was intended to cause for us. If one takes the position that all believers are predestined to be such, then what is the purpose of missionary work and the great command of the Savior to go out and preach the Gospel to every creature? What is the purpose of keeping the commandments, having faith, or doing anything if everything has already been predetermined and there is nothing that we can do about it? Does man have free will or free agency? These scriptures undoubtedly have been mistranslated. The Greek word "proorizo" used in both scriptures can also be translated "foreordained". This translation eliminates the problem. Please refer to Bruce R. McConkie's book, Mormon Doctrine for a discourse on foreordination.
Let's take a look at the three remaining scriptures that make no sense to me. If you have any idea what the last five scriptures have to do with this topic, please email me and let me know. Psalms 40:11 - This is a plea from David to the Lord to preserve him. Please note that this is a plea and not a doctrinal statement and can also be classified under category #1 above. Rom. 11:29 - If we had to be sinless to have gifts and callings, few would have any, at least not for very long. We all have sin. How can Christ give any man a calling or gift if the individual has rejected the sovereignty of Christ? 1 Cor. 5:4-5 - Let's look at verses 1-5 to get the whole feeling of this scripture. Is verse 5 saying that we should kill or allow individuals to be killed so that the soul of the individual may be saved? If an individual is committing the sins outlined in v.1-2, does it mean that he is on his way to losing his salvation so that it would be better for him if he were killed so that he could not continue sinning thereby he could avoid chancing losing his salvation? This interpretation could be used by the opponents of Eternal Security. What kind of an argument can the proponents make with this scripture? What kind of can of worms are they opening about murder? If this is the case, shouldn't we kill all believers so that they would have no chance of sinning enough to lose their salvation?!?! Suicide for believers must be O.K. This "Jim Jones" type of doctrine is obviously false. This still leaves the proponents with the problem of having an individual be in a position of losing his salvation unless he is "delivered unto Satan". This scripture clearly states that an individual can lose his salvation!
After examining the scriptures used by the proponents, let's look at a few of the remaining anti-Eternal Security scriptures not already mentioned. Rom. 4:15, 5:13,and 7:7-9 state that if an individual is ignorant of the laws of God, "sin is not imputed". How could the Scribes sin against the Holy Ghost if they were unaware of how the sin was committed or whether the sin even existed? They can't according to Paul. Since miracles can only be performed by God or Satan, "..and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost" (1 Cor. 12:3), how else can a non believer explain the miracles of Christ? Are we condemning people to Hell by asking them to explain these miracles? One large group of scriptures state that only those who endure to the end shall receive salvation. These scriptures are: Matt. 24:13; Mk. 13:13; 1 Cor. 15:2; 1 Tim. 4:16; Heb. 3:12-14; Jas. 5:11; Rev. 2:7,10, and 3:5,15-16. These show that it is possible to lose your salvation if you don't remain faithful to the Gospel plan until death. Along the same line, Phil. 2:12 commands us to work out our own salvation. If we do not work at it, can we expect to obtain it? 1 Jn. 5:16 states that there is a sin unto death. This is not physical death since there are a number of sins which were worthy of capital punishment. John says there is only one sin which leads to spiritual capital punishment. Matt. 5:13, Gal. 5:1-4, and Heb. 12:15 also say that we can fall from grace. The parable of the ten virgins (Matt. 25:1-13) tells of believers being locked out of the Lord's presence due to their not performing works required to prepare for His coming. 2 Tim. 2:10-12 has Paul "endur(ing) all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus...if we deny him, he also will deny us." Please note that Paul endures that the elect "may" have salvation. Nothing is assured. They may fall at some point and he states that if we (believers) deny Christ, he will deny us. See Matt. 10:33.
The best scripture remaining is Heb. 10:26-29. It reads in the NASB:
26. For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
27. but a certain terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries.
28. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.
29. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?
Please note that this scripture talks about those who were sanctified by the blood of Christ (a saved individual). It also mentions a terrifying judgment of fire. Verse 29 also points out that a previously saved person who denies Christ and "the blood of the covenant" will receive a punishment severer than death. What fate could be worse than death and involve a fiery judgment other than being sent to Hell?
One of the most vocal proponents was the late Walter Martin, the host of the "Bible Answer Man" radio program. Ironically, on one of his programs he stated that Judas Iscariot, though not saved in Martin's opinion, was so familiar with Christ and His miracles, that it was possible for Judas to sin so much that he went "beyond the point of no return" and was unable to repent and be saved. In other words, an unsaved person with intimate Gospel knowledge can sin so much that not even the blood of Christ can wash away his sins. As proof of this, Martin quotes 1 Cor. 5:1-5 where he claims that it says that a sinning and unrepentant believer should be killed in order to prevent him from sinning away his salvation. This is in 100% contradiction to the words of Christ found in Matt. 12:31,32; Mk. 3:28,29, the subject of this writing, where it says all manner of sin, except the sin against the Holy Ghost will be forgiven man. The only way Mr. Martin's example, to which he later added Satan, could be true, would be if Judas, Satan, and the sinning believer KNEW the Gospel was true and subsequently rejected it, as the Mormons teach. This is obviously true of Satan and his angels thereby explaining why he and his angels can not repent and be freed from Hell. Martin himself, however, denies that Judas was ever a truly Spirit filled believer. By making this claim, "Dr." Martin is stating that Christ was wrong about all manner of sin being forgiven except the sin against the Holy Ghost. Judas and the sinning believer never claimed that Christ was demon possessed as Martin's definition of the sin claims. His statement, along with my previous examples show the disharmony between the teachings of Christ and the teachings of the proponents.
In conclusion, the sin against the Holy Ghost is not saying that Christ had an unclean spirit. It is to deny the Christ and His atoning sacrifice, after having been born again. The reason this sin is so serious is that believers are commanded to be a light unto the world. By renouncing their testimony, they knowingly become spiritual fire extinguishers dousing not only the light within themselves but often the light in many of those around them. They become an anti-Christ.
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
Can a true Christian be carnal? In answering this question, let’s first define the term “carnal.” The word “carnal” is translated from the Greek word sarkikos, which literally means “fleshly.” This descriptive word is seen in the context of Christians in 1 Corinthians 3:1-3. In this passage, the apostle Paul is addressing the readers as “brethren,” a term he uses almost exclusively to refer to other Christians; he then goes on to describe them as “carnal.” Therefore, we can conclude that Christians can be carnal. The Bible is absolutely clear that no one is sinless (1 John 1:8). Every time we sin, we are acting carnally.
The key thing to understand is that while a Christian can be, for a time, carnal, a true Christian will not remain carnal for a lifetime. Some have abused the idea of a “carnal Christian” by saying that it is possible for people to come to faith in Christ and then proceed to live the rest of their lives in a completely carnal manner, with no evidence of being born again or a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). Such a concept is completely unbiblical. James 2 makes it abundantly clear that genuine faith will always result in good works. Ephesians 2:8-10 declares that while we are saved by grace alone through faith alone, that salvation will result in works. Can a Christian, in a time of failure and/or rebellion, appear to be carnal? Yes. Will a true Christian remain carnal? No.
Eternal security is a fact of Scripture. Salvation cannot be lost, because salvation is a gift of God that He will not take away (see John 10:28; Romans 8:37-39; 1 John 5:13). Even in 1 Corinthians 3:15, the carnal Christian is assured of salvation: “If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.” The question is not whether a person who claims to be a Christian but lives carnally has lost his salvation, but whether that person was truly saved in the first place (1 John 2:19).
Christians who become carnal in their behavior can expect God to lovingly discipline them (Hebrews 12:5-11) so they can be restored to close fellowship with Him and be trained to obey Him. God’s desire in saving us is that we would progressively grow closer to the image of Christ (Romans 12:1-2), becoming increasingly spiritual and decreasingly carnal, a process known as sanctification. Until we are delivered from our sinful flesh, there will be outbreaks of carnality. For a genuine believer in Christ, though, these outbreaks of carnality will be the exception, not the rule.
http://www.gotquestions.org/carnal-Christian.html
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
ARE THERE CARNAL CHRISTIANS?
Exclusive Principles
The expression "carnal Christian" is not a New Testament term. In fact it is a complete contradiction in terms. A "Christian" is a "Christ-One" - joined in vital relationship to Christ as Lord and Head, and by virtue of this union, indwelt of the Spirit of God, Who was given to Christ in immeasurable Supply (John 3:34). To be a Christian is to be the possessor of a heavenly, supernatural life.
All that is connoted by the adjective "carnal" is the very reverse, and savors of that which is "earthly, sensual, devilish." The New Testament is at great pains to set forth the tests of true believerhood and discipleship, and if these many scriptures were taken seriously, the glib, superficial and wishful talk of this one or that one being a Christian or "born again" when there are glaring indications to the contrary, would have to cease. If those who talk so loudly of "believing the Bible from cover to cover" would really meditate upon the tests of what constitutes a Christian, and the quality of fruit that will inevitably be produced by one who is a partaker of the Divine nature, a lot of the loose talk and careless teaching that is abroad today, would be recognized as highly subversive and deeply pernicious.
The Christian walk and the flesh-walk are mutually exclusive spheres, conflicting principles, hostile concepts. "Walk in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh" (Gal. 5:16) saith the Apostle. These two types of walk are in perpetually opposite directions, and the principles governing them are irreconcilable.
Spurious "Grace" Teaching
Our contention is that the modern school of self-styled "grace teachers" have in reality "turned the grace of God into lasciviousness" (Jude 4). It is all a part of the age-end apostasy. It genders the antinomianism, which is going to cause a large part of professing Christendom as well as the world, to take the mark of the Beast when he appears.
It is difficult to account for the attitude of these ministers who claim themselves to be teaching that the Divine justification is "by grace through faith" aside and distinct from any work or merit of man. The fathers of the reformation did a very thorough work of rediscovering and setting forth this magnificent doctrine, yet without disparaging the principle of law, or reducing grace to a kind of divine sentimentality, or faith to an empty babble of "taking Jesus as personal Savior." In their zeal to displace the dead works of human righteousness as a cause of salvation, have they not, consciously or unconsciously, discounted the God-wrought righteousness, which is its inevitable effect and its immutable objective.
"For we (Christians) are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before prepared that we should walk in them." It is this class of teachers that have been the proponents of the "carnal Christian" doctrine. They have misused one passage of scripture to divert the whole course of New Testament teaching.
The use of the term "carnal Christian" unavoidably implies a habitual state of carnality, and it is from any such constant state that regeneration is represented as being the alternative, the antithesis. For carnality to be a habitual characteristic is a sure indication of the dominion of sin. But we are plainly told by the Apostle:
"For sin shall not have dominion over you. Know ye not that to whom ye yield yourselves as servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey: whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? . . . Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness" (Rom. 6:14, 16, 18).
It is a serious thing for any Christian teacher to water down the implications of regeneration. For in so doing he conveys a false hope: he comforts the self-deluded individual who thinks he is saved and is not: he condones sin and lowers the standards of discipleship: he does despite to the Spirit of Grace and even to the divine character, because he asserts (in effect) that one can be "a partaker of the Divine nature" and continue in a course of fleshliness: he implies that one can "eat his cake and have it too," or that he can successfully serve both God and Mammon. He sets forth the spiritual walk as preferable but the carnal as passable. Say they; that there are three classes of men, the natural man, the carnal man and the spiritual man. The natural man is, of course, the unsaved child of the world. The carnal man is a saved man who, however, still walks in the flesh. The spiritual man is the higher quality of saved man, who walks in the Spirit and in the course of obedience. (A book by Lewis Sperry Chafer called "He that is Spiritual" and the notes in the Scofield Bible on pages 1213-14 have been two great contributors to this widespread error. - ED.)
The Eighth Chapter of Romans
Much of this is directly contrary to the teaching of the 8th Chapter of Romans. In the first verse of that chapter those in Christ Jesus" are declared to be the ones who "walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." This great chapter is dealing with the believer's walk, and repeatedly that which is "after the flesh" is shown to be distinct from that which is of the Spirit or "after the Spirit." The Greek preposition kata is defined in Thayer: "according to anything as a standard, agreeably to." Then, "For they that are after the flesh (do according to the flesh as a standard) do mind the things of the flesh, but they that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit." Thayer gives an alternate translation of "they that are after the flesh," "they that bear, reflect, the nature of the flesh." "For the mind of the flesh is death, but the mind of the spirit is life and peace."
Let us note that they that bear the nature of the flesh, mind the flesh, while they that bear the nature of the Spirit mind the things of the Spirit. The verb "mind" then changes to its cognate noun, and we are told that "the mind of the flesh is death, and the mind of the Spirit is, life." Nothing could be plainer. Things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. Those that bear the nature of the flesh are in a state of death, while those that bear the nature of the Spirit are in a state of life. Being "after the flesh", is equated with the "mind of the flesh," and the "mind of the flesh" is equated with DEATH. How then can there be such a thing as a "carnal Christian" or a "Christian" who operates according to the flesh-principle as a habitual thing, as the use of the adjective inevitably implies? A Christian is a Christ-one, a person in whom the Divine "Zoe" (life) has been wrought by reason of union with the Only One since the fall of Adam who possessed this precious Life. The carnal principle is related inseparably to Death, while the Christian is inseparably related to Life.
Verse nine of Romans eight emphasizes the same truth: "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His." We are told here so clearly that in whomsoever the Spirit of God dwells, that one is "in the Spirit" as regards the principle of his walk, and has ceased to be "in the flesh" as regards the principle of his walk. This is its obvious meaning in the light of the context. Here "in the flesh" speaks of a Spiritual condition while in II Cor. 10:3 the expression "in the flesh" refers to a physical condition. In the latter passage the same apostle is showing that though we still go around in a physical body our spiritual warfare is not "according to the flesh." The latter expression always is used in a spiritual sense, while the former ("in the flesh") is used in both a physical and a spiritual sense.
In Romans 8:9 we are told that to belong to Christ, or to be a Christian, one must possess the Indwelling Spirit, and that one possessing the Indwelling Spirit, is not "in the flesh" but "in the Spirit," speaking of the principle or law of one's living. Where then does a "carnal Christian" come in? It is a ghastly contradiction of terms, and a direct contradiction of scripture.
The Fifth Chapter of Galatians
In Galatians 5:16-25 we have another discourse in which the flesh-walk and Spirit-walk are sharply contrasted. The two principles are shown to be at war with each other.
Let it be noted, before we proceed further, that in this discussion we are not arguing the eradication of the sin or flesh-nature. As long as we inhabit a body of flesh there will never be complete elimination of the flesh-nature, but the upsurges of its unholy desires and urges are progressively reduced and quelled in the process of sanctification. We are contending, moreover, that in regeneration the principle of government is changed and the Spirit is the dominating force and not flesh-and-sin.
So in Galatians five, the flesh nature lusts against the Spirit and would fain vitiate and neutralize His work, and the Spirit is against the flesh. The verb "lusts" is not repeated with ''the Spirit.'' ''The Spirit does not "lust." But He is against the flesh and prevents it from being a dominating force.
The "works of the flesh" are set forth as manifest, and are plainly listed. It is declared that "those doing (or committing) such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God." Here as in I John 3:9 where it is said: "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin . . ." the present tense indicates habitual action. The most lenient interpretation of these and other passages, is that though sin and its urges are not eliminated in the child of God, indwelt of the Holy Spirit, it is not a deliberate, habitual, premeditated, dominating principle. This inescapable truth the doctrine of ''carnal Christians'' flatly denies.
The last clause of Gal. 5:17 is deeply significant. We have been told "The Spirit is against the flesh" and then comes the explanatory parenthesis, "For these are opposed to one another" and then the clause "In order that ye may not do the things, which ye will." So, read without the parenthetical clause it would be "The Spirit is against the flesh, lest ye do the things, which ye will."
After the apostle has set forth the works of the flesh and the fruits of the Spirit there comes verse 24 which deals another death-blow to the "carnal Christian" heresy. "And they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with the passions and lusts." He does not say "The Spiritual Christian has crucified the flesh, etc." But "they that are of Jesus Christ," the genitive of possession, of relationship. Those who possess Jesus Christ and He them, "have crucified the flash", etc. It is an aorist, a completed act, that the flesh with its lusts and passions has been crucified as a dominating principle in the life of those belonging to Jesus Christ. This is one of the many verses that the propounders of the doctrine of "carnal Christians" have overlooked.
We have repeatedly emphasized the drastic implications of regeneration and discipleship as set forth all the way through the New Testament. One who will honestly search out the matter will find that there is vastly greater bulk of material upon the walk and performance of a Christian than there is even upon the great doctrine of justification by faith. Any "handling aright the word of truth" (II Tim. 2:15 R.V.) should keep such standards right in the forefront of teaching emphasis. The N.T. knows nothing of a grace that does not "reign through righteousness." If the writings of the Apostle Paul are full of these rigid tests, which he set forth under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, it is reasonable to suppose that one passage cannot be used to refute or invalidate the whole course of his emphasis and that of other N.T. writers. God cannot deny Himself.
First Corinthians Chapter Three
But the propounders of the doctrine of "carnal Christians" have done just this with I Cor. 3:1-3. If this passage is to be interpreted as they interpret it then large sections of the New Testament would have to be thrown out. But they have seized upon threads of scripture here or there to buttress their case, though it demands the blinding of men's eyes to a multitude of scriptures that do not support this thinking.
Christians have always found that where there is an apparent discrepancy or contradiction in one or two portions from the prevailing course of Scripture, a careful examination will disclose the fact that no contradiction really exists, and that reconciliation is easy. Certainly it is easier to reconcile the one to the many, than the many to the one.
"And I brethren could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, as unto babes in Christ." Three times the comparative adverb "hos" - "as", is used in this verse. He is not setting forth the theology of the walk of the believer or the principle that governs that walk, as in Romans 8 and Galatians 5. We have previously declared the fact that though the principle of government is changed from the natural-carnal to the spiritual at regeneration, there is not a complete elimination of carnal tendencies and outbreaking carnal acts. The process of sanctification reduces both such tendencies and such acts, until in the mature state of growth both can be so checked as to be scarcely discernible to the eye of man. The apostle is deploring here the arrested process of sanctification rather than dealing with the governing principle of the believer's walk. The New Testament does not teach "carnal Christians," but is full of the tragedy of Christians reverting to carnality. There is a great difference. A person walking along an ice-covered side-walk may slip and slide and frequently fall, but the principle that governs, is a forward movement in an upright position, not a backward slide in a prone position.
The Corinthian Christians from various causes had not gone forward in sanctification as they should and their growth in spiritual understanding was so stunted that he had to speak unto them "as unto carnal," with almost the same degree of simplicity as he would declare God's truth to the unsaved. The Greek word translated "carnal" used in verse one is significantly different from the one used twice in verse 3 also translated "carnal." The first is sarkinos and the second and third are sarkikos. There is little difference, but Thayer tells us that the first is the more emphatic. We believe the first refers to the unsaved. Their position and the principle governing may still be "spiritual" but he must speak to them as though to the carnal (sarkinos). "I fed you with milk, not with meat: for ye were not yet able: nay, not even now are ye able." Obviously it is a matter of growth, which has been unduly arrested. Babies have life, but weak digestion. Then he goes on to say: "For ye are yet carnal (sarkikos) for whereas there is among you jealousy and strife, are you not carnal (sarkikos) and walk according to man?" This carnal (sarkikos) is not speaking of a principle, or of a state that is irremediable, but of an outcropping of a special manifestation of the flesh - jealousy and strife resulting in sectarian cliquishness. In using the interrogative form, he calls on them to judge the evil themselves. It could be paraphrased positively: "You are acting in a carnal manner, in that you are allowing this spirit of jealousy and strife to spring up, which is shown by one saying, 'I am Paul's man' and another 'I am of Apollos' etc. All such acts are nothing but carnality, and like the men of the world."
Do not Base Any Teaching on a Single Verse
Benjamin Whichcote made the remark that if one only has a single scripture on which to base an important teaching, he will probably find on close examination that he has none. This is trebly so when the one portion cited cuts directly athwart the unmistakable teaching of other portions of scripture. We have shown that Romans eight and Galatians five are setting forth the general doctrine concerning the distinction between the Spirit and flesh principles, while the first Epistle of John gives the tests of regeneration, which unmistakably exclude habitual sinning. The term "carnal Christian" implies one who continues in sin as a habitual, constant and settled practice, and is therefore a false and misleading term. We repeat that owing to the old nature that yet abides, there are more or less frequent outcroppings of carnal acts, but the government is changed, the conscience is tender and these occasional reversions to carnality cause a true Christian deep sorrow and penitence of heart. They are sporadic and not constant.
The teaching then of the three classes, natural man, carnal man, and spiritual man is pernicious and is deluding many who are continuing in sin into thinking they are saved. If the spiritual walk is set forth as preferable but the carnal walk possible for a Christian, the evil heart of unbelief will say to itself: "I can sin and yet be saved. If I can be carnal and yet enter heaven, I am content, I will do without rewards." This is all false and the teachers who give such an impression are guilty of false teaching. It is the worst kind of antinomianism and is part of the base alloy of fundamentalist instruction that is abroad today.
The scripture knows of two places - heaven and hell; two beings - God and Satan; two ways -the narrow that leadeth to life, and the broad that leadeth to destruction; two principles of walk - the Spirit principle and the flesh principle. There is no halfway point in any of these. First Corinthians 3:1-3 is not expounding a general doctrine but reproving a specific outcropping of carnality in a certain place. May the Lord keep us true and faithful, and from whittling down divine principles to suit a miserable human performance, or of watering down God's standards to include the inordinate affections of man.
"If any man be in Christ, he is a new creation, old things are passed away: behold all things are become new."
JAMES R. GRAHAM
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
