Hello Howie,
I did read your post, but you will understand that this is the first time we've discussed these things, and while I am used to trying to understand biblical words such as 'repentance' and 'humility' in their biblical context, I'm not used to some of the assertions you've made, which are giving me cause to stop and think about how your way of putting things fits scripture.
Sin is a result of unbelief
This is an interesting point, because without doubt it applied to Adam. Since then, the rest of us have been born in sin, and so our unbelief is a result of sin. We were born
already alientated from God.
Before you come down on me too hard, please consider that even that statement is not as straightforward as it may first appear, because no-one is surprised by unbelief
per se amongst, well, unbelievers (for want of a better term); but when Jesus said the Holy Spirit would convict of
sin because they don't 'believe' in Him, He was talking about people who were aware of Him, who heard His claims, and yet still refused to 'believe'.
This same kind of unbelief applies to those who hear the gospel today, who understand what they are being invited to believe, but who choose not to receive the word which is offered to them. This kind of unbelief is, therefore, sin. This was the kind of unbelief for which God left all but two members of the older generation who had left Egypt, dead in the desert, They knew what they were doing.
In that sense, I read Jesus' words as a statement that those who
never turn to Him will, one day, be convicted of
the sin of unbelief, and this will seal their
eternal fate.
You are preaching to the choir, here. I agree with scripture that the failure to believe God is probably His biggest issue with mankind. He has repeated over and over and proven over and over that He can be trusted. This is a trust issue as much as anything.
True. I think it also depends what a person wants. To walk with God means to leave one's own agenda.
dragonfly, on 14 July 2012 - 02:43 PM, said:
(re: " there is no passage in new testament scripture that teaches repentance from sin as a reuqirement for life")
I dispute that strongly, as it flies in the face of logic and the New Testament; for, the reason
we don't have eternal life now, is
the sin which entered the world through Adam.
Romans 5:12.
williemac replied
What has that got to do with what I said? Have you been reading my posts? I already expalined why I said what I said.
Well, I read what you said and I thought about it, and the major disconnect in your statement was the
cosmic context in which Jesus came preaching,
'Repent', to Israel, on the heels of John the Baptist's calls
for repentance.
According to your analysis, they could have called for
'Humility'. Why didn't they?
My question is around whether stepping over one's pride for a moment, really counts as
repentance?
What is the difference? The first thing that strikes me, is that humility is the opposite of pride. Jesus was humble. He had not a speck of pride in Him. Humility is one of the qualities in the Godhead. But is it
enough to invite people to turn from their pride, which is only one outworking of the sin nature. Or, is God asking them to turn from sin altogether?
I believe it is the latter, and that is what distinguishes repentance from humlity. Because until the cross, sin and
eternal death (
the death) were at work in mankind. ('The wages of sin is
the death', still applies to unbelievers.)
Leviticus 26:41 And [that] I also have walked contrary unto them, and have brought them into the land of their enemies; if then their uncircumcised hearts be humbled, and they then accept of the punishment of their iniquity:
So, while I acknowledge God sees humility as a desirable step in the right direction, it
didn't deliver them from their punishment. It's not even clear whether God considers humility enough to circumcise the heart.
dragonfly, on 14 July 2012 - 02:43 PM, said:
Looking back in scripture to Elijah's ministry, which was to restore Israel to fellowship with God (through repentance from idolatry - God's greatest rival) under the Old Covenant, the fact that John Baptist came 'in the spirit of Elijah' and then preached 'repentance from sin', had a deep meaning for 'Israel' which they understood; they repented from sin, and were baptised 'for the remission of sins', and were commanded by John to show the fruit of repentance in their lives. That meant putting things right with other people, according to the requirements of the Mosaic law.
williemac commented
If this was all that was needed then there would have been no further need to remedy the sin problem. However, these are temporary fixes, as no man has ever or will ever change his nature. One can be on his best behavior throughout his lifetime but his offspring can turn out totally opposite. The significance of the new covenant is not just a behavior modification, it is rather a new creation. The real and permanent remedy for sin is to re create the species. This is God's role, not ours. This does not happen as a result of repenting from one's sin. It rather happens when a person rather humbles himself in acknowledgment of his sin and acknowledgment of his helplessness in it and allows God to fix the problem.
I agree this was a temporary measure with regard to sin, but for the people who had repented and put things right, it was 'remission of sins' - which is a prize.
the repentance you are describing did not contribute to the receiving of anything, but is merely the result of it. This complies with my observation, that eternal life was/is not given as a result of our repentance from sin, but just the other way around. We cannot put the cart before the horse. Salvation comes first. A changed life is the result. The degree of change can vary from person to person. The amount of fruit can vary from person to person. The speed at which change happens in a life can vary also. The completion date is the resurrection.
I fully accept that some people do not experience conviction of sin until after they have actually received the Holy Spirit and been born again. This is a reasonable observation to make, and for me to acknowledge.
But, it is clear from scripture and from the experience of some Christians, that God is able to convict of sin before new birth, and that this is His preferred modus operandus, for then, when the Holy Spirit is given, the person has already turned away from sin in their heart, and already has a desire to walk with God.
On that note, I must mention that it is an errant belief that some have, that the Holt Spirit convicts believers of sin.
So... how would you
explain the conviction of sin a believer may feel when he has sinned?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
The first part of the piece by Tozer ended with these words:
The new cross does not slay the sinner, it redirects him. It gears
him into a cleaner and a jollier way of living and saves his self-
respect. To the self-assertive it says, "Come and assert yourself
for Christ." To the egotist it says, "Come and do your boasting
in the Lord." To the thrill-seeker it says, "Come and enjoy the
thrill of Christian fellowship."
The Christian message is slanted in the direction of the current
vogue in order to make it acceptable to the public. The philosophy
back of this kind of thing may be sincere but its sincerity does not
save it from being false.
Here is the second part.
It is false because it is blind. It misses completely the whole meaning
of the cross. The old cross is a symbol of death. It stands for the abrupt,
violent end of a human being. The man in Roman times who took up
his cross and started down the road had already said good-by to his
friends. He was not coming back. He was going out to have it ended.
The cross made no compromise, modified nothing, spared nothing;
it slew all of the man, completely and for good. It did not try to keep
on good terms with its victim. It struck cruel and hard, and when it
had finished its work, the man was no more. The race of Adam is
under death sentence. There is no commutation and no escape. God
cannot approve any of the fruits of sin, however innocent they
may appear or beautiful to the eyes of men. God salvages the
individual by liquidating him and then raising him again to newness
of life. That evangelism which draws friendly parallels between the
ways of God and the ways of men is false to the Bible and cruel to
the souls of its hearers.
The faith of Christ does not parallel the world, it intersects it. In
coming to Christ we do not bring our old life up onto a higher plane;
we leave it at the cross. The corn of wheat must fall into the ground
and die. We who preach the gospel must not think of ourselves as
public relations agents sent to establish good will between Christ
and the world. We must not imagine ourselves commissioned to
make Christ acceptable to big business, the press, the world of
sports or modern education. We are not diplomats but prophets,
and our message is not a compromise but an ultimatum.
God offers life, but not an improved old life. The life He offers is life
out of death. It stands always on the far side of the cross. Whoever
would possess it must pass under the rod. He must repudiate
himself and concur in God's just sentence against him. What does
this mean to the individual, the condemned man who would find life
in Christ Jesus? How can this theology be translated into life?
Simply, he must repent and believe. He must forsake his sins and
then go on to forsake himself. Let him cover nothing, defend nothing,
excuse nothing. Let him not seek to make terms with God, but let
him bow his head before the stroke of God's stern displeasure and
acknowledge himself worthy to die. Having done this let him gaze
with simple trust upon the risen Saviour, and from Him will come
life and rebirth and cleansing and power.
The cross that ended the earthly life of Jesus now puts an end to
the sinner; and the power that raised Christ from the dead now
raises him to a new life along with Christ. To any who may object
to this or count it merely a narrow and private view of truth, let me
say God has set His hallmark of approval upon this message from
Paul's day to the present. Whether stated in these exact words
or not, this has been the content of all preaching that has brought
life and power to the world through the centuries. The mystics,
the reformers, the revivalists have put their emphasis here, and
signs and wonders and mighty operations of the Holy Ghost gave
witness to God's approval. Dare we, the heirs of such a legacy of
power, tamper with the truth? Dare we with our stubby pencils erase
the lines of the blueprint or alter the pattern shown us in the Mount?
May God forbid. Let us preach the old cross and we will know the
old power.
~
A. W. Tozer, Man, the Dwelling Place of God, 1966
I loved it!
