These people were acting as unsaved because they were unsaved.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Do Christians Have an Inner Struggle with Sin or the Flesh?
- Thread starter Internet Theologian
- Start date
- Status
So Paul lied??
1 Corinthians 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:
Paul never led. Never implied as such. Quit misrepresenting me.
Just disagree with you guys' theology saying believers can live worldly and still be saved. It's impossible. Yes we sin, but when we sin, we repent. Repentance is an ongoing process in the christian's life. So is sanctification.
Just disagree with you guys' theology saying believers can live worldly and still be saved. It's impossible. Yes we sin, but when we sin, we repent. Repentance is an ongoing process in the christian's life. So is sanctification.
I agree with most of this, but also believe some Christians are carnal, even babes in Christ, requiring the sincere milk of the word because they are unable to tolerate the meat of spiritual matters.
But these carnal Christians mentioned by Paul are not out in the world living by and for the devil. The ones Paul addresses were active in the Church at Corinth. Carnal Christians are those who have not yet grown into the strong, mature adults (spiritually, not necessarily physically) they should, and eventually will, become.
They were identified in the church at Corinth by their attitude toward the ordinances and the gifts of the spirit. Those who understood the meaning and purpose of the ordinances were contrasted with those who did not, and because of that failure abused the practice. They wanted the gifts of the spirit as their personal toys used to show others how "spiritual" they were, not recognizing the Divine purpose of the gifts and their temporary nature, given, not to be used selfishly to edify themselves but used to confirm the inscripturation of God's word in the New Testament.
Carnal Christians are real. They are just not what most Christians think they are.
But we don't live a sinless life. We do sin, and we sin as a result of not abiding in Christ; as a result of being pulled away by our own "carnal nature" which we still have.
Paul wrote to the saints in Christ, to the brethren, to those who were saved. It was a carnal church.
He wrote to those who were living in sin, though they were Christians. Let's consider the book in general.
He had received a letter from them detailing many of these problems:
1 Corinthians 7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: ...
--And thus he addresses them one by one.
In chapter one they were contentious and divided. It was a problem, not a sin that lasted for a moment or even a day. It was an on-going carnal problem that is now part of their lifestyle:
1 Corinthians 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
--They are carnal Christians.
They were being "continually" influenced by the "wisdom" of false teachers: (ch. 2)
1 Corinthians 2:5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. (See also 2:14)
In chapter 3 Paul calls them carnal because of their immaturity:
1 Corinthians 3:2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
In chapter 4, he calls their faithfulness into question for now he is in a position where he must defend his own apostleship to them.
1 Corinthians 4:2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.
1 Corinthians 4:3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.
--Again, they were being influenced by false teachers. This was an ongoing problem.
In Chapter 5, he addresses an ongoing problem of a believer living in immorality.
1 Corinthians 5:1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
In chapter 6 he addresses the problem of many of them "habitually" taking one another to court.
1 Corinthians 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
--Note as the language suggests, Paul is appalled at this, just as you are. But never does he question their salvation as you do. The are still brothers in Christ.
In chapter 7, the chapter is full of marital problems of various sorts.
1 Corinthians 7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
In chapter 8, idolatry, but specifically eating foods that were offered to idols is addressed. It was a problem more of offending others. It was a continuous problem. Paul answered it this way:
1 Corinthians 8:13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
In chapter 9, again he feels led to give a thorough defense of his apostleship because of the influence of the false teachers which they listen to:
1 Corinthians 9:1 Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?
In chapter 10, he uses OT examples to rebuke some of their on-going sins which are basically sins of being offensive to others. It was a divisive church. They were offending each other. This arose out of selfishness. In conclusion he said here:
1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
33 Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.
In chapter 11, he speaks of two important "ordinances", the head covering, and the Lord's Table. They had been so abusing the Lord's Table that God had brought severe judgment upon them.
1 Corinthians 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
--It was a continual problem. They were all continual problems. They were carnal Christians.
From chapters 12 to 14 the problem revolves around the use or abuse of spiritual gifts.
1 Corinthians 12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
--Speaking in tongues was the most significant problem addressed here.
Again this problem was a problem of the flesh. They were carnal. It was perpetuated by carnal Christians.
Finally in chapter 15 we have some that even denied the resurrection. Paul gives his great defense of the resurrection here. In this chapter, though the teaching is for the entire church, the stunning rebuke is for the false teachers among them.
In general the entire epistle is written to carnal Christians living a carnal lifestyles and have not yet repented of their sins. By the time he writes his second epistle, things have changed.
Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
Ernest Pickering simply carries the baton of FGT and Finney-ist teachings as you do. You're therefore in grave error as he is. What you all teach in essence is that a 'believer' can live in any manner they want. They can choose A, B or C off the menu of the newer to the scene, Gospel truncating man made soteriology.
Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
Well, then they can claim everyone in their church is saved and going to heaven. But then they can preach no one knows if another is saved too. They're consistent like that. Solid.
I would appreciate it if you use this forum for what its intended use and nothing else but--that is, debate.
It is not a sounding board for your bombastic accusatory and cowardly attacks against others.
It is a coward that sits behind his computer with anonymity and hurls insults at others without justification.
If that is your forte and how you get your jollies then please leave and go somewhere else.
This is a debate forum The rules are posted on every page for all to follow.
Neither Pickering nor I are a follower of Finney. Stop with the false accusations. I will request another moderator or administrator to start handing out infractions for this nonsense.
Dr. Pickering was a long-time president of Central Baptist Theological Seminary.
Their doctrinal statement on salvation is as follows:
We affirm that salvation is the work of God wholly and completely. Humans contribute nothing to the process and can only believe as they receive the grace of God to do so. Apart from that grace, humans cannot believe because they are thoroughly sinful. People are naturally at enmity with God and resist Him at every turn. Therefore God, for reasons completely of His own determination, chooses and draws those whom He saves.
Since God commands all people everywhere to repent, we all believe that the offer of the gospel should be extended to all. Some of us believe that Christ has provided the benefits of salvation for all people, while others believe these benefits may have been secured only for those whom God intends to save. Also, some of us believe that God selected individuals for salvation without condition in eternity past, while others understand God's choice as either corporate or conditioned on His eternal prescience. Each of these views admits a gracious working by God in those who ultimately respond to the gospel in faith. This gracious work is different in character than any work performed by God in the hearts of those who ultimately reject Christ.
We believe that regeneration establishes permanent membership in the family of God. Some of us believe that regeneration is also the work of God that makes human faith possible, while others of us (not denying that such a work must occur) affirm that regeneration is the result of saving faith. For the regenerate, ultimate denial of the faith is not possible. The regenerate, therefore, will maintain their profession of faith in Christ alone without exception and without end.
http://www.centralseminary.edu/abou...nts/statement-on-salvation-and-sanctification
I suggest you read it carefully.
I am going to have to strongly disagree with your above characterization of Dr. Pickering.
Dr. Pickering was Dean of Central Baptist Theological Seminary of Minneapolis (where I began my theological education) from 1959 until 1965.
He was President of the Seminary from 1988 to 1993.
Dr. Pickering was a Particular Baptist, believing in Particular Redemption and was, in my opinion, a staunch Monergist. He was not a proponent of Lordship Salvation, which has caused considerable heartburn for may staunch Calvinists. He viewed Lordship Salvation as “changing the terms of the gospel.” He understood Lordship Salvation, as articulated by John MacArthur in his book The Gospel According to Jesus, to be the addition of commitment to a life of holiness in order to be saved.
Personally I tend to think the problem is one of semantics. John MacArthur has a history of making statements that cause contention, only to have to explain those statements in later publications.
Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
That's fine with me brother. I have enjoyed some things Pickering has stated, especially in his book Biblical Separation. If he has disagreed with MacArthur on the Gospel According to Jesus then he shows a shallow understanding of the Gospel as understood in times past. MacArthur brought nothing new to the table, he simply crystallized teachings formerly known. The book became a hit and many were offended when confronted with true teachings versus the popular easy-believism and false dichotomy of believer/disciple.
A list of credentials doesn't make excuse for error. It is honorable he was a president of a seminary, but as for me that doesn't give anyone a free ride.
That said I will have to strongly disagree with you here as well. His view that suggested LS changed the terms of the Gospel is short-sighted and erroneous. Pickering needs to ask if his Gospel changed the terms of the true firstly. I don't see that he understood what was at stake and the effects of the truncated Gospel is tragic. MacArthur sought to set the record straight. I don't see any documentation where he had to back pedal on his Gospel According to Jesus anywhere. It seems you are implying this.
Now, I would like you to document what you said that LS has caused heartburn for many staunch Calvinists. Also on Pickering being a Monergist.
Last edited:
His Gospel was Monergistic Particular Redemption. What he objected to was MacArthur's seeming stance that in order to be saved you must make Christ Lord of all things in your life. Which is, of course, in direct opposition to regeneration preceding faith!
The "If He is not Lord of all He is not Lord at all" theology flies in the face of Monergism.
Again, personally, I think the argument between the two of them was one of semantics rather than substance. I believe both men believed the same, just articulated their respective positions in different ways.
Every pastor wants to see holy living in his people. And sometimes that desire tends to color our pronouncements to the point of inviting misunderstanding.
Subsequently to the first printing of MacArthur's book he has clarified his position and made it clear that holy living was not the cause of true salvation but was the result of true salvation. And with that I agree.
Unfortunately Dr. Pickering had been suffering from a cancerous tumor in his sinus cavity which required intense radiation therapy since 1983.
Dr. MacArthur's second edition came out in 1993 while Dr. Pickering was fighting for his life. A fight he lost, first to total blindness due to the radiation damage to his optic nerve, then, in 2000, to death from the cancer itself.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
How is the theology in this paragraph any different than the theology that I have been advocating for? Are you saying that the people to whom Paul was writing were Christians who were living a non-Christian lifestyle?
Not a lifestyle....
They were sinning in this one issue. ....
It was an act of sin
They needed to repent of this activity.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
If sanctification is, in the lives of most Christians, an “ongoing process” (as I agree is the case), then as Christians become sanctified to an increasing extent, they become carnal to a decreasing extent. Carnality and spirituality are not absolute conditions—they are relative conditions. That is, as Christians mature, they become relatively less carnal and more spiritual.
I have been a Christian for some years, but I have not met very many Christians that I could honestly say were spiritual in an absolute sense. Let’s see—there was Gary B., a 14-year-old boy; Wesley B., a 17-year-old boy; Joyce B., their mother; Anthony G., the rector of a Roman Catholic Cathedral; Sten B., a Baptist Sunday school teacher; Cindy S., a very dear and close friend; Fred S., a 19-year-old sailor; Sister P., an elderly friend; and John C., a businessman who was a staunch Calvinist and a faithful friend for 37 years—and that is about it!
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
1 Cor. 11:11. For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe’s people, that there are quarrels among you.
12. Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, “I am of Paul,” and “I of Apollos,” and “I of Cephas,” and “I of Christ.”
1 Cor. 5:1. It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father's wife.
2. You have become arrogant and have not mourned instead, so that the one who had done this deed would be removed from your midst.
1 Cor. 6:1. Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints?
2. Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts?
3. Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life?
4. So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church?
5. I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren,
6. but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?
7. Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?
8. On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.
1 Cor. 6:18. Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body.
19. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own?
And throughout the remainder of the epistle, Paul instructs and admonishes the carnal Christians in Corinth on one point after another.
(All quotations from Scripture are from the NASB,1995)
Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
The only reason that MacArthur clarified his position was because the position is misunderstood brother, not because he had to back pedal. He was then given the label 'Lordship Salvation' for his stance. Interestingly enough I was listening to DMLJ preach on this very subject yesterday as he was lamenting the new doctrine coming in that said Jesus does not have to be Lord over believers. He denied there would be any salvation in that gospel.
When persons hear the doctrines of grace, especially perseverance of the saints they think 'works gospel!' but that is furthest from the truth. People have been so ingrained against works that they conflate evidence of salvation with works. In fact evidence of salvation is even balked at and/or flat out denied. This in itself has caused major damage in churches, and has hurt the pulpits. Preaching this truth is mocked and the pews control the pulpits too often.
Thanks for the info on Pickering.
Last edited:
Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
Right. There is a struggle with the flesh here in this body in this realm. The key is the struggle, or not a struggle, that is being in a state of mind there are no worries about sinful practices.
I've talked with many who have abandoned the teachings of Christ (2 John 1:1-13), abandoned believers (1 John 2:19) only to tell me 'God knows my heart'. These have been taught they are going to heaven no matter what, they point to a date in time, and to the goodness of their hearts. I ask them 'So, you believe God will save you because your heart is good'? They go two directions with this; 'Yes, I'm a good person' 'Well God looks on our hearts'.
Instead of being afraid of where they are and that God looks on their hearts they are smug and complacent.
Last edited:
Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
You have to be careful with this guy, if you show him where his theological position comes from he says it is insulting him.
You're correct, repentance is a lifestyle for the believer, yet some here teach it is unnecessary.
Some have denied repentance then when they were discovered tried to cover it up as if they never denied it.lol
- Status