tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post8294762008144968705..comments2023-12-22T08:29:29.230-08:00Comments on WHAT IS TRUTH: Is It That You're Really Missing Something? Forms of Second Blessing Theology, pt. 4Kent Brandenburghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-34066048085459406822014-05-16T19:20:12.586-07:002014-05-16T19:20:12.586-07:00I appreciate what both of you are trying to wrestl...I appreciate what both of you are trying to wrestle with here. I can understand why Tim is asking the question, because I Cor. 3 does say "ye are carnal." However, I know exactly what Kent is saying, and I agree. When I recently preached on I Cor. 3:1-4, part of my outline concerning "The Reality of Carnality" was the following:<br /><br />The carnality referred to here is:<br /><br />A. A Characteristic, not a Category<br /><br />B. A Description, not a Demarcation<br /><br />C. A Stage, not a Status<br /><br />By "Stage", I don't mean an indefinite period of time between the time a person accepts Jesus as "Savior" and the time he accepts Jesus as "Lord". I don't see that distinction in scripture. What I mean is that Paul says that they were "yet carnal" that they were to be spoken to "as unto babes". In other words, they had some growing to do, but they were expect to grow out of it so to speak.<br /><br />FWIW, I'd thought I'd share that in hopes that it might help clarify what I Cor. 3 is saying about carnality and what it is not saying.<br /><br />MatAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-79400880515374321102014-05-16T11:21:26.698-07:002014-05-16T11:21:26.698-07:00Tim,
Scripture doesn't contradict itself, but...Tim,<br /><br />Scripture doesn't contradict itself, but it will make statements, that if not taken in the right way, will contradict. Some of it has to do with the tenses of the verbs or whether conditional sentences are being use. For instance, think of 1 John 3, where it says that a believer cannot sin. On the other hand, it says if he says that he has not sinned, he's a liar (1 John 1). There are no carnal Christians -- sin doesn't have dominion over them. Romans 8 makes this same point. People who are unsaved are "in the flesh," so they cannot please God. They are in the flesh -- that is the carnal person. Saved people are not in the flesh.<br /><br />Personally, I think you know this. Maybe not, but I think you do.<br /><br />It's easy to attack this and put the one teaching it on the defensive, because of the passage that says a person can behave carnally. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the historical detour off the biblical teaching of sanctification that taught categorical carnality up until a certain point in life: the two nature teaching. That's what we're talking about here. Maybe you don't know that or understand that.<br /><br />So no, I'm not contradicting myself. Christians sin, they do works of the flesh (carnality), but they are not by nature carnal, that is, categorically carnal. The way I'm putting that, and I'm not the first, is that there are no carnal Christians, only spiritual ones. I'm also saying that is what 1 Cor 2-3 are teaching. The Bible won't contradict itself.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-51433471348775210992014-05-16T08:24:55.685-07:002014-05-16T08:24:55.685-07:00Kent - I would completely agree with your statemen...Kent - I would completely agree with your statement above. But it doesn't address what I was actually saying earlier. <br /><br />You originally stated that "There are no carnal Christians, only spiritual ones."<br /><br />This is, scripturally, not true. The scripture itself refutes your original comment in your article. It was THAT comment to which I was responding, not the later things which you have said. Therefore, it is to that original comment, not the later things, that I also said "...would seem to steer..." in the direction of sinless perfectionism. "Would seem to steer" is not the same thing as saying that you're there (a point which I thought I had made pretty plain in my original comment, btw).<br /><br />Your attempts at clarifying your statement appeared to be somewhat contradictory to your original comment. That's the issue. Originally, you said there are no carnal Christians - a statement that is scripturally not true on its face. You subsequently adopted the more scriptural position that, yes, it is possible for someone to be a Christian and still have carnality in their life (though obviously they *should* not). I took your first subsequent responses to be a de facto retraction of the original comment.<br /><br />I'm not accusing you of teaching sinless perfectionism. I have not said that you did, and have actually tried to go out of my way to affirm that I do not believe you believe that or are teaching it. If you want to believe that I am, there's really nothing else I can do say to disabuse you of the notion. All I said was that your comment was the same as has been made by those who do and who I have seen be a discouragement to new Christians. That's it. No accusation against you, Kent.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-3725514770568968992014-05-14T15:53:51.540-07:002014-05-14T15:53:51.540-07:00But Tim,
This position is classic NOT sinless per...But Tim,<br /><br />This position is classic NOT sinless perfection. The historic position, which is the same for Baptists and reformed in this instance, they didn't disagree, is exactly what I'm communicating. Perfectionism comes out of Keswick revivalism, second blessing theology. The classic, historic, biblical view just looks for fruits of salvation, characteristic holiness, a lifestyle of righteousness.<br /><br />You tell me if I'm wrong. You don't like your salvation being questioned, and the people who might question it, speaking hypothetically, because they expect repentance for sin, you think are asking for perfection? No. Believers, who are sinning, are expected to repent. They want to repent. They don't see themselves as bigger than the teaching of the Bible, the truth, as proclaimed by the pillar and ground of the truth, not some self-appointed free-floating, free agent, who takes it all into his own hands. Not saying the latter is you, but I wondered if you agreed with the statement.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-71446791978618308282014-05-14T15:39:09.258-07:002014-05-14T15:39:09.258-07:00Hi Kent,
Sorry for not responding sooner. To be ...Hi Kent,<br /><br />Sorry for not responding sooner. To be quite frank, I had some other things come up and forgot about this thread, which is why I did not respond again sooner.<br /><br />However, at no point in my comment above did I "accuse" you "of teaching sinless perfectionism." In fact, I specifically tried to allay that concern by saying, "While I believe you do not hold to it..."<br /><br />The reason I said that your comment could appear to point in that direction (which is not the same thing as being there, mind you) is because making a declarative statement like "there are no carnal Christians" seems to naturally lead to "anyone who sins is not saved," which is where that statement HAS led in the theology of others that I have seen. Again - I am not saying you hold to this. Simply that, as formulated as a declarative statement without apparent (at the time) caveats, it mimicked what has led to sinless perfectionism in other cases. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-73891843539584766312014-05-13T18:13:56.828-07:002014-05-13T18:13:56.828-07:00In an earlier comment (above), I said that I hadn&...In an earlier comment (above), I said that I hadn't seen anything in Chafer's systematic theology about "carnal" and "spiritual" Christians. I stand corrected:<br /><br />"As there is a great transition from the estate of the unsaved to that of the saved, there is also a transition for the Christian from the carnal to the spiritual state. The former change is wrought by God in answer to saving faith in Christ, while the latter is brought about by a natural release of the Spirit's power in the believer when needed adjustments are made, which power has been possessed though not necessarily experienced from the moment of salvation," (6:172-173). Tyler Robbinsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-51621874923840036292014-05-01T22:41:05.692-07:002014-05-01T22:41:05.692-07:00Titus (aka Tim Dunkin),
So you're going to do...Titus (aka Tim Dunkin),<br /><br />So you're going to do a drive-by and accuse me of teaching sinless perfectionism with no obvious example, and then just disappear without proving it. What's that all about?Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-10102147730989469892014-04-30T21:06:21.394-07:002014-04-30T21:06:21.394-07:00Thanks VERY MUCH for the article. I've saved i...Thanks VERY MUCH for the article. I've saved it. Extremely helpful. I especially like the sanctification comparison charts at the end. <br /><br />For those disagreeing with Bro. Brandenburg, I think the charts at the end of Naselli's article (linked above) will explain matters very clearly. Come back and let me know which view of sanctification you support. Tyler Robbinsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-45283619233633381962014-04-30T14:25:04.855-07:002014-04-30T14:25:04.855-07:00Here's something free and available online rig...Here's something free and available online right now in pdf....not the book, but a journal article.<br /><br />http://www.dbts.edu/journals/2008/Naselli.pdfKent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-38395764490621097212014-04-30T14:12:22.581-07:002014-04-30T14:12:22.581-07:00Kent:
Thanks. I was going to mention that Naselli...Kent:<br /><br />Thanks. I was going to mention that Naselli wrote on it (I think it was for his PhD at Trinity). This is a thought-provoking series. Tyler Robbinsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-50602229260033657632014-04-30T13:34:30.471-07:002014-04-30T13:34:30.471-07:00Hi John,
I don't believe we "are" c...Hi John,<br /><br />I don't believe we "are" carnal. We "are" spiritual. We have the flesh, but our nature is spiritual. Is. Perhaps you are taking that from Paul saying "I am carnal," but in the context, he's saying that he still lives in a physical body. You can't separate that from the term. This is part of anthropology, that is, the flesh resides in the body, which is why the flesh disappears when we are glorified. You can't separate "the flesh" from the physical body.<br /><br />Everyone is struggling, to answer that question, but sin isn't characteristic, habitual, or a lifestyle, and, therefore, a believer has victory. The struggle is described in Rom 7.<br /><br />Nice talking about this.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-53058582969557948512014-04-30T13:30:50.278-07:002014-04-30T13:30:50.278-07:00Joe,
Thanks and your comment was a contribution.Joe,<br /><br />Thanks and your comment was a contribution.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-36320078073839607552014-04-30T13:29:32.678-07:002014-04-30T13:29:32.678-07:00Tyler,
At that point in my life, keswick or secon...Tyler,<br /><br />At that point in my life, keswick or second blessing was all that I heard. I heard various iterations of it, but if sanctification was touched in any depthy, it was keswick. I heard the two nature doctrine taught. Of course, Rice and Hyles and those in their orbit were absolutely second blessing people. Dr. Cedarholm never taught on things like that. I never accepted it fully and questioned it, but I didn't know what I believed by the time I left. I knew that I wasn't Rice and Hyles, but I wasn't settled myself, because I hadn't heard a regular diet of exposition or been studying it out myself. It's one reason I write about it here, because I think men should be thinking about it.<br /><br />Thomas Ross's PhD dissertation, 1000+ pages, will probably be the greatest dealing with it in existence when he's done. Someone you've heard of, that's written a book on it, is Andy Naselli, and Detroit has talked a lot about it. They are Calvinists, but Thomas and myself are not.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-76895024110104990442014-04-30T10:33:37.375-07:002014-04-30T10:33:37.375-07:00I'm not arguing for a category of carnal Chris...I'm not arguing for a category of carnal Christians. However, it seems we are all carnal (Rom.7:18) at varying levels. Some of us are babes in Christ (1 Cor.3:1). Some of us are novices (1 Tim. 3:6). Some others are spiritual (Gal. 6:1). However, even the spiritual ones struggle with something(s) (1 John 1:8).<br /><br />I don't struggle with the same things I did 10 years ago and I hope to say the same Lord willing in another decade. It's not some second blessing that got me here from there nor one that will get me from here to yonder. I rejoice with Paul that it is only Jesus who will save me from this body of death.<br /><br />I don't think you believe in sinless perfectionism but your case reads like either your’re saved, victorious, overcoming or not saved (Jesus is Saviour but not Lord). You acknowledge "struggling" but what do you call someone who has Jesus as Lord and is struggling?<br /><br />Blessings<br />JOHN GARDNERhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17629427894921858214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-75584204822436504192014-04-30T10:17:15.762-07:002014-04-30T10:17:15.762-07:00Whenever this topic comes up, I always anticipate ...Whenever this topic comes up, I always anticipate the Paul-said-the-Corinthians-were-carnal argument. Every time.<br /><br />The fact that there are no carnal Christians does not imply that Christians don't act carnally. There's a difference between being a child and acting like a child. If I tell an adult, "You're a child" what I mean is: "In this-and-that situation you have acted childish."<br /><br />Christians can act carnally, but the Bible has no room for the "carnal Christian" as a third spiritual category of people.<br /><br />Just like there are no fruitless branches in Christ. The fruitless ones are removed and burned. Any connection they had to the Vine was purely mechanical and not vital. The branches that are in the Vine are pruned of their dead works so they will bear more fruit. All Christians will bear fruit; those who don't aren't Christians. I think the Savior makes this clear in John 15:1-6. Likewise, there are no carnal Christians. The Christians that act carnally are disciplined by the Father so they will be less carnal and more spiritual.<br /><br />I haven't taken the time to read the entire thread, so if I am repeating what others have already said, I hope Kent will delete this comment.Joe Cassadahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11332557908306763199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-35364239313015616742014-04-30T09:36:52.810-07:002014-04-30T09:36:52.810-07:00None of my professors were Calvinists and the teac...None of my professors were Calvinists and the teaching they considered Scripture wasn't keswick/second blessing.<br /><br />SES was co-founded by "moderate Calvinist" Norman Geisler. He's not a Dallas guy but SES was known as not reformed.<br />JOHN GARDNERhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17629427894921858214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-13072400517571239612014-04-30T08:40:37.654-07:002014-04-30T08:40:37.654-07:00Kent:
Back in your day, did you see any hint of s...Kent:<br /><br />Back in your day, did you see any hint of second blessing theology at Maranatha? Tyler Robbinsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-81531884514695779102014-04-30T08:32:01.594-07:002014-04-30T08:32:01.594-07:00John,
I'm sure there are Dallas guys who don&...John,<br /><br />I'm sure there are Dallas guys who don't believe that position. Many are Calvinist. They won't call their own teaching keswick or second blessing -- they'll just call it scripture if they believe it.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-76299320713443585932014-04-30T08:30:22.856-07:002014-04-30T08:30:22.856-07:00John,
I'm not arguing against the reality of ...John,<br /><br />I'm not arguing against the reality of "the flesh" in a Christian. That also means that he will act carnal, because the flesh is carnal. However, scripture doesn't present a category of carnal Christian -- do you understand what you are arguing for if you argue for that? In light of keswick and second blessing?<br /><br />Neither am I saying that 1 Corinthians isn't written to believers. I'm saying, however, that we don't argue for a category of "carnal Christian," even as Paul is talking to them as though they are unsaved, though they are actually saved. When you read chapters 2 and 3 and take it altogether, instead of zeroing in on the first few verses of 3 in order to find the carnal Christian category.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-71162765095623267772014-04-30T08:19:01.612-07:002014-04-30T08:19:01.612-07:00Anecdotal warning:
I took classes from several Da...Anecdotal warning:<br /><br />I took classes from several Dallas brothers at Southern Evangelical Seminary and can't recall any keswick or second blessing teachings.JOHN GARDNERhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17629427894921858214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-38583029057680808522014-04-30T07:42:55.228-07:002014-04-30T07:42:55.228-07:00Hi Bro. Ross,
Regarding Gal. 6:1, to where are the...Hi Bro. Ross,<br />Regarding Gal. 6:1, to where are the spiritual men to restore such an one? Or another way, the man that was overtaken with a fault was in a position before the fault that he needs to be restored to, where/what is that?<br /><br />Are not the attributes of the "brethren" in 1 Cor.3:1 carnal and babes IN Christ?<br /><br />Blessings<br />JOHN GARDNERhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17629427894921858214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-36538067734964668292014-04-29T22:32:05.020-07:002014-04-29T22:32:05.020-07:00I think that an examination of the verse that Chaf...I think that an examination of the verse that Chafer took his book from is very interesting:<br /><br />Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. (Galatians 6:1)<br /><br />Note that the verse identifies "brethren," the regenerate membership of the church in Galatia, with the category of those who are "spiritual." The verse does not say that some of the "brethren" are "spiritual," but that all of them are. They are contrasted with the one who is overtaken with a fault. His spiritual status is not identified – he is simply a "man."KJB1611https://www.blogger.com/profile/09696273086955004524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-51467947008105267792014-04-29T19:28:42.258-07:002014-04-29T19:28:42.258-07:00Titus,
You threw out that idea that at face value...Titus,<br /><br />You threw out that idea that at face value I was teaching sinless perfectionism, and I'm still awaiting an example of that. I believe what I'm teaching is biblical salvation and sanctification. People who are justified don't live a lifestyle of sin any longer, they don't live in perpetual carnality. They overcome. When they sin, they confess, and if they don't, they repent when confronted, and if they don't, they repent when they're disciplined, but they will live righteously. It will be a struggle, but they don't need a second blessing to do that. Awaiting your retraction of sinless perfection accusation or example of it in my post. Thank you.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-27248614074921417182014-04-29T19:22:44.463-07:002014-04-29T19:22:44.463-07:00Jim,
They're acting like unsaved people. He&...Jim,<br /><br />They're acting like unsaved people. He's having to talk to them like they're unsaved people. Some of them were unsaved, thus, they needed to examine themselves whether they be in the faith. Saved people act like unsaved people when they obey the flesh and not the Spirit, but they aren't charcteristically under the control of the flesh. In Rom 8, Paul says that which is in the flesh cannot please God. Cannot. Not will not. Cannot.<br /><br />In a practical way, men obey the flesh and not the spirit, and they behave fleshly, carnally, and then they obey, they behave spiritually. If by "carnal Christian" someone meant that Christians do carnal things, I would be fine with that, but that is not historically what men have meant by that.<br /><br />Thanks.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-57052723818243437862014-04-29T18:46:00.321-07:002014-04-29T18:46:00.321-07:00Hi Steve,
I would hope that what we have here is ...Hi Steve,<br /><br />I would hope that what we have here is just dealing with what the Bible says and not attempting to win an argument by straw manning someone else. I spent most of my early life in keswick/second blessing surroundings. I can sympathize with people who are hearing something different. I'm happy to hear where I straw man anything, have it pointed out, because it's not something I want to do. I think I know when I'm actually hearing the wrong teaching. <br /><br />I think it is important that we don't take people out of context and represent them properly. The only two people I have named is Chafer and Finney. These weren't Baptists, and yet a lot of Baptists take their position on things as if these were historic Baptist or let's just say biblical teachings, when they are not.<br /><br />Are saying that the Bible teaches there are two categories of Christians? I'm saying that isn't what Paul was teaching in his epistles.<br /><br />I don't know what the pride is that you're talking about. I understand pride being a sin that is also a basis for other sin, but how is pride uniquely an issue with regards to these two positions that are different. It is more than just semantics. People think, believe, and then live differently. In many cases, they think they're saved, when they're not, because this is also tied into salvation doctrine.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.com