Part 23
If a person is lost it is because he refuses the free salvation that is offered to him by God. John 1:29, "...the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world." John 3:16,
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him
should not perish, but have everlasting life."
Hebrews 2:9,
"But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor, that he,
by the grace of God, should taste death for every man."
1 John 2:2, "And he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for us only, but also for the sins of the whole world."
The entire human family can be saved. 2 Corinthians 5:19,
"To wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself,
not imputing their trespasses unto them, and hath
committed unto us the word of reconciliation."
Isaiah 61:1,
"The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound;"
Colossians 2:14-15,
"Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And, having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it."
It has been suggested that we still have the sin nature, but that God gave us the Holy Spirit so that we can live a holy life. In effect the teaching holds that the Holy Spirit allows us to win the battle between the old and new natures. I find a problem in this thinking.
If under this case I sin, I am left to understand that the Holy Spirit did not do His work properly and the fault of my sin was His. The thought set forth — that the Holy Spirit controls the sin nature, and that this is our hope for living a good life as a believer — is illogical.
Secondly, this tells us that the Old Testament saint could not have lived a righteous life, for he did not have the Indwelling Spirit as we do. Thus the Old Testament saint had no possibility of pleasing God. Not Logical. Indeed, Unscriptural, For David Pleased God.
How did the Old Testament saint keep from bringing three thousand lambs per day for sacrifice? He had to have sinned continually if the New Testament person has a struggle. This teaching is not acceptable.
Chafer mentions, "...the gift of the indwelling Spirit as One who is able to give victory over every evil disposition." (Systematic Theology, p 293) This implies that he agrees with what has been previously set forth, with the exception that it is not the Holy Spirit that controls whether the person sins or not, but that the individual controls it by being filled with the Spirit.
This line of thinking tells us that the believer has an old nature, and a new nature. The Holy Spirit, if in control, will see to it that the new nature has victory over the old nature. The emphasis is on the control of the Spirit. I have always wondered how this teaching relates to James when it tells us that sin comes from lust. The James text seems to indicate a choice of the will. If what has been set forth is true, the believer that is not controlled by the Spirit will automatically sin. If sin is automatic, then what is James speaking of? James 1:14-15 "But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." If sin is automatic why does James say it comes from lust?
On the other hand if the believer has only one nature, and that being the new creation of God, and if we are as Adam was before the fall, then we have this choice of the will which James indicates. The main objection to this thought is that we still sin. Yes, we still sin, because we are humans, descended in the image of Adam. We choose to do our own thing, rather than follow God.
This is not hard to understand. Given the choice of a life of ease or a life of tribulation, we naturally want to go the easy way. It takes a choice of the will to do either. Those that want to follow God, will choose the life that He shows them, rather than what they would naturally desire.
To sin or not to sin, then is the choice to do it God's way or our own way. The committed Christian will choose the way of God and the noncommitted Christian will choose his own way.
No one disagrees that man has a bent toward evil. Christianity has taught the mediate transferral of the sin nature. Chafer lists three proofs that the sin nature is received mediately from Adam. In other words because of Adam we received a sin nature. First, Scripture says it, that finishes it.
Secondly, it is observable in all of history — war, Hitler, hateful things man does to man, etc. Man shows his true, sinful, colors when he opens his mouth or acts. Finally, the fact that man is consciousness of God. Most every civilization recognizes man is not a perfect creature. Why else would they work for merit. We all work to improve our perception before man. There is always a concept of right and wrong.
Most agree that in Adam, all of mankind sinned. We are all in our earthly father's image.
THE NATURE, OR NATURES OF MAN
We have already hinted at the fact that there is discussion as to the number of natures of man. This question has been around for some time.
There are two views as to the nature, or natures of saved man. Both views would see lost man as having one nature, and that being an old nature, or possibly better termed Adamic nature.
The difficulty comes in whether the old nature, which by the way is not a Scriptural term, so let us say whether the Adamic nature, is eradicated, or if it is present along side the new creation of God.
As you read the texts that supposedly prove that we have two separate and distinct natures, read them carefully and examine them within their context. Many verses used to prove this point are poorly if not wrongly used.
I don't think anyone would dispute the fact that the saved man has an inner man. What is the inner man? The Spirit? The nature? The soul? I'd say soul, and this would require the lost also have an inner man.
The two nature people use Romans 7:25 to prove the struggle between the old nature and the new nature. "I thank God through Jesus Christ, our Lord. So, then, with the mind I myself serve the law of god; but with the flesh, the law of sin." One must determine if this is Paul speaking from his lost state, or his saved state. I wonder at a statement of Paul that mentions that he serves the law, being tied to his saved state. I doubt that after his conversion he followed the Old Testament law. If he did, it was only until Christ taught him that he didn't need to.
Cambron states that this new nature is a "Christly Nature...an Imparted Nature...a Holy Nature...an Unchangeable Nature...a Non-forfeited Nature." "Its End is Resurrection and Rapture" "Every child of God has two natures; the unsaved man has only one nature. The old nature cannot be eradicated while the believer lives in the flesh; therefore, we have the fight between the old and new natures." (Cambron, Mark G., D.D.; "Bible Doctrines"; Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1954)
He also mentions that Romans 7:22 is speaking definitely of Paul as a saved man. No unsaved ever delights after the law of God. He also mentions that "...only the saved man has the inward man, which is the new nature." He offers no proof of this.
The two nature thought requires that the one nature system, eradicate the old nature. Eradicate is the wrong term. Eradicate has the idea of doing away with — getting rid of — destroying. The thought of the one nature person is more along the line that the lost person has a sin nature which is a nature of man that is injured by the fall. (We have shown that the two nature people hold to this.) The work of the cross transforms that injured nature, back into the nature that it should have been had Adam not fallen.
We are a new creation according to Scripture. We are not a depraved person that is given a new creation — the new nature, we are a depraved person that is transformed into what we should be. If this is not true how do you deal with the meaning of rebirth.
The two nature people would view the struggle of old nature versus new nature as our state, and the fact that we are Spiritual in God's eyes as our standing.
They use several verses to prove their point. I would like to list these verses with some thoughts for you to consider as you consider their position. If there is a reference with no comments, it is probably because it is dealt with later in this section.
Romans 13:14
Colossians 3:10.
"And have put on the new [man], which is renewed in knowledge
after the image of him that created him"
I would start at 3:1. Putting off the old man was a past item of business. We will see this later. The putting on of the new man is also a past item of business. It is an aorist tense. (The aorist tense is something that occurred in the past at a point in time. There is no continuing action.) This has to do with living as they ought to live, and not as their Adamic nature is forcing them to do.
Romans 6:13
"Neither yield ye your members [as] instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members [as] instruments of righteousness unto God."
I would add vs. 11 and 12 also.
"Likewise, reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Let not sin, therefore, reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in its lusts. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin, but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God."
This is not saying that there is a conflict — only that we can yield ourselves to serve sin, or serve God. It is our free choice — an act of our will.
Ephesians 4:22
"That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man,
which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;"
Ephesians 4:24
"And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in
righteousness and true holiness."
Let us look at the terms involved and see what the Scripture has to say. (I have included the tenses of some of the verbs in brackets for your convenience.) We are just listing the references and making observations.
A LOOK AT THE TERMS
Old Man: Romans 6:6,
"Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the
body of sin might be destroyed [aorist], that henceforth
we should not serve sin."
The old man is crucified with Christ so that the body of sin might be destroyed. Three things that need to be noticed: One is that our old man was crucified — put to death as Christ was. Secondly, we need to note the term destroy, which would give the impression that it is no longer around. The body of sin is no longer around. Thirdly, all this is so that we "should not sin." This does not say we cannot sin, nor does it say that we do not sin — only that we Should Not Sin.
2 Corinthians 5:17,
"Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away [aorist, active, indicative]; behold [aorist, middle, imperative], all things are become new [perfect, active, indicative]."
(The perfect is an act in the past that has continuing action into the future. It is something that is permanent.)
If we are in Christ the text tells us that we are new creatures — that old things are passed away, and that all things become new. Passed away indicates "gone." All — ALL becomes new — we are new creatures.
What can we say from all this? All the old ways are gone and they are replaced by new. Might this be speaking of our life style and way of doing things? I suspect so. There is also indication that the old is gone and that we are a "new creature" — singular.
Ephesians 4:22,
"That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man,
which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;"
The old man is corrupt. Statement of fact. The verb put off is aorist — past. They have put off the old man which is corrupt. It is done. This is
not a command to put him off. Nor, is it a command to keep putting him off every day. He was put of in the salvation experience.
Colossians 3:9, "Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;" The old man was put off past it would seem from this text. (Put off is an aorist, middle tense.)
Old Nature: There is no listing for old nature in the Scripture.
New Man: Ephesians 2:15,
"Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, [so] making peace;"
The context seems to indicate to me that this new man is a combining of the Jew and Gentile into one people for the Lord, and that people, probably referring to the church. This verse really does not relate to our discussion.
Ephesians 4:24,
"And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in
righteousness and true holiness."
"Put on" is aorist middle, and thus is a past action that they have done. The term created is also aorist and a past thing. Not something that the Ephesian people are to do.
Colossians 3:10,
"And have put on the new [man], which is renewed in knowledge
after the image of him that created him"
"Have put on" is aorist middle, and thus something past. Renewed is present passive, thus the renewing is continuing and it is being done from outside the person. (Created is an aorist active.) The new man is knowledgeable after the image of our creator.
New Nature: There is no listing in Scripture for this term.
New Creature: 2 Corinthians 5:17,
"Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature old
things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."
(See above for comments.)
Galatians 6:15,
"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor
uncircumcision, but a new creature."
The new creation availeth for something, and the context would indicate that salvation is in view. The new creature evidently comes from the salvation experience.
Miscellaneous Texts:
Ephesians 2:1-3 tells us of our past life that is now gone because of what salvation has done in our being.
"And you hath he made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins; In which in times past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the sons of disobedience; Among whom also we all had our manner of life in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others."
We are no longer this type of person due to salvation. all this is behind us.
2 Peter 1:4 mentions that we partake of the divine nature. The context is strictly salvation and its benefits. There is no hint of struggle, or vestige of the old nature left in our being.
"Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust."
1 Corinthians 2:14,
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
This is contrasted with a spiritual man. This is man in his Adamic fallen, unsaved, unregenerated state.
Galatians 5:16-26 contrasts the lost, or life of the flesh, to the saved, or the life of the Spirit filled man. It is a stark contrast of lost vs. saved. Verse 24 is of interest to our discussion. "And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." "have crucified" is an aorist active, indicative tense, which means that they did it at a point in the past — point of fact. (Indicative shows a statement of fact.)
If you are to make this a conflict between the flesh and spirit in one person you have problems with vs. 21 which states that the workers of the flesh won't be in the kingdom of God. I think that one holding that this is old vs. new natures must also hold to the insecurity of the believer. Indeed, Bancroft a two nature man states that the saved person is not in the flesh, but relates that he still has the flesh within. He bases this on Galatians 5:16,17. That is a real problem for the doctrine of the security of the believer.
Romans 8:12-13,
"Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if we live after the flesh, ye shall die; but if ye, through the Spirit, do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live."
To say that the flesh is in us and read this text where it says "if we live after the flesh, ye shall die" gives some rise to the thought of eternal security and its truth...
Let us move on to consider further the question of one or two natures. So, if there is no struggle between our new and old nature, why do we sin as believers? Because we make a choice to. We chose to follow our desire. Not because some ugly sin nature is pressuring us to, but because we allow our minds to dwell on things that they ought not dwell on. We allow our mind to decide to sin. James 1:14-15,
"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death."
There is a sequence involved in our sin in this text, and there is no mention of our old nature, old man, evil self or any other thing in the text. Only lust — enticement — sin.
Romans 6:11-13,
"Likewise, reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Let not sin, therefore, reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in its lusts. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin, but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God."
Galatians 2:20,
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me."
"live in the flesh" relates to living life, not living with the "flesh" or the old nature.
We have the choice to do either — sin or serve God. Romans six calls us to serve God and not sin.
Conclusions Based On These References:
1. The indication is that the new man is something put on in the past by some of the recipients of Paul's writings indicating that it is something that came at salvation. The putting away of our old life.
2. We are told that we Should not serve sin.
3. Our old man was crucified, and is no longer a threat to us, if he is dead.
4. All things in the believer are new.
5. The old is passed away. This terminology would indicate that the old is not going to bother us at all.
If you haven't tumbled to it yet, it should be obvious that the definition of "nature" is of great importance to us. How can we define nature?
Buswell suggests in the discussion of Christ's nature, a "complex of attributes" (Ryrie, Charles C.; "Basic Theology"; Wheaton: Victor Books, 1986, p 250). In other words, the compilation of all the attributes of a person. This would be the person's nature.
We might make note that a nature cannot sin. A person sins. A nature is the sum total of all attributes of the being.
If this definition is true then all the attributes of a lost man would include things like, fallen, vile, evil, against God, etc.
If this definition is true then all the attributes of a saved man would include things like, saved, holy, regenerated, righteous, etc.
The old attributes have passed away and the new attributes are in place.
What of the saved person that ceases to walk with God? Are his essential attributes or nature changed? No. He is still saved, righteous, etc. though he is not walking with God.
In all of my study I see nothing to warrant a doctrine of two natures in any of the texts that are normally given to prove that we have two. Nor have I run across any references in my own reading of the Word that indicate two natures.
It is suggested that Romans seven depicts the struggle between the old and the new nature. There are several possible settings to this passage. The key to understanding the text is to put it in the context of Romans 7:25 and 8:1-2. This can't depict chapter seven as a saved man's view.
Possible settings for Romans seven.
a. Paul reflecting on his lost days and his struggle as a Pharisee with following the law.
b. Newel suggests it is Paul describing his past struggle with the law as a believer before he knew he wasn't bound to the law. He did not realize he did not have to live up to it.
c. Others suggest that he is describing a constant, day to day struggle between the Adamic nature and the new nature. This requires that Christ died for only our personal sin and not the sin nature.
Romans 7:25-8:2 are hard to accept if Chapter seven is a saved man. Indeed 8:1-4 gives the idea that we, because of salvation, don't serve this law of sin that he has just struggled with, and that we do serve God.
I am not sure I understand all I desire to know about the Romans seven text, but I see enough to say that this is not stating that we have a struggle with the flesh and the spirit going on all the time.
Indeed, the overwhelming evidence is that there is no struggle, except between the lust that we can follow with our minds, and our will. This is not two natures. This is mind over lust — matters of the will and intellect, within the recreated soul of man.
I might mention that those that believe in two natures base much of their position on this Romans text, which is in high dispute. Few can confidently state, without reservation what it truly means. So why base a doctrine on a questionable text? Look at the whole of Scripture and see how the questionable text relates to it, not look at the questionable text and attempt to relate all of Scripture to your interpretation of the questionable text.
Our new nature has attributes that make it heavenly and Godly. All our attributes are our nature.
I realize this goes cross grain with many men. Scofield, Bancroft, Cambron, Walvoord and I'm sure Chafer and many others. I wonder why Ryrie does not deal with it (that I have found anyway). Is it because he disagrees with the boys? I don't know.
Walvoord does not believe the old nature is eradicated but that it is out of luck as far as controlling the believer. "Though it is impossible to eradicate the old nature, the exhortation prohibits the old sin nature from dominating the believer's manner of life. The old nature has lost its power in view of the crucifixion of Christ, but the victory can be wrought by God only through the indwelling Holy Spirit."
He goes on to state something that is somewhat eschew of his thinking. "...Christians continue to contend with the "old self" which is contrary to the new nature." (Reprinted by permission: Walvoord, John F. Editor; "Lewis Sperry Chafer Systematic Theology Volume One"; USA: Victor
Books, 1988, p 406) If we aren't dominated by it then how can we be constantly struggling with it?
So, if we do have a left over of the Adamic nature, it is an integrated part of our one nature. I do not think that this is what we have seen, but is an option to the person that desires to retain the Adamic nature within the saved person.
The Adamic nature does not, nor can it ever, force anyone into sin. It is a collection of spiritual characteristics, and not a force to be dealt with.
The new creation is also a collection of characteristics which make up what we are. It cannot, nor can it ever force us to live correctly. It is not a force.
The individual can, at his will, decide to follow the old ways of the lost. This is termed carnal, or flesh in the Scripture. This is not something he is forced to do, but is something that he desires to do. (If we view him forced to, we must give stock to the world's favorite phrase, "The Devil made me do it.")
One must then submit that if a believer that was once spiritual, which is acting as carnal, is acting against his own character — his divine character.
We say man has three parts. Body, soul and spirit. This is pre and post salvation. Where does the Adamic nature fit in? Is it a forth part? No. It is the characteristics of the lost being. It is the pollution of the soul and/or spirit. Which? The spirit is our God consciousness — even in lost man. It is not clearly seeing God. The soul is polluted by sin.
Now salvation comes on the scene and we are a new creation. How are the Spirit and soul affected? Are we given a forth part? A new nature? No. It has to be a changing of the spirit and soul.
Is it a partial changing? How could God call us a new creation or new creature if we were only partly new? He can't.
It seems from what we have seen that we, as believers, are in Adam's prefall state, and we choose to sin as Adam did. It is a decision, or act of the will, not a lost struggle with the old nature.
We have one thing that Adam did not have — 1 John 1:9. We can go before the throne of grace to confess our sin and be restored to that wonderful state, anytime we want.
If you study the word nature, you will find that normally it is viewed as the sum and substance of all that a thing or being is. For example, let us consider a glass of milk. It, as milk, has certain characteristics. If you put poison in, and stir it, the overall nature has been changed. You don't have two natures, you have one that is drastically changed. So, in our being, God regenerated us, we are born again, we are new, we have only one nature.
From all of this, we should deduce that nature is the inherent character or total collection of facts about ones character. The nature of man then becomes all that the man is.
The question then comes, how many natures does he have? Only one. The lost man has one, the saved man has one. The lost man's nature is sinful, and the saved man's is either sinful, or not sinful.
Part of that overall make up needs to have the idea of a self centered, self willed, self serving, characteristic, but still within only one nature.
We then sin because we decide. We then sin because we desire. We then sin because we are self willed, self serving and self centered.
Does that put the monkey of sin and its cause on our back? Very definitely.
I trust that as you approach sin, you will realize that if you proceed, it is because of your decision, and not the old nature, not the Devil, and not the Spirit. It is because you want to.
The ultimate reality in this question is this. If you believe that you have a constant struggle going on, as the two nature people believe, and that you can have victory by relying on the Holy Spirit, as they also believe, then when the person sins, they feel that they have failed to have the victory. Allow this to go on for many years, and you will find the many, totally defeated Christians that we have in our churches. They are totally discouraged because they can't find the victory that they have been taught they can have.
Now, on the other hand, if you tell them that the sin of their life is not due to failing to have the victory, but that it is because they Chose — Decided — Acted — because they wanted to, and you will give them instant relief from their terrible guilt. They don't have victory because the choose not to, not because they have failed in some spiritual battle.
They have not failed the Lord because they haven't been able to walk with Him as closely as they needed to, to have the victory, they have failed the Lord because they have decided to sin.
There is a vast difference between failing the Lord, because you couldn't walk close enough to Him, and to fail Him because we decide with the will to turn against Him. The difference is the terrible guilt.
If we realize we choose to sin, we then realize how important 1 John 1:9 is to us. We will also realize that confession is that which brings us to not want to have to confess the same sin again. On the two nature side, 1 John 1:9 seems to be a crutch for life. You sin because you can't walk close enough to the Lord, and this is the way back.
Confession is, in part, agreeing with God about the terribleness of the sin. If we sin by an act of the will, we are in open rebellion against God. If we sin because we didn't walk as close to him as we should, the sin becomes only the slip of the walk, and a slip of the control of the Spirit.
I see sin, and 1 John 1:9, as a one nature person, as open rebellion and restoration. It is a terrible process to have to go through. As a two nature person, prior to coming to the conclusions I have submitted to you in this section, I was prone to 1 John 1:9 my problems away lightly, because, I was just a little remiss about my walk with the Lord. "Oh, Lord, I forgot my quiet time where I ask you to control me, and got a little off track. Sorry. Forgive me. Amen."
To see sin as rebellion, to see sin as my own responsibility, to see sin as God sees it, as filthy unrighteousness, is to see 1 John 1:9 as a serious place to find yourself.
I trust that you have a healthy realization of what sin is. I trust that you will seriously consider All Of The Scriptures before you decide on one or two natures.
Remember, the crux of the decision is the definition of "nature." To have two natures is to do damage to the normal definition of the term.
Are we talking about sinless perfection. No, never. We will sin however we do not have to. Remember 2 Peter?
"According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that [pertain] unto life and godliness, through the knowledge
of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:" (2 Peter 1:3)
We aren't perfect, yet we don't have to sin. Because we have tried to get away from the false teaching of sinless perfection, we have over reacted to the point of saying we sin because it is our nature. It is almost as if we have to sin — we have no choice. Based on this teaching, we have allowed sin to become a normal part of the Christian life.
We need not see sin as an integrated part of life, we should see it as something that is an option. We don't need to sin, we need to not sin.
IMPUTED SIN
Man is lost due to Adams sin. Is that a true statement? In that God justly transmitted Adams nature to all mankind, yes.
In reality, man is lost in this life because of Adam's sin. In the next life, man is lost due to the fact that he did not respond to God's free offer of salvation in this life.
Romans 5:19 tells us,
"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,
so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."
Wow. Two, huge doctrines introduced in one little verse.
We All Were Made Sinners By Adam.
We All Can Be Made Saints By Christ.
The thought of our sinning in Adam is foreign to some people. I wasn't there so why should I be blamed. Hebrews 7:9-10 may help us to understand this one. "And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, paid tithes in Abraham. For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchizedek met him." (Melchizedek met Abraham in Genesis 14:17-20, Levi was born in Genesis 29:34) As Levi paid tithes before he was even born, so we all sinned before we were even born.
Romans 5:12 also is quite plain on the subject.
"Therefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by
sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned"
Q. Would you have sinned if you had been there in the garden?
Yes. Romans 3:23 tells us that all have sinned. It would be illogical to assume that one of us could have "not sinned" if we had been in the garden. God could not justly pass sin on to all mankind, unless it was the just thing to do. It must be, that we would all have sinned had we been in the garden.
There are some varying views as to how this concept of our being a sinner in Adam is explained.
1. Pelagian: We aren't sinners in Adam. We sinned as he did after our perfect creation. Adam himself was only a bad example, and we being big copy cats, followed his example.
2. Arminian: Because of Adam's sin all mankind is unrighteous and unable to seek God. God does, however give us enough Spirit to counteract this evil, enough so that man can respond to God, or turn to sin. This conscious turning to evil instead of to God is when God imputes sin to us.
3. Federal: God made a covenant with Adam and Adam broke it. Ever since God has been creating souls with evil natures which leads to sin. Adam was the federal head of the race. This is a result of Adam's sin, not a passing down of a sinful nature because we are sinful.
4. Mediate Imputation: The new physical body is corrupted by propagation from Adam. God creates the soul perfect but as soon as the body and soul are joined, the soul is corrupted. It is automatic. Man has no test to undergo, or to fail. (This theory again shows it to be a consequence of Adam's sin not a consequence of our nature.)
5. Augustinian: "In Adam's free act, the will of the race revolted from God and the nature of the race corrupted itself. The nature which we now possess is the same nature that corrupted itself in Adam." (From Strong.) Adam's sin is given to us not because he failed, but because it is ours. He is the representative of the race. We are corrupt because we chose to be with Adam not because of consequences of his sin.
1. If we sinned in Adam then we must also assume if it had been Stan and Faith instead of Adam and Eve, that Stan would have sinned.
If the above is true then: a. We should not be upset with people that sin, for we in their place would sin also. We do have the Holy Spirit, however that gives us the opportunity to not sin. b. There should never be any self righteousness on our part when dealing with sin, or sinners. Our only righteousness is the best robe of the Son placed upon us by the Father.
2. Christ took ALL our sin and gave us HIS righteousness. A feeble illustration would be — at one point in my life in the 60's we owed $6000, plus. At that point had Mark Getty the multimillionaire, come to me and said, "I am taking over your debt and I'm going to give you every penny I have or own." I would have received not only the forgiveness of the debt, but also the riches of the debt taker. This illustrates that Christ took our sins and gave His righteousness. "Think on these things" Philippians says.
When God says, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Isaiah 6:8b, How can anyone not respond "Here Am I Send Me."
We Have Nothing Without Christ.
Do We Live Like It? Is He The Most Important Thing In Your Life?
A sociologist researched the family history of the Edwards and the Jukes families. This is what he found.
The Richard Edwards and Elizabeth Tuthill family over 300 years have produced 1,394 offspring. The result was as follows: "12 have been college presidents, 65 professors, 265 college graduates, 60 physicians, 100 clergy men, 60 authors, 100 lawyers, 30 judges, 80 public officials, three congressmen, two senators, and two presidents. Distinguished names like Jonathon Edwards, Aaron
Burr, Eli Whitney, Bishop Vincent, Grover Cleveland, U. S. Grant, and Edith Carow Roosevelt...."
"On the other hand, during the same period, out of 1,220 members of the Jukes family 300 died in infancy, 440 were wrecked by disease, 310 were professional paupers, 50 prostitutes, 60 thieves, seven murderers, and 53 other criminals." (From Treasury of Christian Faith; under topic of sin. by Albert W. Palmer.)
Now we all know that the Adamic nature is passed on generation after generation, but with statistics like these, one must wonder if the proper upbringing can't help in the overall situation. We all know that all of mankind is lost, but the Godly influence has something to do with the way people respond to their creator.
MAN UNDER SIN
Chafer suggests some points to describe man under sin. I would like to adapt these for our discussion.
Man is:
1. Definitely dead in Adam.
2. Depraved, dead and damned.
3. De sins de same — Devil's, Adams and personal.
4. Decreed "under sin".
5. Disregarded merit.
6. Divine extendable grace.
7. Devilish domination and deception.
I would like to elaborate on these briefly.
1. Definitely dead in Adam. We are proclaimed by Scripture to be dead in Adam. All mankind, fell with him. The lost person has no choice in the matter, he is dead in Adam.
2. Depraved, dead and damned. Because of the common fall of man, lost man is unable to respond properly to the creator. Not only is he unable of proper response, he is dead spiritually and damned to the lake of fire because of his sin with Adam.
3. De sins de same — Devil's, Adams and personal. All sin is the same, whether it is the Devil's, Adams, or our own. Sin is missing the mark set by God, and we all have accomplished that.
4. Decreed "under sin". God tells us in the Word that all lost mankind is under sin. There is no choice, there is no option — under sin is the lot of lost man. Only in Christ can this change.
5. Disregarded merit. Had Adam lived in the garden without sin, we must assume that merit would have been the result. He would have deserved to have eternal life with God in the garden, yet he chose to eat the fruit that was forbidden.
6. Divine extendable grace. Through Christ, God was able to extend His grace to man, to provide a method of salvation. This salvation allows Christ to give HIS merit to us, so that God can save us.
7. Devilish domination and deception. Lost man is dominated by the Devil. The Scripture tells us that he is the god of this world system, and the lost are totally caught up in the system.
Now, believer, do you have a little more to be thankful for? Are we not learning a little about how great God's grace is as we study and learn of sin?
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2:8-9)
Not of works lest any man should boast.
God is perfect so cannot accept less than perfect into His presence. Only the works of Christ's can appear before Him.
Unless I missed some loophole I think it is like this. God did it all. We can't do anything. — OR — God did it. We didn't it.
HOW FINAL CAN YOU GET?
One final thought. There is a teaching around in the 1990's which says that grace covers it all. No matter what we do, grace will cover it. Yes, grace will cover it, but our realization of what God has done and how terrible sin is, then why in the world would we want to walk in sin so that grace could cover it.
Christ suffered and died on the cross for our sin. His suffering ought to bring us to desire not to sin.
Grace covers it all — yes. Common sense says take opportunity of grace as little as possible.
CHRISTIAN SIN
We have already established, in this book, as well as in our lives, that believers sin. We want to consider believers sin. Sin in our lives is not a top secret. We know our own sin before we step into it. We know our sin, because we consider what we want to do and then do it.
Our conscience is present, just in case we desire to sin and forget it. As we sin, the conscience tells us immediately so that we may care for the infraction. If we put off confession it remains in place to prod us into correcting the error.
As we determine to do the wrong, we know it to be wrong. As we determine to forget our wrong, we know it is wrong. The conscience is there to keep reminding us that we have done wrong. It will not go away and it will continue to return from time to time until we correct our problem.
Is there a difference between the sin of the lost and the Christians sin? Sin is sin no matter who it is that is doing it. Sin is missing the mark that was set by God. The sin of the believer may well hurt the Lord more, in that it is His own child that has gone against Him. It may be similar to my own child disobeying as compared to my neighbors child disobeying. My own child's conduct is more important. God is injured by the sin of the lost, in that His creatures are going against Him.
Christ's work on the cross is the only remedy to any sin, be it the sin of the lost, or the sin of the believer. This work was done one time in the past. We do not have to re-kill Him for each sin. He died and offered His blood in the heavenly tabernacle once and for all. His death on the cross was to care for all sin both past, present and future.
Sin severs our fellowship with the Lord. This fellowship can only be restored by confession. 1 John 1:9 tells us,
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our
sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
God will forgive, based on our confession. Confession, however implies two things. First, that you agree with God's evaluation of the act being sin, and secondly, that you will attempt to not fall into that sin again.
We also need to know that before we seek forgiveness, we must have forgiven others of their wrongs to us. Mark 11:25-26 (Matthew 6:14-15 also) shows that there is a link between the Father's forgiveness and our forgiveness of others. "And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have anything against any, that your Father also, who is in heaven, may forgive you your trespasses. But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father, who is in heaven, forgive your trespasses." Indeed, the context of 1 John indicates that our fellowship with the Father is directly related to our seeking forgiveness.
We need to recognize also that confessing is not just lightly admitting that you did it, but that you have God's feeling of disgust over that sin.
The blood of Christ is not applied to the sin until after the forgiveness is sought. This is only logical. If it were applied automatically, we would have no need to go before the Lord with our confessions.
Now, in light of all we know about the sin nature and sin itself, how do we approach a lost person, in an attempt to lead them to salvation? What do we tell them to do? Do we say that they need to ask forgiveness for their sins? Do we say that they need to ask that God would take away their sin nature? Do we say that they need to stop sinning?
Just what is the Gospel that we need to share? Let me share a few points that seem to be consistent with what we have learned thus far. They should know that:
1. They are by nature, and by walk, a sinner.
2. They are by nature unable to correct their problem.
3. They are dependant on Jesus Christ as the only possible solution to their situation.
4. They must believe that He was God, that He died for their sin (singular), and that He was buried and raised from the dead.
5. If they believe that, and accept his work for their sin, they will be saved. This is similar to the Old Testament saint that brought a sacrifice and gave it to the priest to be killed. The priest would place it on the alter and the saint would place his hand on the head of the sacrifice to signify that the animal had to die because of his sin.
Forgiveness is part of salvation, as well as part of the Christian walk. It is not salvation however. Forgiveness for the lost is a step in the process of salvation. The lost person can never receive forgiveness for their past personal sin until they are regenerated.
In our Christian life, we must seek forgiveness any time we sin. If we sin a dozen times, then we should seek forgiveness a dozen times. Some ask forgiveness once a day, in which they lump them all together. This does not seem to be the proper way. When we sin, we automatically take control of ourselves. The Spirit no longer controls our lives. If we sin, and sin, and sin, then we are not walking with the Lord. To live properly, we should restore fellowship as soon as possible.
Since we know the Devil and his ways lead to sin, and that Godly ways lead to a Spirit filled life, why do we choose to sin?
There are two reasons. First of all the Devil, at times can confuse the issues at the cross over point between good and evil. We like to call these gray areas. It usually is the Devil that made them gray. We might in this case sin, due to improper knowledge.
The usual reason we sin is the fact that we decide to sin to fulfill our own lusts.
The devil has devised many tools for man to use in this Struggle between evil and good. Let's look at some of these tools briefly.
Rationalization: It won't hurt just this once. A little social drink can't hurt. One time with that other woman won't hurt. (You know, two consenting adults etc.)
Gray Areas: Well the Bible really isn't clear on this. This is a disputed area — no one knows. I disagree with Paul the apostle on this one.
Desire: God gave me these desires so they must be okay. Desire is natural so why not follow them.
Service To God: I will make money to give to missions. I will serve Him next year. I will serve Him when I retire.
God has a given expectation, for the believer and the believers life. That expectation can be maintained, otherwise God would be unjust to give it to us. He has given us all the help that we need to live up to that expectation. That help is the Holy Spirit. As we allow the Spirit to control our lives and our decisions we will walk along the expected courses. When we deviate from the Spirit's leading and prompting then we deviate from the expectations that the Lord has set.
I John 5:4 tells us, "For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith." (is born = perfect, passive; overcometh = present, active, indicative; overcometh = aorist, active) The being born was something that is past and continuing into the future to a point of conclusion. The one that is born of God continually overcomes the world on a daily basis. The victory that overcometh the world is something that occurred in the past based on our faith.
So, Then, Our Salvation Faith Gives Us Victory To Overcome The World In Our Continuing Day To Day Basis. Think on that one for a time.
God does not attempt to keep the believer from the Devil's work, but He does give us all that is needed to continually walk in the control of the Spirit. Job is a good example of the exposing of the believer to the testings of Satan.
He will however totally isolate us from the Devil and all evil, in that day when He removes us from this life for life in His presence.
God may allow the Devil access to our lives, but He will never allow him to overcome us. In 1 John 4:4 John is speaking of the false spirit's that the believer will be confronted with. He mentions, "Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world." The Holy Spirit within is greater than the Devil that is without.
James tells us to resist the Devil. What does that mean? (James 4:7 "Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.") Notice that one little ittey bittey prerequisite. Submit Yourselves Therefore To God.
How do we resist the Devil?
a. Say No.
b. Be prepared with knowledge of what is sin, and what is not sin so that you can make your decisions quickly when tempted, and walk away from those things that are sin. Don't hang around trying to figure out whether it is sin or not. If you aren't sure don't do it, and work it out in your mind later when you aren't being confronted.
c. Avoid situations that could lead to problems, or that could lead you into a situation in which you would be forced to make a decision for or against.
d. Maintain your walk with the Lord at the highest, and best level that you can.
There is no reason for there to be sin in the life of the believer. We have the Word to guide our path. We have the Holy Spirit to lead and guide our path. When we blow it, we have Christ interceding before the Lord to be sure that forgiveness of our boo-boo's is forthcoming.
I would like to consider 1 John 1:7 for a few moments.
"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood
of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin."
It might be suggested from this verse by itself that if we walk with the Lord we are automatically cleansed by the blood of Christ. You need to take this verse within the context of verse nine. As we confess the blood is applied, not automatically.
Chafer lists seven losses when the believer sins. I would like to mention these for your thought.
1. Loss Of Light. We cannot receive guidance from the Spirit nor from the Word when we have sin in our lives.
2. Loss Of Joy. Again due to sin, the Spirit is quenched and one of His fruit is joy.
3. Loss Of Fellowship. This is clear from 1 John 1:6, "If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth."
4. Loss Of Closeness: The closeness that we have to God in our personal lives and quiet times.
5. Loss Of Peace. Again a fruit of the Spirit. Indeed, when you know what peace with God is — when you loose it you are miserable.
6. Loss Of Confidence. Your prayer life may suffer — lack of faith etc. You may even lack confidence to go on with your everyday life. If you rely on the Lord heavily in the daily walk then when you don't have Him to lean on, you may become very unsure.
7. Loss Of Confidence. In the area of His coming was Chafer's thought but it may also relate to security of the believer as well.
Needless to say, when we sin we loose fellowship, and when we loose fellowship, we loose.
Confession is for correcting things with God. However, if the sin affected others, you must correct things with them as well. Indeed, the correction with others must be a part of correction with God. Confession of your wrong and seeking of forgiveness from others that your sin has affected is necessary. (Colossians 3:13, "Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye." Ephesians 4:32, "And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for christ's sake hath forgiven you.")
I SAID NECESSARY — NOT PLEASANT.
We need to be sure we realize that sin only breaks fellowship and communion with God. It can never, under any circumstance break our Father/son relationship.
When we sin there is further action taken in relation to the confession of sin and the forgiveness of 1 John 1:9. 1 John 2:1 mentions,
"My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not.
And if any man sin, we have an advocate with
the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:"
Just when is the Lord our advocate, before we confess or after we confess? The terminology of advocate would indicate that He stands up for us. When we sin there is an accusation so to speak, and this is followed by our defense. We confess and plead guilty — throw ourselves to the mercy of the court. Christ then steps in to plead our case. Forgiveness is forthcoming for the Father views the Lord's righteousness, and not our filthiness.
Chafer observes four things about the sin of the believer (on page 345). I would like to list these quickly for your contemplation:
1. The sin of the believer is as evil as the sin of the lost.
2. The sin of the believer is against a greater light than the lost's.
3. The sin of the believer is worse in that we do not have the world, the flesh and the devil to fight against.
4. The believer has the Holy Spirit, the Word and the Advocate to aid him in his sin problems.
1. As we consider our personal sin:
a. Our sin hurts God immediately.
b. Our sin immediately breaks proper fellowship.
c. Our sin immediately places God in a bad light.
d. Our sin immediately places Satan in a good light.
e. Our sin immediately affects our testimony before man. So, Why Do We Sin So Much?
When we resist sin: a. Satan is put down — he is the loser. b. In the great spiritual arena, when you say NO Satan looses face. So, Why Don't We Resist More?
QUITE A THOUGHT TO SAY THE LEAST.
The Real Clincher In This Is That We Can Choose To Offend God To Whom We Owe So Much — Or — We Can Put Down Satan, The Enemy Of God, To Whom We Owe Nothing.
Why In The World Would We Want To Knowingly Sin?
It has to be a conscious decision to do what we want to do, when we know that God has specified that we are not do it.
WE SIN FOLKS, BECAUSE WE WANT TO.
WE OUGHT NOT SIN, BECAUSE WE WANT TO.
PUNISHMENT
We have studied the Lord and His Word, we have studied sin, and we will soon move on to the great thoughts of salvation, but we need to look briefly at the intermediate topic of punishment.
Punishment comes in several fashions which we need to look at. The lost will receive a completely different punishment than the believer that has strayed. The believer, in this life, may even find himself under the punishing hand of his Heavenly father.
We want to think about trials and chastisements. Just what are trials, what are chastisements? Trials are for the building up of the believer and the stretching of his spiritual being. It is the positive side of the negatives of life.
Chastisement on the other hand is for the bringing back of the believer to his Lord, after a period of sin and rebellion. It is not meant as punishment, though there is a punitive aspect to it. It is meant to draw their attention from their own desires unto the desires of their Lord.
God chooses to chastise, rather than allow the believer continue to go his own way to the detriment of the believer, or of the believers testimony.
What about the person that is living in open sin yet is not chastised. Indeed, at times it seems that the person is being blessed of the Lord. How do you explain God allowing a person to continue in rebellion against Him, to continue walking in sin, and to continue to ruin the testimony of God?
We knew of a man that drank fairly regularly and was very close to criminal in his business life. He was making money, he was building his business, he was making all sorts of progress in the world's eyes. He had seen his business triple in less than a year, yet there was no sign of outward chastisement. Why does God allow this to continue?
There are three reasons that come to mind in this case. Possibly I don't know everything. Maybe there was inner chastisement. Maybe there were serious problems inwardly. Secondly, it is possible that he was not a believer. Hebrews 12 is quite specific that God will chastise a son. If there
is no chastisement then there may well not be sonship. Then the final possibility is that God was using the man in some way to prove His own case to the principalities and powers of the air. God may do as He wills with His people, and He is not required to do as we feel He should.
God is in the business of doing what He desires to bring about His own glory, and to put down the Devil's pride. He has limitless possibilities, when it comes to allowing, shaping, and molding in the believers life.
I always believed that this man was a believer, and still do. What God was doing in his life is for God and the man to know. It is our place in life to pray for such people, and to assist them in any way that we can. We must assume that they are believers, and continue to assist as if they would some day return to a proper lifestyle. This does not mean that we shouldn't prod them to consider their salvations validity, nor should we become involved in their sin, and/or business practices.
Chastisement is not something that the believer should fear, after sinning. God does not use chastisement to beat us over the head; He uses several other items, much less painful, to draw us back to Him when we stray. Chastisement is the next to last tool in His methods with the erring believer. (Taking the believer home is the final tool.)
When He has exhausted all the other possibilities, He will move on to chastisement. Before this he uses any or all of the following methods of drawing the believer back, the Word, the leading of the Holy Spirit, the prompting of other believers, the small trials of life, and the conscience.
If all of these fail, then He may move on to the harsher, yet loving, chastisement. There may be times when the sin is so outward and damaging to the testimony of the person or God, that God might use more drastic action, yet He always uses any tool, in a perfectly loving manner, for the best of the believer.
Once the chastisement has begun, it is normally quite easy to stop. Confession at any point in this line of reformation will stop the course of things. The believer should realize, however that the effects of that chastisement may flow into the future.
The believer that is walking closely with the Lord will know the moment that he sins that there is a problem, and will immediately confess, before the Lord has to take any steps.
Chafer makes the following comment: "Discipline in one form or another is the universal experience of all who are saved; even the fruit-bearing branch is pruned that it may bear more fruit (John 15:2). The testimony of the central passage of the Bible on chastisement (Hebrews 12:4-15) is to the effect that every son is disciplined." (Chafer, Lewis Sperry; "Systematic Theology"; Dallas, TX: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947, p 361)
Chafer equates the pruning with chastisement, which may not be a valid point. Pruning, may be chastisement, but may also be other things.
If we don't want to worry about what tool the Lord is going to use on us, we should merely be faithful to confess our sins. He then will not need to use any tool on us. Remember when you were a child? You found that if your father spanked, you soon learned what not to do. So, God teaches His children. God on the other hand has given us the Word and the Spirit to guide us into proper living, so we should never need to learn of God's chastisement.
Chafer mentions that Hebrews 12:4-15 teaches that All believers experience chastisement. Does Hebrews 12:4-15 teach that discipline in one form or another is the Universal experience of All who are saved? I personally do not believe that it does. That All Suffer Chastisement Is Probably True In That We All Tend To Go Our Own Way At Times. That All Suffer Chastisement Due To A Plan Of God In The Beginning For The Teaching And Training Of The Saints, No.
A reading of the text will, I believe, show that as we had earthly fathers that chastened, so we have a Heavenly Father that chastens. The fact that we all have sinned now and then would show that we all are chastened. It is because we sinned and not because God planned to chasten everyone that came into His family.
Remember Hebrews 12:4-15, for it is important to the doctrine of God chastening the believer, and it also lays groundwork for the earthly father's discipline of the child.
Chafer mentions, "It is reasonably concluded that scourging refers to the conquering of the will and results in a surrendered life." (Chafer, "Systematic Theology, p 361)
In the believers life, this is probably true. In the life of a child, in recent years this has come to be questioned. In past years there were few parents that would disagree with Chafer's statement.
Today there are those that say you must not conquer the will. The strong willed child will go far in this life because of his strength. Indeed, I have observed children that have been raised with this line of thinking.
Is it proper? Their children are very blunt in their disobedience. They will ultimately submit if the parent pressures, but they will defiantly say no several times before they do.
The will needs to be broken, but not the spirit. There is a difference. If the will is not broken in childhood, then God will have to deal with it in adulthood, and it will normally be much harder.
When I speak of breaking the will, I mean that you must break the "I will" attitude and bring them to understand the authority of the family and society.
There are two terms that are used. Scourging and chastisement. The question arises, is there a difference between scourging and chastisement in Hebrews 12?
I think that they are similar. Chastisement would be any discipline that is brought to bear on the believer. Scourging would be harsh chastisement aimed at gaining the believers attention after he has ignored the chastisement.
Vine relates chastise to being "paideia" which "denotes the training of a child including instruction; hence, discipline, correction..." He mentions that "mastigoo" is similar to "mastix" which is "a whip, scourge, ... as in the Roman method...." He mentions earlier of the Roman method, "Under the Roman method of scourging, the person was stripped and tied in a bending posture to a pillar, or stretched on a frame. The scourge was made of leathern thongs, weighted with sharp pieces of bone or lead, which tore the flesh...."
There is another term which you may run across. It is not a Scriptural term, yet it describes well the plight of the lost. Retribution is used of the lost and their eternal punishment. What is retribution? It relates to the giving out of punishment after guilt has been proven. It usually relates to eternal judgment. In relation to the lost it is the dispensing of punishment as they deserve.
All forms of trials, chastisement, etc. are used to bring about proper living. There is always an instructional value to the process with the believer.
There is, however, no instructional value in the giving of retribution to the lost, unless their final kneeling before Christ in acknowledgement. This indeed will be a heavy lesson.
There is no instruction at the giving of retribution to the saved, unless it is their final realization of whom and what God is. Again this will be some heavy learning.
Romans 12:19 tells us,
"Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves but, rather, give place unto wrath; for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord."
There is application in this for both the lost and believers.
a. The believer has the peace of knowing that God has promised to repay wrong actions of others toward them.
b. The lost have the horror of knowing that this is coming.
We as believers should realize that when some lost person buffets us, it is not the believer that is being downed, but it is the Lord. Realize that when you are buffeted, the person will answer to Almighty God.
I was doing door to door visitation once and a man came to the door. I told him who I was and that I was just going door to door in the neighborhood to invite folks to church. His mouth opened and the cloud of nastiness billowed forth. As I left, I was shocked at his response, but more than that, I was concerned about that man. He will have to answer to God for his actions.
Since we know that God is just, then we can know that the punishment will be completely just and correct.
Chafer draws an interesting contrast for us in that he mentions that God's chastisement is a show of God's Divine Love, while God's judgment is a show of God's Divine Wrath.
Guess which I'm glad I'm going to be on the receiving end of?
The question that often comes when you are witnessing to some of the cults and isms of our day is the eternal nature of man. How do the cults view man and eternity?
There are some that hold to the total destruction of the lost. Others see the lost as asleep now for a time, and then they will be destroyed. Some, when describing their belief state that at the point of death, the person becomes non-existant. Think about that for a moment. If you become something, can you be nonexistent? NO.
We hold that the lost person, as well as the saved person, at death are conscious beings and always will be. The quality of life will however differ drastically.
How can we prove that those holding to "soul sleep" and total destruction are incorrect?
a. Luke 16:19-31 shows the rich man and Lazarus in Sheol, one on the side of torment, and the other on the side of God. Both were conscious of their surroundings, as well as one another.