Spiritual or Soulish - Nee

A question to ponder: Where in scripture is the idea of “soul” (or soul-ish) applied to a human compartment that can only do what is contrary to God or independent from God?

In the history of man’s creation we read, ‘The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground’—thus was his body made—‘and breathed into his nostrils the breath’ or spirit ‘of life’: thus his spirit came from God; ‘and man became a living soul.’ The spirit quickening the body made man a living soul, a living person with the consciousness of himself. The soul was the meeting-place, the point of union between body and spirit. Through the body, man, the living soul, stood related to the external world of sense; could influence it, or be influenced by it. Through the spirit he stood related to the spiritual world and the Spirit of God, whence he had his origin; could be the recipient and the minister of its life and power. Standing thus midway between two worlds, belonging to both, the soul had the power of determining itself, of choosing or refusing the objects by which it was surrounded, and to which it stood related.

In the constitution of these three parts of man’s nature, the spirit, as linking him with the Divine, was the highest; the body, connecting him with the sensible and animal, the lowest; intermediate stood the soul, partaker of the nature of the others, the bond that united them and through which they could act on each other. Its work, as the central power, was to maintain them in their due relation; to keep the body, as the lowest, in subjection to the spirit; itself to receive through the spirit, as the higher, from the Divine Spirit what was waiting (sic) it for its perfection: and so to pass down, even to the body, that by which it might be partaker of the Spirit’s perfection and become a spiritual body

Personal Comment by myself.

One of the most remarkable and honest teachers to have ever lived practiced 'experiential' truth (my emphasis} in China in the early part of the 20th century. Nee in The Spiritual Man explained that he was learning from what God made real in the work not what others said about the work. This is why I have used the term 'experiential' truth. He was courageous enough and therefore willing enough to test everything which God did with him and those he served against the Scriptures. And most importantly to accept and practice what was experienced and tested as a matter of obedience to the leading of God fully grounded in Scripture. What was experienced was tested and that which could not be clearly seen in the Word was rejected.

Nee only really set out to write one or perhaps two books. The chief work however of the many books which bear his name is "The Spiritual Man". In this book Nee sets out an understanding of the nature and construct of man at the start of the book. The only Scripture to explicitly convey this construct is the one quoted in this thread or post. (1 Thessalonians’ 5:23). He later explained in another book, which was drawn from his writings and teaching ministry, "The Latent Power of the Soul" how an understanding of the Soul itself.......drawn from examples across a range of human activity; both intellectual, emotional and volitive......could not be the source and therefore the energy used by God for His work of salvation in men.

Nee didn't condemn the Soul as always sinful. But he did teach that the soul is always unprofitable to God in the evangelisation of the nations and the building of the church. I have taken the trouble to add this post because I have known no other teacher who better explains the importance of right separation in our understanding the nature of man, and therefore right activity in serving God. The quote above from The Latent Power of the Soul is self explanatory.

Andrew

Nee didn't condemn the Soul as always sinful. But he did teach that the soul is always unprofitable to God in the evangelisation of the nations and the building of the church.

Agreed. I think of the Apostle Paul going to bring the message of the Gospel to Asia and the Lord prevented him by the Spirit, so he re-corrected and then when he received a dream he obeyed the vision of the Lord. We cannot help but operate in the soulish level at times because we are in these "tents". Yet I also agree with the Nee quote fully that only those operations which are done by the Spirit of God have tremendous eternal significance and bring glory to God's Name.

The impossible glorifies God. The possible glorifies man's abilities.

Hi Diane. According to Nee, who bases most of what he taught on verses found in Romans 8 and those along that line - the soul is to submit to the Spirit within us. Walking in the spirit is the soul's submission to the dictates and leadings of the LORD that speaks and leads through our spirit. That no flesh - [which is synonymous with our soul] - may glory in His Presence ... "for without Me, you can do nothing."
Our soul or flesh is where our freewill is and we see that in the verses that you posted. Our humanity is there - but it will never glory in His Presence. He expects our thoughts and actions to orginate from and are brought under submission to His Spirit within our spirit and not from ourselves. Our freewill decides whether to wait on Him to lead or speak through our spirit and then to obey or follow through on what originates from Him, by our own freewill/soul.

Don't know if this helps at all.

where it seems that the soul truly craves for God and indeed is required to love God

Loving God for Himself is probably the most noble endeavour of the soul of man. Evangelism and equipping the saints to serve God is a calling of God according to Ephesians. I don't think that seeking to know God for His own loveliness is going to cause anyone to be led astray or stumble in the church. On the other hand the church is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, whereon Christ Himself is the chief corner stone. Is it really likely that God would build His church on even the most noble efforts of a man?

In the Epesian list of God's gifts to the church, this leaves evangelists, pastors and teachers. Is it by the power of the evangelist that a man is convicted of sin? Or does the evangelist give faith to believe? If it is, then none are yet saved, because we have believed by the power of a man. Where then comes conviction leading to true repentance? Pastors and teachers feed the sheep and by sound doctrine keep them. What is the food and what is the doctrine to keep? If it is a mans words and ideas, or a mans teachings we are yet starved and hungry.

All these gifts of men have souls and bodies but the substance of their activities, if it is to always lead men to God and Christ, must be God Himself working through them. Yes, working through their souls and bodies, but not by the power of their souls and bodies. It is the newness of life in their regenerated spirit and the calling of God in their lives which gives rise to the substance. The soul is not the whole man if he is regenerate. because he is a new creature. As the Lord said, "whosoever believes in me, from his innermost parts shall flow rivers of living waters". Also the whosoever not only includes the ministers of the Word of Christ, but includes everyone who believes. The gifts of faith in Romans and the gifts of the Spirit in Corinthians are all subject to God giving newness of life in the first instance. Otherwise everything we do is just the soul or the body. It is the spirit which is born of the Spirit. The flesh profits nothing.

Isn't this the very difficulty which everyone who is born again of the Spirit of God has experienced in our own walks. False apostolic teachings, men who deny the power of God, having none of it, yet perverting the Word of Truth. Laying a shaky and uncertain foundation. False prophets speaking lies and leading many astray. Evagelist's commanding men to be saved, fishing for men with nets made of their own reason, and deluding many. Pastors and teachers feeding the sheep with bitterness and scattering the flock. I don't say this judgmentally, but fearfully knowing that it is true in many instances. If all these men had laboured as broken vessels, releasing the true source of God's power in the spirit, we would see a perfect church already. It is not this way and it would be delusional to imagine that the church is already perfected. But this is God's ambition and He will do it according to the gifts and the life He has already given. The very thing that must be laid down and broken is the soul and the body, only then will we see real power of God unto revival. The method of this being broken is denying our selves and our bearing the cross unto death; a following after Christ so that we may be found in the end where He will be found, at His appearing, and His Kingdom.

Andrew

I do not see Scripture suggesting a shift into another realm of our personhood: the spirit – as distinct from the mind (seen as the soul, as in psyche) or the body.

To the Lord whom I serve I offer my heartfelt thanks, for He has given me the privilege of writing this book. I had always hoped another more capable would undertake this work, yet it pleases the Lord to call me to it. If the choice were left to me I should be the last of all to write; for I have the least desire to do such a book. My hesitation lies not in withdrawal from duty but rather in the realization that such a book touching on the way of spiritual life and the stratagem of spiritual warfare is surely beyond the possibility of one whose experience of the Lord has been less than ten years long. (Part preface) The Spiritual Man.

This part preface seems to me to point to the 'honesty' of the man.

One thing that we all agree about is the importance of judging oneself first. I don't mean this to sound like something else so I will explain it as I personally understand it. Judging oneself seems to me in experience to mean that on the one hand one is willing to judge ones motives, attitudes and so on, but in balance one must also judge ones own experiences in the Lord as well the effect one has on others. We know that one day we will all have to give an account to the Lord Jesus Himself for our own personal walk. More burdensome is the knowledge that we will also have to give an account of His gift of life to us; the gift of talents, as well as the effect or 'fruit' of the calling and talents given.

So that say a pastor who is given as a gift to the body must also account for his calling as one given; in short his labour of effects. Sometimes we only realise that we have sinned by the effect it has on others. It seems this kind of judging of oneself is essential to growing as a pastor and not simply as one called. I don't doubt that to the pastor this distinction is almost inseparable, but very real. To the one 'looking' at the pastor it could easily seem like mere semantics. It is certain that this distinction is very real to a 'mindful' pastor as it is to apostles, prophets and evangelists if they are true.

I agree that it is reasonable and I would say necessary to examine who has influenced a teacher in their thinking. It is certain that Nee held Jessie Penn-Lewis in regard. It is not so certain whether she influenced him however. How could we judge such a thing anyway unless it was stated explicitly by the man himself. Simply making reference to an others writings cant be taken as proof of influence. This must be especially true of someone who was 'taken out of the way' to suffer trials of their faith, in order to make certain their ministry to the wider body of Christ.

One thing is certain we don't follow a man or men. We follow Christ and are accountable to Him alone.

Andrew

by ccchhhrrriiisss

Zac Poonen has a message on this topic that is included on SermonIndex's YouTube page:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ck5su6Mg7aA

My wife and I attended the meeting and we both appreciated many of the points that Brother Zac made. I think that he echos many of the things that Nee is saying.

That was the first time I've heard Zac and you're right, Chris. I caught myself smiling through the whole presentation. Love rejoices at truth.

I believe, the tearing of the veil between mind/flesh and spirit to sometimes be painful [mainly to our autonomous, 'self' preserving ego], but always a reason for rejoicing if we dig through to our own wills and submit, as Zac showed. I loved his visuals of the house being built by digging down through the sand to the rock of our wills.

We learn to depend on His Spirit within, in two ways, from what I've seen. As Zac brought "The Word" - Heb 4:12 For the Word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

- and by experiences - if we see that He is in control of "all things" that come our way - Rom 8:28,29 And we know that ALL things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose - FOR whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.

I believe it was Nee that said that even that flat tire is part of the "all things" that can give us opportunity to see that GOD is allowing these situations for us to make a choice of either seeing it as coming from His Hand so that we can react by the spirit or our flesh/mind/emotions - and that if we see that "all things" that come at us, are in His control and our opportunity to rent the veil between our soul and react from His Word and/or Spirit's leading instead - we are being transformed into His Image, bit by bit.
The veil is rent bit by bit by our "will" submiting to His Word and the circumstances that He permits to enter our days and is either slowed down or sped up by our willingness to lose ourselves in whatever He wants.
Many prefer to blame anything negative that comes their way as "the devil", missing yet another chance to allow GOD to show us how unlike Him we are in our responses and preventing us from seeing our reactions are to protect 'self' rather than turn to the Spirit to be transformed by 'all things'. All circumstances are either met by our self/flesh or seen as the way that He brings us into His Image, as we die to protecting our self image.

That video has made me want to sing, "More of Thee" and I'm still smiling.

Thank you!

Good Sunday to you, Diane.

Rather than go off into a debate on dichotomy vs trichotomy, which will either kill this thread or make it much too similar to a Cal/Arm debate - maybe we could just stay on the topic of something like Romans 8 or merely let this topic go, as is.
I don't see the need to take a "critical stand" because of those that have taken either view of the nature of man to extremes.
There are extremes in both camps, we must admit, if we were to be honest.

Just a suggestion.

Have a Blessed day!

When I studied reformed theology I read about dichotomy and trichotomy and monoism.
Reformed people hold to dichotomy while pentacostals hold to trichotomy.

We live in this day and at this hour. Despite the importance of what is taught across a wide spectrum of theological and experiential positions, we have to attend to today. So far as we are able to judge what is happening today the most important reality which all saints have to attend to, here and now is the Lord's soon return. We hear all the time, and some of us assert it clearly..."This is the time of apostasy". Not that apostasy began just this morning, or that it will be fully revealed by this evening. Yet the apostles, Paul and John stated clearly that it was already in the world in their day. John speaks of it as "the spirit of anti-christ" and Paul speaks of it as a "falling away". One is the cause and the working of wickedness, the other is its effect. Taken together what is being spoken of is a mystery on the one hand, but is clearly 'grounded' in the claim that a man is coming into the theatre of the world who's appearing will be a conclusion of this effect which will directly precede the Lords' return. Anything which makes it possible to understand what part we as saints in the church today, may have in this falling away, must be of the most immense importance. More than this we need to be 'kept' and we need to 'keep' one another in truth and love.

I would suggest that one way in which God Himself makes provision for His children is to bring into the understanding of His children those things which are necessary for their day. Today there is a need to know how to stand and walk in this perverse generation where apostasy is more visible than at any other hour.

For this reason alone I am certain in my own spirit that a fuller understanding of what a man is, and how he affects himself and others, will serve that need well. A theological discussion won't serve that need. If we look to this way of walking we will inevitably, be tossed about by everything which has been said from the apostolic church until this very hour. Such a way of thinking will not satisfy the need to know today how God Himself is able to keep His children despite the hour in which we live.

Earnestly searching the Scriptures will have the same effect as earnestly looking into theology in this regard. This is because the Scriptures speak to all the days of the church, not simply to 'this' day. No doubt we will find if we look into prophecies and doctrines of Scripture that they may in fact keep us personally, but these things will not keep others if they remain in ourselves alone. If we seek to teach from prophetic insight and present doctrines alone, and do not see that we have to discern the times and bear one another's burdens so that we can all walk, we will have missed more than the greater portion of our calling and The Father's will for our lives.

This subject of the nature of a man and The Father's dealings with men individually, is at the heart of the matter; precisely because the dichotomy of a man as having three distinct and real parts is revealed in this day. That is to say it has only been taught in the last 100 years or so. In days previous other things were given by God to keep the church in that day. If this thread is to have any purpose in serving God's will for our lives today, please make it about today's reality in the context of growing apostasy and not about past workings of God from which we have already benefited. We really can benefit from 'looking' into the full nature of a man and men individually, but not if we focus on an apparent doctrine, which in any event, is no doctrine at all. The subject has been searched by others far more equipped than we may be and still it is rejected by the majority of saints. Indeed it is actively resisted by many. We need to look to effects in our day and not doctrines, so long as those doctrines do not touch upon the issue of life and the person of the Lord Jesus. Apart from sacred doctrines of eternal life as understood through Christ birth, sinless life, obedience unto death, resurrection, ascension into heaven and soon return; we should have no concern at being free in the knowledge of these things to lay hold all that works for His glory and our good benefit today.

Andrew

If this thread is to have any purpose in serving God's will for our lives today, please make it about today's reality in the context of growing apostasy and not about past workings of God from which we have already benefited.

This quote above from my preceding thread seems a little arrogant on the face of it. So I feel led to explain it in the hope that in some way it will not have the effect of laying waste to the original post. Below is a quote from Nee. It is a part preface of Latent Power of the Soul. Remembering that this was written in 1933 puts the subject into a more alarming necessity today. Nee laid a considerable emphasis on the development of human sciences, particularly psychology, which at that time was no where near as advanced as it is today. He also emphasised a great many other areas of human activity in the world including all manner of religious deceptions. He also related this knowledge to the activity of the soul as well as the danger of believers using their soul life in an unwitting counterfeit of spiritual activity. It is no exaggeration to say that today this counterfeiting effect is many times greater than it was in Nee's day of writing.

When in 1924 I first called the attention of God’s children to the dividing of spirit and soul, many well-disposed brethren thought of it as merely a dispute over words having no great significance. What they failed to see was that our conflict is not concerned with word but with that which lies behind. The spirit and the soul are two totally different organs: one belongs to God, while the other belongs to man. By whatever names one may call them, they are completely distinct in substance. The peril of the believer is to confuse the spirit for the soul and the soul for the spirit, and so be deceived into accepting the counterfeit of evil spirits to the unsettling of God’s work.
This series of articles had originally been intended to be written immediately following the completion (in 1928) of The Spiritual Man. But because of physical weakness and the heavy burden of other service, I was only able to have them published in last year’s issues of Revival magazine. In response to the request of its readers, I now put forth this booklet.
The greatest advantage in knowing the difference between spirit and soul is in perceiving the latent power of the soul and in understanding its falsification of the power of the Holy Spirit. Such knowledge is not theoretical but practical in helping people to walk in God’s way.

It seems necessary to ask the question why this increase of counterfeit affects is happening in the church. My own conviction is that it is happening in order to defeat or confuse the effect of the great revivals in the last 120 years with the purpose of bringing believers into an ever increasing cycle of dependancy on signs and wonders in the churches. Similarly it is having a parallel effect of pressing more and more believers from being able to depend on that which is truly spiritual for fear of being brought into a delusion. One could not say straight forwardly that all these counterfeit effects are the result of deliberate wickedness on the part of those who have become snared by them. But one could very definitely say that the benefactor is the evil one who is seeking to establish a visible kingdom on this earth; what is Scripturally called "the working of iniquity. Lastly in order for this iniquity to become possible there must first be a falling away from the apostles teachings. Hence why I am inclined to think in such terms as I rather presumptuously wrote in my last post.

Andrew

Some verses that came to mind that reminded me of this thread and worth thinking on ...

Mat 10:19,20 But when they deliver you up, *take no thought* how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak for it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

Here The LORD is telling us to shut down our own reasoning of what to speak and at a time when life hangs in the balance - according to His will.

another that blessed me today -

Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day

The way that John has worded this, being in the Spirit for him was not an unusual place to be, as if this was John recounting a first time experience, but he words it in such a way that this was something that he was acquainted with. He got there somehow and intentionally and was more than likely in a state of prayer where he knew there would be two way communication - but this particular day was exceptional, of course.
I clicked on all the commentaries in e-sword for this passage and was delighted to see the responses on this verse.

That we are to depend on HIS Spirit is the main thought here and not 'where' that Spirit is. Whether I believe in the dichotomy of man or not - I no more rely on where in my tripartite nature His Spirit is when I need Him than I would try to be able to understand the three aspects of "loving Him" before I would "Love Him".

In all three Gospels where it quotes Jesus speaking the First Commandment, He uses the same three parts of man - "heart, soul and mind".

Imagine trying to dissect which were which before obeying this commandment?

I do understand what being "in the Spirit" is. I do understand that we can pray and He'll fill our mouths and I do understand that I can follow His leading by His Spirit and not my own ways and that He'll direct my paths.
That's all I need to know.

GOD Bless us all.

Trichotomy is not a recent belief, neither is it merely "Pentecostal". It didn't originate with Jesse Penn-Lewis and much of what has been written on dichotomy has been unfair scholarship. JMO after much viewing of this debate over the yrs.

Trichotomous viewpoint -

"While the most of modern theology is Dichotomous, most of the early church and all of the Eastern church was Trichotomous. In the time of Christ all the Jews were Trichotomous Josephus 1:1,2. So was Justin Martyr, Tertulian, Origin, John of Damascus, Tatian, Clement Alexandrinus. In fact, no writing of the earliest church Fathers contains any idea of Dichotomy. Strong, in his systematic theology even quotes from some evolutionists to prove his dichotomy. P. 486, Leslie Olshausen well says on I Thess. 5:23, quoted in Smith's Bible Dictionary, p. 9l5--"It is indispensable, under a purely historical view, to acknowledge the triple division of human nature as a doctrine of the Apostolic age (and in agreement with our own belief)." "

G. H. Pember:

"Now the body we may term the sense-consciousness, the soul the self-consciousness, and the spirit the God-consciousness. For the body gives us the five senses; the soul comprises the intellect which aids us in the present state of existence, and the emotions which proceed from the senses; while the spirit is our noblest part, which came directly from God, and by which alone we are able to apprehend and worship Him."

L. S. Chafer in his Systematic Theology:

". . . many have assumed that the Bible teaches only a dichotomy. Over against this is the truth that oftentimes these terms cannot be used interchangeably. At this point it may be observed that there is the closest relation between the human spirit and the Holy Spirit--so close, indeed, that it is not always certain to which a referenceis made in the sacred text. . . The Holy Spirit works in and through the human spirit, but this is not said of the human soul. "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit." (Rom 8:16).

Franz Delitzsch in his A System of Biblical Psychology:

"The psuche must be more than the form of existence, the individualization of the spirit; for Scripture certainly appropriates to the spirit and soul different functions, and often in juxtaposition. They must be distinguished even otherwise [more than by mere function]. . . A man would then not be able to speak of his spirit specially, and of his soul specially."

"And as for the essential condition of man, I certainly agree entirely with the view that the spirit and soul of man are distinguished as primary and secondary, but not with the view that spirit and soul are substantially one and the same."

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's commentary on 1 Thes 5:23

"All three, spirit, soul, and body, each in its due place, constitute man 'entire.' The 'spirit' links man with the higher intelligences of heaven, and is that highest part of man which is receptive to the quickening Holy Spirit (1 Cor 15:47). In the unspiritual, the spirit is so sunk under the lower animal soul . . . that such are termed 'animal' (E. V. "sensual, having merely the body of organized matter, and the soul the immaterial animating essence), not having the Spirit."

Fausset's Bible Dictionary: Spirit

Hebrew ruach, Greek pneuma. Man in his normal integrity ("whole," holokleeron, complete in all its parts, 1Th_5:23) consists of "spirit, soul, and body." The spirit links man with higher intelligences, and is that highest part receptive of the quickening Holy Spirit (1Co_15:47). The soul (Hebrew nephesh, Greek psuchee) is intermediate between body and spirit; it is the sphere of the will and affections.
In the unspiritual, the spirit is so sunk under the animal soul (which it ought to keep under) that such are "animal" ("seasonal," having merely the body of organized matter and the soul, the immaterial animating essence), "having not the spirit" (Jud_1:19; Jam_3:15; 1Co_2:14; 1Co_15:44-48; Joh_3:6). The unbeliever shall rise with an animal (soul-animated) body, but not, like the believer, with a spiritual (spirit-endued) body like Christ's (Rom_8:11).
The soul is the seat of the appetites, the desires, the will; hunger, thirst, sorrow, joy; love, hope, fear, etc.; so that nephesh is the man himself, and is used for person, self, creature, any: a virtual contradiction of materialism, implying that the unseen soul rather than the seen body is the man. "Man was made" not a living body but "a living soul." "The blood, the life," links together body and soul (Lev_17:11).

Lenski:

"Where, as here, [Heb 4:12] spirit and soul are distinguished, the spirit designates our immaterial part as it is related to God, as being capable of receiving the operations of the Spirit of God . . . The spirit ought to rule supreme; wholly controlled by God's Spirit, man ought to be pneumatikos . Sin enabled the psuche to control so that man became psuchikos , his bodily appetites having sway."

Richard Trench:

"The psuchikos of Scripture is one for whom the psuche is the highest motive power of life and action; in whom the pneuma , as the organ of the divine Pneuma , is suppressed, dormant, . . . whom the operations of this divine Spirit have never lifted into the regions of spiritual things. (Rom 7:14; 8:1; Jude 19)."

Oswald Chambers' lectures on biblical psychology:

"The spirit is the essential foundation of man; the soul his peculiar essential form; the body his essential manifestation."
"Remember, the whole meaning of the soul is to express the spirit, and the struggle of the spirit is to get itself expressed in the soul."
"God knows of no divorce whatsoever between the three aspects of the human nature, spirit, soul, and body; they must be at one, and they are at one either in damnation or in salvation."

Others trichotomists - T. Austin-Sparks, Herbert Lockyer, and Andrew Murray

http://www.ecbragg.net/Class%20Notes/Anthrop%20Sup%20I.htm

http://www.gracenotebook.com/pub/87.html

...a man as having three distinct and real parts is revealed in this day. That is to say it has only been taught in the last 100 years or so. In days previous other things were given by God to keep the church in that day.

Annie seems to have addressed the actual question Sister. But the answer I can give is God Himself 'revealed in this day'. The 'this day' is within the last 100 years or so. How it pleased God to do this seems to have to do with revivals and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in many places, which resulted in a revelation of experience and discernment in those who were so blessed as to have had a part in those wonderful mercies of God. Their experiences and testimonies bear witness to the marvelous reality that after this outpouring they knew that their was such a thing as the soul which cannot please God of itself, and the inner most part of their beings, being a new creature; spirit born of Spirit always pleasing to God. I have met some of them in the Hebrides and they know it even to this very day. They were taught of God Himself.

Andrew

I’m not sure how this proves the distinct and conflicting compartments of “soul” and “spirit”

Meditations on the things which have been given to us always bears fruits of remembrance and a quickening of the spirit, bringing forth praises and a wondering at how God has laboured in the past, in the lives of men. Beyond this lies a grievous knowledge that men when labouring in the power of their own souls can do immeasurable harm to themselves and others.
We arrived in Lewis on the 30th April 1991. It was a beautiful clear spring day. Exhausted from a long journey we went to our beds early. Awaking that first morning in a new home I realised immediately that, for the first time in years I was completely rested. At noon burdened with a need to understand why I had taken my family to the very edge of the Hebrides I took a walk into the moor calling on God to give me understanding. After a while I saw the edge of the island and felt an increase in a need to know why I was there. Moving tentatively towards the cliff edge I felt desperate to hear from God. Nothing came to me and it seemed for a moment as if I had acted foolishly. Turning away to retrace my steps the Lord spoke to me in the spirit and told me quietly, that whilst I had made the journey, He was the one calling it. I was at peace.
Having purchases our house from Murdo Maclean, an elder in the local Church of Scotland, it seemed reasonable that he would be instrumental in helping me to find fellowship. To test me I was invited to speak at a chapel meeting, where I felt certain that a need to always speak truthfully would bring me into difficulties. This was because I had already discerned that things were not as they seemed outwardly. There was a ‘difficulty’ in the air. On the afternoon of the chapel meeting Finley Campbell, an elder walked into our house, right into the living room and enquired as to what version of the bible I was going to use. He very kindly offered me his KJV, which I declined pointing out that I had a bible my own. Without any discomfort or unsettling effect he left.
On the evening I was led to share about the coming kingdom. I spoke of the gifts of the Holy Spirit; speaking in tongues and the need to be dressed in readiness. To my surprise as I made each point, a different elder would stand up and confirm the word with a scripture. None of this made any sense to me because my discernment regarding the spiritual atmosphere of the district had caused me to believe otherwise.
After some days and explanations I realised what it all meant. These elders were bearing witness to what had taken place in the revival in which they were saved. I heard accounts of how the Spirit swept over the “west side” and how workers in the fields would fall down under the conviction of sin, crying out for salvation to come to them. Murdo Mclean had been saved at this time. He could not lie against the truth of those days when tongues and the baptism of the fire were realities of God working in their lives. Yet at that hour of my bearing witness, they had not the liberty to exercise these gifts. They bore witness because they were saved and because they themselves were witnesses of God's effects and labours.
For months I resisted the atmosphere and discerned a measure of darkness which I have not known before or since. One night whilst returning from a meeting in Dalbeg on the west side of the island I found myself in a great struggle with the air and stopping the car my attention was drawn to the deep moor which was out of site. In a vision I saw “sons of God” sitting around a fire taking their ease and exercising a blasphemous confidence in their labours. I was shocked and withstood. Such things became almost normal for a season. At the same time the presence of God was everywhere on the island and liberty in the spirit was given daily.
There was one particular minister who at the time of the revival was a relatively young man. He had even in that day a name for himself. It was stated to me by witnesses that at the time of the revival in the Hebrides the area in which I now lived was relatively unaffected. It was also stated that the doors of a few churches were slammed shut and barred in order to prevent this move of God and the new ‘saints’ from gaining entry. The district is called Nis in Gaelic or Ness in English. I saw this minister in Stornoway a few days after I arrived on the Island. At the time I didn’t know who he was. I did however see what a profound influence he had on a young lady serving in the shop I was in at the time. Whilst waiting in the queue to pay for my goods this minister came into the shop I watched the young lady turn her eyes towards this man and a look of fear and utter contempt came over her face in an instant. I watched as this seemingly weak elderly man browsed uncertainly for his needs. In the end she was so compelled to serve him that she left the checkout and went to his assistance. Not once did this man so much as look at her. The influence however was so real that one could almost reach out and touch it. By the time we had moved to the Island this minister from Ness had retired to Stornoway.
At the time of the revival in Lewis many thousands of souls were profoundly saved. Yet in this one district at the very western edge of the Island an effect of a man and those who took their stance with him; corresponding at that time, with spiritual wickedness in the air, kept from a great number of people this blessing from God. Not only was this true, but in the end those who lived in Ness and had been saved, were brought into an imprisonment which robbed them of their liberty in Christ. From being a little flock of new converts, meeting together in any place made available to them they were brought into submission by others Whom God had overlooked. I know that they were not overlooked at all. But that in the power of their souls they rejected God's gift to their neighbours and in the end, as the shadow of God passed into another place, they reaped the harvest of men and women who had been saved. I bear witness to this in a sincere spirit without contention.
No one should continue in the belief and understanding that the soul is somehow innocent of wickedness or short of its own power. It is certain that in Ness a wicked thing was in the air, attending to the purposes and works of the evil one. But men and women can, even when they believe and have their own testimony in Christ, still act in their own understanding exercising considerable influence on others; who in going along with them become guilty of a great sin. Murdo Maclean was a lovely man and I respected and loved him. The only thing which he and many others in Ness failed to understand because they were newly saved at the time is this reality of effects. I know today that when I was in Ness he hoped that God would do it again. He wanted his liberty back. He knew what he had lost.

Andrew

For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul? For what will a man give in exchange for his soul? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels(Mark 8:36-38}

The gaining of the whole world in this passage and the forfeiting of the soul speaks directly to the original post and its meaning.

For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two- edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the hear.(Hebrews 4:12}

The things shared about the Hebrides did not include any saved or lost souls in the sense which this term ‘saved’ is often used by believers. It is almost always used in the ‘life giving sense’. That is to say, it is used to describe an individual being ’born again’ of the Spirit of God. Murdo didn’t become unregenerate. His testimony was sure and certain. Having made a good start in the power of God, he again came under the influence of other ‘souls’ and by that means his own ‘soul’. I would that he had ‘lost’ his soul in order that he might ‘find’ it in the day of the Lord (Matthew 10:37-39). To be more precise having been set free from its influence and power, he became once again imprisoned by it. Put differently Murdo didn’t continue in the liberty and the distinction which he first knew when he was saved during revival of God in Lewis (Duncan Campbell and Barvas). Yet at the time of my fellowship with him and many others in the same condition, he knew with tears what he had lost. He could have only known this by having been born again under a great power of God in his earlier life. He was able to make a distinction in his own understanding by reason of the power of God’s word which came to him when he first ‘cried out’ to be saved.

For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two- edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do(Hebrews 4:12)

The minister in Ness as well as others; those who in the end were found to have resisted God, were not unregenerate. It isn’t possible to sneak into a Calvinistic church in the Hebrides. By the very nature of their doctrine (predestination) one must have a clear testimony before the Kirk of elders. This minister simply ‘gained’ his soul. Rather, he was again imprisoned by it after having made a good start. He was ordained and set apart for the ministry of the word; attested to by the kirk of elders and many others. He knew how to present sound doctrine; he had a ‘name’ for himself. Yet it is this very thing which caused others to fear him, and despise God because of him. The young lady in the shop was such a person. She wasn’t saved, she was in unbelief. Yet she was compelled by the power of his name to set aside all the other customers in order to help him. Those who knew God and were with him in Ness had the very same influence and effect as he did. Listening to a witness of this terrible effect by other unsaved souls in Ness, was grievous. Can anyone understand this? What was this power which he exercised? If it was God, then God is divided. And the truth fails.

For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul? For what will a man give in exchange for his soul? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels (Mark 8:36-38)

Only the Word of God can divide the soul and spirit to the natural mind, yet in the moment of the power of God working in you it is a division which is easily discerned. In the regenerate spirit it is also understood, though always without contention. In the natural mind we are inclined to ‘gain’ the whole world. In the mind of the spirit we are willing to ‘lose’ the whole world. In the spirit we have the’ mind’ of Christ. In the natural man, the soul, we have to have our minds renewed daily.

We know that Jesus was tempted in ‘every way’ like as we are. We know that the wicked one taking advantage of the Lords weakness, which was pressed upon Him by hunger and thirst, was carries up to the pinnacle of the temple to be tempted with this very thing which we now attend to. Satan offered Jesus the whole world of power and wealth. He denied the temptation and Satan fled from it.

The wicked one always seeks to labour in men’s souls. He can do nothing in the spirit of dead men. He can only utilise the power of their souls. Let the dead bury the dead. If they were dead how could they bury anyone? They were dead in unbelief. Yet in their souls they preferred to attend to death than to the one who was able to give life! We are not dead! We must attend to life or we will become as though we were dead!

Today, as in Lewis during the revival, there are two distinct effects. The one produces wisdom which leads saints to the cross of Christ death and self-denial; and to the kingdom of God and The Lamb. Or there is another which tends to a ‘mystery’ even the working of iniquity and the revealing of a man and to another kingdom; which is no kingdom at all; to a day of sin and tribulation.

The original post was made I believe as a devotional thought. Yet it is the very substance of wisdom in our day. Thank you to that ‘one’ for your post and the blessing which is will bring to those who lay hold of it without hypocrisy.

Andrew

Edited for Spelling

thank you for sharing your explanation. If I understand you correctly you are saying that the soul is the devil’s “stomping” ground, but by living in the spirit one is able to live in victory and obedience. [By the way, I wondered if you quoted from “Sounds from Heaven” by Peckham. The book documents testimonies of the Hebrides revival. It is an inspiring book!

Nothing written in this post has been quoted. If one simply quotes others then there is a danger that one will be merely expressing an opinion. To speak of that which one has discerned and heard personally, if tested, will be a ‘bearing witness’ to the truth. This is how I have posted regarding the Lewis Revival November 1949. Colin & Mary Peckham were witnesses of a revival in their own community in the 1960’s on one of the inner isles of Hebrides.

Since my last post on the 16th June {Spirit, Soul & Body} I have been back to the Isle of Lewis to examine some of what I shared previously. This is because I became aware of what seemed like a profound contradiction between my post and a statement by Duncan Campbell towards the end of his life, regarding the characteristics of the 1949 revival in Lewis.

On the evening I was led to share about the coming kingdom. I spoke of the gifts of the Holy Spirit; speaking in tongues and the need to be dressed in readiness. To my surprise as I made each point, a different elder would stand up and confirm the word with a scripture. None of this made any sense to me because my discernment regarding the spiritual atmosphere of the district had caused me to believe otherwise.

After some days and explanations I realised what it all meant. These elders were bearing witness to what had taken place in the revival in which they were saved. My Post

Now perhaps I should go into some of the features that characterized this remarkable movement. I have already mentioned to you that men were found in trances. Perhaps I should mention that in the Lewis revival we never saw anybody healed. That wasn’t a feature of it. We never heard anybody speaking in tongues. Personally, I never heard anybody speak in tongues until a year or two ago, and that was in England. We knew nothing whatsoever about such manifestations. Don’t misunderstand me. I believe in every gift mentioned in the Word of God, but it wasn’t God’s plan or purpose that we should be visited in that way, and we weren’t. But we saw strange manifestations. The Lewis Revival. Duncan Campbell.

Clearly these two claims stand in apparent contradiction.

Two hours after I made this post I read Duncan Campbell’s statement which he made to express two points. The first was to express his sorrow that revival in Lewis was being put down to his having come to the island. As he said, “revival was already on Lewis when he arrived”. The second was to resist an effect of a man. This man had gone to Lewis and had gone about the island seeking to ‘prove’ whether anyone had actually received the baptism and the gifts of the Holy Spirit; especially tongues. He believed and therefore wanted to ‘prove’ that tongues were evident in the revival. In doing so he caused considerable problems and divisions on the island. Duncan Campbell was trying to settle that effect, by placing the emphasis where it rightly should have been placed on the “conviction of sin”. There is a deeper reason also, but I am not free to express it here.

It is a curious fact that @AbideinHim, who started this thread, also posted a previous thread

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30959&forum=40&0

….in which there is an account of “the boy Donald”.

Donald MacPhail is now with the Lord. However in 1993 I met Donald and his family in Lewis and fellowshipped with him several times. He spent most of his adult life on the mission field and his last 10 years in Lewis. The few days I have just had in Lewis I spent with his son, and was able to examine my concern. Suffice it to say that my discernment and understanding as to what had been said and witnessed to in Ness 1991 was accurate and true. Peter MacPhail emphasised that the chief characteristic of the Lewis revival had been conviction of sin. For me at least this is sufficient.

In conclusion everything I heard again and discerned again in this last week confirmed and reinforces why we as saints need to understand how the soul has to come into subjection to the ‘new life’ of the spirit within. If the soul acts in its own understanding then the consequence is that Satan comes in like a flood and has his way in the lives of others.; both believers and unbelievers. We cannot labour in the soul. We must walk in newness of life. That which is born of the flesh is flesh. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Andrew