Issue 1, Spring 2000, Volume 18

THE MYTH OF THE "CARNAL" CHRISTIAN

Robert L. Brush

 

Instead of trying to stem the tide or oppose the wickedness of our culture, the Church has simply adopted a theology that allows sinners to feel very comfortable in our midst.  Many today are like those in the Corinthian church who profess to be Christians, but are indeed carnal.  All kinds of sin and wickedness in the church as well as the actual denial of the faith is being excused under the name of "carnal Christian."

Geoffrey Thomas wrote that it was the 1909 Scofield Reference Bible which popularized "an antithesis between law and grace so that the believer was alleged to be no longer under the constraints of the moral law.  Those Bible footnotes made respectable the 'carnal Christian' hypothesis which has been so detrimental to godliness amongst those who profess the faith."

When Lewis Sperry Chafer wrote He That Is Spiritual (1918) it was extremely controversial.  He wrote that a believer could be a new creation and yet remain a carnal Christian without any change in character.  He stated that the carnal Christian is characterized by a walk that is on the same plane as that of the natural man.  Today that teaching is commonly accepted.

Dan Corner wrote in The Believer=s Conditional Security, "This carnal Christian question is a watershed issue, since it really affects the definition of a Christian and, therefore, who will ultimately be saved."

Carnal actually means unregenerate; unsaved.  How can we have unsaved Christians  Paul states in the second letter to the Corinthians that he was afraid when he came to them he would be embarrassed and find many which had sinned and not repented of the uncleanness, fornication, and lasciviousness which they had committed.  He feared there would be quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, factions, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder (2 Cor 12:20-13:5). These were in the visible church, but not considered saved.  In fact, Paul states real Christians should not fellowship these "carnal Christians" (1 Cor 5:11-13).

Some seem to think the only one in the Corinthian church who was unsaved was the one who was living immoral with his mother or maybe step-mother, but from the verses quoted above it seems there were many in an unconverted state.  Yet there were no doubt saved, regenerate, upright Christians in that church as well, but Paul feared many who had sinned would not have repented when he arrived (2 Cor 12:20).

The classic passage in defense of the "carnal Christian" position is found in 1 Corinthians 3:1-4.  First, I see no necessity of saying all in a particular local church are in the same spiritual condition.  John describes antichrists as going out from [the church].  "They were not [really] of us; for if they had been of us, they would not doubt have continued with us" (1 John 2:19).  Obviously all professing Christians are not in the same state or degree of grace.  To refer to a church collectively as Christians does not mean all in that church are saved.

Second, the key words brethren, babes in Christ, and carnal must be properly understood.  Brethren does not always mean Christian in the true sense.  Sometimes it is used of mankind in general or of those in a community relationship which are united by common interests or members of the same congregation, but does not mean all such are regenerated.

Babes in Christ does not necessarily mean all in the church were actually born again, but babes in the sense of just beginning to understand the teachings of Christianity, or as Adam Clarke states, "Just beginning to acquire some notion of the Christian religion."  These babes in Christ were not the same as the newborn babes of 1 Peter 1:2.  Paul uses strong language in v 3, "For you are yet carnal.  They always were and still are carnal, which in a strict sense means they are still unregenerate.

Then Paul cites the inconsistences of their lives.  Religious, yes, but sinful in their actions.  Can you be religious and lost Yes!  Paul points to the inconsistences of every strife and division.  Since you have all this among you, are you not yet carnal (unregenerate) and live like or act the same as unregenerate man  In 2 Corinthians 12:20-1 Paul reveals their sexual sin and debauchery, anger, slander, gossip, envying, strife.  Paul, in Galatians 5:19-21 tell us they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Let's look more carefully at the word carnal.  The word is a noun, but it is always used as an adjective to refer to persons, behavior, or dispositions.  Sarx, which is used 17 times in Romans 7-8, basically means flesh or fleshly.  Although some speak of carnality as if it were an entity all of its own, the term carnality is never used in the Scripture.

In theological terms carnal means the natural man, sinful man, or the unregenerate nature.  John McClintock and James Strong defined carnal by saying that "wicked or unconverted men are represented as under the dominion of a carnal mind, which is enmity against God."  In a strict sense there is no such thing as a carnal Christian any more than an unregenerate Christian! 

"They that are in the flesh (sarx) cannot please God" (Rom 8:8).  "The mind of the flesh (sarx) is death" (Rom 8:6; neither adjective is used here).  This does not mean that a true believer does not have a sinful nature yet remaining in him, but it does mean that while the sinful nature remains it does not reign.  A true Christian is not under the control of the carnal mind. 

However, there is a difference between being carnal and being influenced by the carnal mind just as there is a difference between being evil and being influenced by evil.  The Christian may be influenced by it from time to time, but the carnal mind is crucified; nailed on a cross.  "They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh (sarx) with the affections and lusts" (Gal 5:24). 

The term Athe flesh nature@ here has the same meaning as Athe body of sin@ in Romans 6:6.  He will get weaker and weaker until he dies.  Yes, you can revive him if you please.  You can get a ladder and administer first aid by what you read, watch, and where you go.  You can leave off the means of grace and he will revive.  You can let him down after the Holy Spirit has nailed him there. 

In 1 Corinthians 3:1 the adjective sarkinos is used and it means "fleshly."  According to W. E. Vine this word is far less grave than sarkikos, which is used twice in vv 3-4.  Sarkikos has clear ethical overtones.  Gordon Fee said "they are living like the devil."  They are living like natural men (v 4).

Sarkikos is also used once by Paul in Romans 7:14 where he speaks of being unspiritual or sold under sin and in 2 Corinthians 1:12 to refer to worldly wisdom which is based on the viewpoint of the sinful nature.  Many in our churches are undoubtedly unregenerate and not truly born of the Spirit, as was also true at Corinth.

John Wesley has been misunderstood on this point.  In his sermon "On Sin in Believers,"  Wesley makes a distinction between being controlled by the carnal mind and having the carnal mind remaining.  He is making the point that there are degrees of faith prior to conversion as well as degrees of faith after justification, but is he right in his assessment that those who are described as carnal  in 1 Corinthians 3 are actually "babes in Christ" in the true sense

Elsewhere, in his comments about the "carnal" Christians at Corinth, Wesley said they were "in a great measure carnal." I think he used this phrase "in a great measure" to distinguish them from being altogether carnal, as some teach today.  In at least three other locations Wesley qualifies this description: "still in a measure carnal," "still (in part) carnal," "which is in some measure 'carnal.'"  It is obvious he did not think they were altogether carnal, but those who were described in 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 were!

J. Agar Beet takes the phrase "ye are yet carnal" as a rebuke, not as delineating states of grace.  He wrote that Paul does not "look at them as altogether destitute of the Spirit, but as men whose spiritual life is as yet undeveloped. . . .  Paul is compelled to speak to them as though still unsaved."

The problem here is simply that you cannot be regenerate and unregenerate at the same time.  Daniel Whedon commented that "were they wholly carnal they would not even be babes, but be unregenerate."

Adam Clarke interprets the same passage to mean that some who were associated with the Corinthian congregation were not actually part of the universal Church.  They were "just beginning to acquire some notion of the Christian religion."  He concluded that 1 Corinthians 3:3 meant, "Ye act just as the people of the world, and have no more of the spirit of religion than they."

Regardless of which of these Methodist interpretations is preferred, the point is that the term carnal is never used in an unqualified sense to describe Christians, as it later came to be used in the holiness movement and by dispensationalists.  Their use of the categories "carnal Christian" and "Spirit-filled Christian" are not biblical.  They teach a "carnal Christian" is still in bondage to sin and may not live any differently from the unsaved until he receives the Spirit.  This is heresy.

The expression "carnal Christian" is a misnomer.  Over a hundred names are given for Christians, but "carnal" is never mentioned.  Neither is "a sinner saved by grace."  Let us be Scriptural in our doctrine, in our faith, and in our practice.

 

THE FIVE GRACIOUS BLESSINGS OF ALL WHO ARE BORN AGAIN

Joseph D. McPherson

 

ADo we ordinarily represent a justified state so great and happy as it is@  APerhaps not,@ replies Mr. Wesley.  AA believer, walking in the light, is inexpressibly great and happy.@

The questioner again asks, AShould we not have care of depreciating justification, in order to exalt the state of full sanctification@ AUndoubtedly we should beware of this;@ replies Mr. Wesley, Afor one may insensibly slide into it.@

AHow,@ asks the questioner, Ashall we effectually avoid it@  AWhen we are going to speak of entire sanctification,@ says Mr. Wesley, Alet us first describe the blessings of the justified state, as strongly as possible.@

This exchange of questions and answers was recorded in the Minutes of an early Methodist conference Mr. Wesley held with his preachers at Bristol, England in 1745.  It illustrates the immense importance once placed upon the transformation wrought by the Holy Spirit in the initial conversion of a penitent=s heart and soul.  Mr. Wesley and other early Methodist leaders never minimized nor diminished the great work of justification and regeneration in order to exalt entire sanctification, as too many are found to do in the modern holiness movement.

The Day of Pentecost ushered in the most glorious of dispensations C the dispensation of the Holy Spirit.  Since then, the third person of the Trinity has had a major role in the total process of man=s salvation.  In fact, the whole scheme of salvation has been greatly elevated and rendered more glorious than at any time during former dispensations.

Too often it is thought that the Holy Ghost is primarily, if not only, involved in a believer=s entire sanctification.  To be sure, He is involved in the process of sanctifying believers wholly. However, He is also involved in convicting sinners of sin, drawing them to the Savior with strong desires, assisting them in repentance toward God and the placing of their trust in the Lord Jesus.  When the conditions of true repentance and vital faith are met, the Holy Spirit then gives new life and power over sin.

Since the rise of the modern holiness movement, the emphasis has been decidedly focused on the second work of grace.  However, while exalting the work of entire sanctification there has, at the same time, been a shameful and unscriptural minimizing of that great work of the Spirit in the initial conversion process.  To a growing number of serious students of the New Testament and early Wesleyan teachings, this has become a concern of major proportions.  Such an imbalance must be checked if Scriptural holiness is to flourish again.  It is a serious mistake to think of the first work of grace as consisting only of one blessing C that of forgiveness of sins.  There are, in fact, several blessings which are included in what we often call the first work of grace or conversion.  Let us briefly review these blessings.

1.  Justification is the blessing most often mentioned as essential to conversion.  It is an act by which forgiveness, or        pardon of sins and acceptance with God is extended to the penitent.  It is remission of sins that are past.  Justification is said to be that which God does for us.  It is based entirely upon what Christ has done and suffered for us.  Upon condition of true repentance and faith, God for Christ=s sake forgives and pardons all past sins so that one appears before Him as though he had never sinned.

2.  Regeneration is a second blessing experienced by converts in the first work of grace.  Whereas justification is that which God does for us, regeneration is the work of the Holy Spirit within us.  At the same time the sinner is justified he is also made anew by regeneration.  ATherefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold all things are become new@ (2 Cor 5:17).  The sinner is raised from spiritual death to spiritual life.  The soul that was dead to God is now made newly alive.  Although all were born in sin, those who experience the new birth are born anew from above; born of the Spirit.  They have been quickened to spiritual life.

Writing to the Colossian church, the apostle Paul says, AAnd you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all your trespasses@ (Col 2:13).  Reference to both justification and regeneration are found here C the forgiveness of trespasses and the quickening to life of the believer=s soul in regeneration.  In Titus 3:5, the same apostle speaks of believers being Asaved by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.@

Where justification takes away the guilt of sin, regeneration not only quickens the soul and imparts life, but takes away the power of sin.  As long as the believer maintains a vital and obedience faith in Christ Jesus, there is no willful sinning.  This can be supported by a number of New Testament references, particularly those found in 1 John, such as AWhosoever is born of God doth not commit sin@ (1 John 3:9).  Even though the remains of sin is yet in his heart, the believer has power over outward and inward sin together with a measure of peace and hope and love.  Dr. Leo Cox writes, AClearly this is a part of that perfection toward which every Christian moves when he shall be >perfect,= even as his Father >in heaven is perfect.=@

It is clear that this work of generation is an inward work of the Holy Ghost.  As Vic Reasoner puts it, AUntil the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost neither regeneration nor entire sanctification was possible.@  The truth is that Jesus never speaks of His disciples as being in possession of the Holy Spirit prior to Pentecost.  In fact, He made it unquestionably clear that until He was glorified, the Holy Spirit would not be given (John 7:39).  The timing and fulfillment of this was Pentecost.

Charles Carter declares that, AAll of the promises concerning baptism in the Spirit fund their fulfillment in the Pentecostal effusion, but never before.@  Reasoner then observes, AHe [Carter] is persuaded that when Jesus is recorded in Joh 20:22 to have breathed upon them, saying, AReceive ye the Holy Ghost,@ that He was acting symbolically and in anticipation of Pentecost.@  However, since Pentecost all who truly belong to Christ have received His Spirit.  So it is that Paul assures the believers at Corinth that the Holy Ghost was dwelling within them (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19), even though it is evident from his description of their spiritual state that they were not as yet entirely sanctified nor perfected in love (1 Cor 3:1-3).  We likewise find the Thessalonian believers enjoying the inward presence of the Holy Spirit at the very time that Paul was praying for their entire sanctification (1 Thes 1:6; 4:8; 5:23-4).  Such inward enjoyment of the Holy Spirit=s presence could not have been the experience of the disciples before Pentecost.

3.  Initial or Partial Sanctification is also an inward work of the Holy Spirit during conversion and is experienced together with justification and regeneration.  H. Orton Wiley, author of Christian Theology, makes the point that when a soul commits willful sin, there is not only a consciousness of guilt present, but a defilement of the soul that comes about from that committed sin.  In the following statement he explains further the basis for initial sanctification:

There must be this initial cleansing, concomitant [or at the same time] with the other blessings of the first work of grace, if this guilt and acquired depravity are to be removed from the sinner.  Since that which removes pollution and makes holy is properly called Asanctification,@ this first or initial cleansing is [sometimes identified as] Apartial@ sanctification. . . . Initial cleansing or partial sanctification . . . is limited strictly to that guilt and acquired depravity attaching to actual sins, for which the sinner is responsible.  It does not refer to the cleansing from original sin or inherited depravity, for which the sinner is not responsible.  We may say then that initial or partial sanctification includes in its scope all that acquired pollution which attaches to the sinner=s own acts; while entire sanctification includes the cleaning from original sin or inherited depravity.  Since sin is two-foldC an act, and a state or condition, sanctification must be twofold.  There is an and can be but two stages in the process of sanctification C initial and entire C the full consummation of the process being rightly known as glorification.   

 

Dr. Leo Cox in his book entitled John Wesley=s Concept of Perfection, ably describes initial sanctification with a little different emphasis.  He writes:

 At the same time that the new life is planted in the soul [in regeneration], God begins the cleansing of sin.  The power of sin is broken.  Man is made holy, pure, clean, but not entirely so.  This cleansing work is the beginning of sanctification.  It is holiness begun.  It can be called initial because it is just a beginning.  This new life exists where some evil is still present.

Mr. Wesley, himself, had much to say about initial sanctification, assuring all that when one is justified, he or she is also regenerated and sanctified initially.  He admonished new believers to push forward to the completion and perfection of this beginning.

This initial sanctification is what the Apostle Paul referred to when he described the Corinthian believers as being Asanctified.@  It should be clear to the Bible student that these Corinthian believers were not entirely sanctified at the time Paul was writing to them, for he plainly speaks of them as being Ayet carnal@ and Ababes in Christ.@  Since this sanctification is found to be an inward work of initial cleansing in the convert=s heart, it must be considered as involving more than that sanctification thought by some to have been only an outward separation from the world and its sinful lifestyle.  No, we must conclude it to have been a deeper work than any mere outward cleansing and separation.  Rather, it was an inward and supernatural work of the Holy Ghost unknown to the disciples before Pentecost.

4.  Adoption is a blessing also found to be included in the first work of grace.  Richard Watson assures us that this is Aa large and comprehensive blessing.@  He continues with an explanation:

Our sins had deprived us of our sonship, the favor of God, and our right to the inheritance of eternal life.  We had become strangers, and aliens, and enemies to God.  However, upon our return to God, and reconciliation with him, our forfeited privileges were not only restored, but heightened through the paternal love of God. . . .  Adoption then, is that act by which we who were enemies, and disinherited, are made the sons of God, and heirs of his eternal glory.  AIf children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ.@

 

5.  The Witness of the Spirit is the final blessing we wish to highlight as a very important part of conversion or the first work of grace in the believer=s heart.  We are referring to what Watson identifies as Athe inward witness or testimony of the Holy Spirit to the adoption or sonship of believers from which,@ says he, Aflows a comfortable persuasion or conviction of our present acceptance with God and the hope of our future and eternal glory.@

Mr. Wesley saw this inward witness as being such an important privilege of the children of God that he wrote at least three sermons directly pertaining to it.  He defines this blessing as follows:

The testimony of the Spirit is an inward impression on the soul, whereby the Spirit of God directly witnesses to my spirit that I am a child of God; that Jesus Christ hath loved me, and given himself for me; that all my sins are blotted out, and I, even I, am reconciled to God.

 

Joseph Benson, an early Methodist leader, was likewise persuaded of the same truth.  AAll that receive the remission of sins, and are adopted into God=s family, receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, as a Spirit of adoption and regeneration: to assure them of their sonship, and renew them after God=s image.@

Since the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit alone enables believers to enjoy this blessing, the disciples again would not have experienced it before Pentecost.  However, true believers of this Holy Ghost dispensation are more highly favored with this added blessing of the Spirit of adoption.

Dr. Kenneth Collins, Professor of Church History at Asbury Theological Seminary, supports Mr. Wesley=s view concerning Athe witness of the Spirit, which is the privilege C though many are ignorant of it C of all who believe.@  Among several passages of Scripture that teach and support this truth we mention but two.

Romans 8;15-16 states, AFor ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.  The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God.@  Likewise in Galatians 4:5-6 we read, ABut when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons; and because ye are sons God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.@

ATo these,@ writes Richard Watson, Aare to be added all those passages, so numerous in the New Testament, which express the confidence and the joy of Christians.@  For illustration, he then mentions Atheir friendship with God; their confident access to him as their God; their entire union, and delightful [fellowship] with him in spirit.@

After Peter finished his sermon on the Day of Pentecost, his listeners were Apricked in their hearts.@  In other words they were under conviction and full of fear.  They asked, AMen and brethren, what shall we do@  Peter answered, ARepent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost@ (Acts 2:37-8).  We believe this passage, among others, demonstrates that all true penitents receive the Spirit when initially converted.  Paul, writing under divine inspiration, adds authority to this truth when he assures the Roman church that Aif any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his@ (Romans 8:9).

Mr. Wesley boldly asserts that one was not yet a Christian if he had not received the Holy Ghost.  He assures his readers that a Christian is one who is Aanointed with the Holy Ghost and power.@  AI assert,@ said he, AThat till a man >receives the Holy Ghost,= he is without God in the world.@

Commenting on Acts 1:5, AYe shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost,@ Wesley says, AAnd so are all true believers to the end of the world.@  This was the historical view, not only of early Methodists and early Wesleyan Methodists, but also the view of the Church Fathers and eminent saints throughout church history.  It continues to be the view of those who closely adhere to the Wesleyan-Arminian persuasion.

In New Testament epistles we find believers being exhorted to go to perfection.  We find the Apostle Paul praying that the Thessalonians might be sanctified wholly, but we never find believers being exhorted to receive or be baptized in the Holy Spirit.  Rather they are commanded in Ephesians 5:18 to be continually filled with the Spirit.  It is clear that having been powerfully raised from spiritual death to spiritual life by the miracle of the new birht, regenerated believers are in present possession of the Holy Spirit.  By their continuing faithful to the grace given them, the same Holy Spirit who began His work within them will continue that work so as to faithfully lead them on to perfection.  AFaithful is he that calleth you,@ writes the Apostle, Awho also will do it@ (1 Thess 5:24).

There are those who would contend that the experience of the original disciples before and after Pentecost provide the model or pattern for today.  Robert Lyon, Professor of Biblical Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary, answers this by offering Atwo observations,@ that he says Amake this impossible: 1. the model is not followed elsewhere in Acts or the early Church; 2.  it fails to consider the . . . significance of Pentecost as the once-for-all inaugurative event which establishes the Church.@

In the final analysis we conclude that it is not scriptural to equate the experience of regenerated believers in this Holy Ghost dispensation with the experience of the disciples before Pentecost.  The dispensation of the Father, or Jewish dispensation, afforded its blessings.  The dispensation of the Son, enjoyed by the disciples while in the presence of Jesus, provided greater blessings.  But the dispensation of the Holy Ghost outshines all former dispensations, showering even the new believer with blessings and privileges unavailable to those living in all former dispensations of inferior blessing.

A WORD FROM WATSON

 

The name "Watson" is usually associated with G. D. Watson, a popular holiness author.  Few people have had any exposure to Richard Watson, the first Methodist to publish a systematic theology.  We think part of the problem is that the wrong Watson has been reprinted and read.  This is the sixth extraction from Richard Watson to be published in this magazine.  This is a summary of Richard Watson=s sermon, ASt. Paul=s Confidence in the Gospel, A found in Sermons and Sketches of Sermons (New York: Carlton & Porter, 1851)Sermon #12, 1:175-183.  The sermon is based on Romans 1:16-17.

 Paul=s confidence in the gospel was based upon five considerations.  First was the personal transformation experienced by Paul.  To relax the bigotry, to quench the fury, to suddenly turn the tide of such a mind, some great power must be supposed.  Since it bound him to sacrifice fame, wealth, and friends, and to embrace reproach, poverty and suffering, it must have been supernatural.  The only adequate explanation is that Paul received a vision of Christ on the Damascus road. 

Paul=s confidence in the gospel was also based upon the conviction that Jesus Christ is God, according to his higher and divine nature.  According to the flesh he was human, but according to the spirit of holiness he was the Son of God.  In his eternal sonship he is both subject to the Father and equal to the Father in majesty and perfection.  Such a Messiah was promised in the writings of the holy prophets and Jesus was declared to be this Messiah by his resurrection from the dead, which authenticated all the claims he had ever made on earth. 

Paul=s confidence in the gospel was confirmed by the results already produced by Christianity in Rome.  And here the Christian preacher may stand upon the highest ground and say, after the lapse of centuries, AI am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ.@  While superstition, error, persecution, and bad morals have been charged upon Christianity, this is like charging the sun with causing blight and other damage done to the crops by the clouds, humidity, and storms.  Yet above those storm clouds, the sun shines unclouded.  Christianity, in its worst forms is superior in moral influence to the best systems of heathen wisdom or superstition.  Wherever the Gospel of Christ has come, whether it has broken partially through the gloom of darkened Christendom or been as the first dawn of morning light rising upon the long night of pagan countries, the effect has been the same.  When we contemplate on so large a scale and through a portion of time so vast, its beneficent operations on the bodies and the souls of men, upon their civil, social, and religious state, upon the intellect and the passions, upon the conditions of this life and the hopes of another, when we think of the manliness it has given to intellect, the power it has infused into conscience, the settledness to religious opinions, the happy families it has created, the moral progress into which it has impelled the most degraded nations, the noble examples of wisdom, purity and heroic suffering, the mercy it has shed through society and the Anumber which no man can number@ with which it has colonized heaven, we may each respond with the apostle and say, AI am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ.@

Paul=s confidence in the gospel is also expressed as he brings the efficiency of the Gospel down to individual experience.  It not only transforms nations, but everyone that believes.  The power of the gospel is employed to illuminate darkened minds.  The power of the gospel is the voice of God which brings life.  The power of the gospel brings the comfort of a powerful and unequivocal testimony of the Spirit of God to our spirits that we are now the reconciled, accepted children of God.  The power of the gospel is employed to regenerate and to sustain.  The power of the gospel shall raise the body from the humbling ruins of mortality to the glory of immortality.

Finally, Paul=s confidence in the gospel is based upon his understanding that the gospel contains a revelation of the terms on which God forgives sin, justifying by pardon those who are actually guilty.  The gospel is a divine institution by which men are saved through the forgiveness of their sins by faith in an atonement which demonstrates the righteousness of God in this very exercise of mercy.

This same gospel demands from us a similar confidence and commitment.  Are we taunted by the world  Is the doctrine of justification by faith treated by contempt by proud and unhumbled men  Is the gospel assailed by philosophers and infidels  Does rationalism endeavor to shame our simple faith  Let the cross of Christ be to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness; to us who are saved it is the power of God and the wisdom of God.

 

Martin Luther=s Preface

 

This preface was read at a Moravian society meeting at Aldersgate Street in London on May 24, 1738.  John Wesley was present and testified that "about a quarter before nine, while he was describing the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed.  I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone for salvation, and an assurance was given me that he had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death." 

This Preface appeared in Luther=s German Bible of 1522 and should not be confused with Luther=s Commentary on Romans which was based upon his lectures given in 1515-6.  Although Luther=s Preface defines several key terms and then summarizes each chapter in Romans, according to Luke Tyerman, the section being read at Wesley=s conversion was where ALuther teaches what faith is, and also that faith alone justifies.@  In that section Luther writes:

Faith is not what some people think it is. Their human dream is a delusion. Because they observe that faith is not followed by good works or a better life, they fall into error, even though they speak and hear much about faith. ``Faith is not enough,'' they say, ``You must do good works, you must be pious to be saved.'' They think that, when you hear the gospel, you start working, creating by your own strength a thankful heart which says, ``I believe.'' That is what they think true faith is. But, because this is a human idea, a dream, the heart never learns anything from it, so it does nothing and reform doesn't come from this `faith,' either.

 

Instead, faith is God's work in us, that changes us and gives new birth from God. (John 1:13). It kills the Old Adam and makes us completely different people. It changes our hearts, our spirits, our thoughts and all our powers. It brings the Holy Spirit with it. Yes, it is a living, creative, active and powerful thing, this faith. Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn't stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without ceasing.  Anyone who does not do good works in this manner is an unbeliever.  He stumbles around and looks for faith and good works, even though he does not know what faith or good works are. Yet he gossips and chatters about faith and good works with many words.

 

Faith is a living, bold trust in God's grace, so certain of God's favor that it would risk death a thousand times trusting in it.  Such confidence and knowledge of God's grace makes you happy, joyful and bold in your relationship to God and all creatures. The Holy Spirit makes this happen through faith. Because of it, you freely, willingly and joyfully do good to everyone, serve everyone, suffer all kinds of things, love and praise the God who has shown you such grace. Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire! Therefore, watch out for your own false ideas and guard against good-for-nothing gossips, who think they're smart enough to define faith and works, but really are the greatest of fools.  Ask God to work faith in you, or you will remain forever without faith, no matter what you wish, say or can do ["An Introduction to St. Paul's Letter to the Romans," Luther's German Bible of 1522, translated by Robert E. Smith from Dr. Martin Luther=s Vermischte Deutsche Schriften, Johann K. Irmischer, ed. (Erlangen: Heyder and Zimmer, 1854), 63:124-125].

 

REVIEWS

 

The Heritage of American Methodism

by Kenneth Cain Kinghorn

Reviewed by Robert L. Brush

 

Refreshing, enlightening, educational and easy to read is my assessment of Kenneth Kinghorn's account of America's Methodist Heritage. Even if you have already read a history of

Methodism or The Life and Times of John Wesley you will find this volume most refreshing. He covers areas not usually covered by others such as the "Black Experience" and camp meeting phenomena.  My  first ever hearing of the singing experience!  Read it for yourself and be blest.  This oversized book contains an extensive collection of illustrations, photographs, and lithographs.  Many have never before appeared in print. [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1999), 176 pp, $25.00].  To order call Cokesbury at 800-672-1789.

 

The Scripture Way of Salvation

by Kenneth J. Collins

Reviewed by Joseph D. McPherson

 

One finds in this scholarly work a thorough and understandable overview of John Wesley's theology.  Whether the reader should be a long time student of the founder of Methodism or one who seeks to be newly introduced to this great man's teachings, a fresh insight and sound understanding of his scripturally based doctrine of salvation is sure to be gained.

Dr. Collins shared with me what motivated him to write A Scripture Way of Salvation: 

I believed that the liberty that we have in the Gospel, freedom from the guilt, power and being of sin was being obscured by some popular theologies.  One favorite move was to empty regeneration of its "power" and then ascribe it to Christian perfection.  This unfortunately results in antinomianism in practical Christian life.  I was also concerned with the deprecation of conversion (Aldersgate) and the instantaneous motif in the thought of leading Methodists.  I eventually became convinced that they were doing "constructive theology" rather than "historical theology," that they told us much more about their own theological judgments and sensibilities than about those of John Wesley.  In short, they failed to be historically accurate and ignored significant evidence which undermines their (popular) contemporary constructions.

 

In his introductory comments, the author reveals the significance of the title he has chosen for this book.  He identifies the first part of the title as having been "taken ... from a summary sermon that Wesley produced in 1765, AThe Scripture Way of Salvation."  Rather than focusing upon the term, Way within this title, as he says some scholars are apt to do, Collins prefers to put the emphasis of his study on the term, Scripture as found in the title.  As he points out, "It is, after all, not 'The Traditional Way of Salvation,' or 'The Rational Way of Salvation,' or 'The Experiential Way of Salvation,' but the 'The Scripture Way of Salvation.'"

The Heart of John Wesley's Theology, was chosen as a second part of the title and captures well the full content of this work.  Collins explores thoroughly the various aspects of Wesley's doctrine of salvation, beginning with the doctrine of creation and original sin.  He then continues by giving full treatment to Wesley's views of prevenient grace, repentance, justification, the new birth, entire sanctification, and final justification.  Herein the reader finds Wesley's orderly process of salvation clearly marked and explained.

Wesley's doctrine of entire sanctification, or the cleansing from all inbred sin, is often emphasized by theologians and pulpit evangelists to the degree that it tends to eclipse his theological emphasis on the new birth.  In contrast, Collins provides a more honest and balanced review of Wesley's teachings.  He impresses the reader with that great man's extraordinary emphasis of the initial work of God in the heart of a penitent.  He introduces afresh his view of this transformation as necessarily implying an "entire, general, universal" and "supernatural change--a change "whereby a soul moves from death to life."  Wesley's persuasion that this new life and regenerating force is accompanied by sufficient power over inward and outward sin is highlighted, as well as the view that the work of sanctification is begun in regeneration.

Although Collins gives due consideration to Wesley's teaching of the instantaneous aspect of both justification and entire sanctification, he is careful not to omit the reality of what Wesley assures us is a gradual process before and after these crises experiences.  He likewise provides thorough insight into Wesley's doctrine of assurance, both in reference to justification and entire sanctification.

In the final chapter, the author makes an emphasis of Wesley's doctrine of a "final justification" in the day of judgment in contrast to that justification experienced initially in the new birth.  He concludes this excellent study by revealing the wide variety of resources and traditions from which Mr. Wesley drew his theological thinking [Kenneth J. Collins, The Scripture Way of Salvation: The Heart of John Wesley's Theology (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1997), 256 pp, $19.00].  To order call Cokesbury at 800-672-1789.

 Why the Holiness Movement Died

by Richard S. Taylor

Reviewed by Vic Reasoner

 

In March 1999 God=s Revivalist printed an essay by Richard S. Taylor entitled, AWhy the Holiness Movement Died.@  This was heralded far and wide as a Alandmark@ article.  Although this article has receive much acclaim, The Arminian Magazine, Fall 1997 and Spring 1998, contained a two-part article "Why the Holiness Movement Died" by Douglas Crossman which was more comprehensive than Taylor's analysis. 

The American holiness movement, beginning around 1835, was misguided in its very beginning by Phoebe Palmer, with her misconception of faith, and by Charles Finney, who denied original sin.  By the turn of the twentieth century the center of the radical holiness movement was God's Bible School and their Revivalist Press.  Nothing did more to pull the holiness movement away from its Methodist moorings than some of the folk theology published a hundred years ago by Revivalist Press, which issued Taylor=s essay in booklet form last year. 

Although the recent editorial trend in God=s Revivalist toward a more comprehensive grasp of Methodism is refreshing, it seems a bit presumptuous for Taylor to single out Nazarene theologian Mildred Wynkoop (1905-1997) as the scape goat of a movement that was off track before she was ever born.  This is a classic illustration of reductionism.  Taylor dislikes the writings of Wynkoop because she advocates a relational view of sin instead of Taylor's more substantive or materialistic view.  Taylor feels that his concept of eradication is essential to the holiness message.  Thus carnality is perceived as something, often compared to a tree stump, which was removed by the second blessing.  Although Taylor tries to distance himself, and the holiness movement, from a substantive view of sin in this booklet, he previously argued that it was reasonable to believe that the sin nature was passed down through the genetic code [Exploring Christian Holiness, 3:96-8].

In contrast, Wesley taught that the sinful nature came through Adam and "not by immediate generation."  Neither the Bible nor Wesley used the word "eradicate." In A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, Wesley described Christian perfection as Alove filling the heart, expelling pride, anger, desire, self-will; rejoicing evermore, praying, without ceasing, and in everything giving thanks.@

Taylor also asserts that Wynkoop adopted the Pelagian doctrine of sin advocated by Charles Finney.   This is a serious charge which cannot be proven.  Wesley wrote that anyone who denied original sin was still a heathen and claimed this doctrine was "the first grand distinguishing point between heathenism and Christianity."  Before supposing   that Wynkoop was a heathen, I reviewed her Foundations of Wesleyan-Arminian Theology and Theology of Love.   I concluded that Wynkoop had not denied this fundamental doctrine, only that she had not accepted Taylor's  views.  All in all, I found her presentation to be more Wesleyan in spirit than Taylor's  [Richard S. Taylor, Why the Holiness Movement Died (Cincinnati: Revivalist Press, 1999), 16 pp].

 

A Tribute to Norman Brush

(November 24, 1926 - March 23, 1998)

by Marion Brown

Ernest Norman Brush was born in Birmingham, Alabama to Bert and Minnie Brush.  During his early years he recalled carrying songbooks for his dad and listening to his mother preach and >backing the preacher=, a local term used to identify those who supported the preacher.

He experienced childhood conversion and began preaching at an early age.  He became pastor of the Millroad Sanctified Church of Christ.   The light of God shone brightly in his heart and he soon became sought after as an evangelist.  His insistence on a holy lifestyle soon caused dissension within the church of his birth.

With a heart hungry after God, Adam Clarke's Commentaries, and the Holy Scriptures, he pursued a life that would be well pleasing to the Lord.  As his acquaintances grew of like-minded men he came in contact with Rev. G.I. Norman.  Bro. Norman was instrumental in leading him to a more clear knowledge of God.  Always remember that God will reveal Himself to all who call upon Him, for He is no respecter of persons.  Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.. 

Norman Brush fondly recalled going to revival meeting at night then going to see Bro. Norman during the day and walking with him as he patiently pointed out more clearly >the way of the Cross=.  He then joined the Wesleyan Methodist Church and pastored Fort Payne, Ala.; Columbus, Ga.; and Pell City, Ala.  While pastoring at Pell City, the Church was visited with an unusual spiritual awakening under the preaching of Rev. Arthur Roney.  While there he experienced a new level of victory, but mingled with sorrow; his first wife died and left him a widower with eight children.

From Pell City he moved to Hobe Sound, Fla. where he met and married Fay Halstead, who became his lifelong mate and mother to his children.

His understanding of the Scriptures; his fierce allegiance to Wesleyan teaching and doctrine; his determination not to allow this present evil world to squeeze him into its mold; his unmitigated honesty; his contagious smile and his warm and affectionate spirit was well known to all whose lives he touched.

Last, but by no means least, he was among that hardy group of men who risked reputations, friendships and respect of peers to launch this fledgling fellowship now known as the Fundamental Wesleyan Society.   Of our few numbers he once quipped AThe cutting edge is never crowded@.  So, he lived and died, but to those of us who knew him intimately he was holy and undefiled, a son of the living God!