Menu

to hold any one guilty of sin for not doing what he could not do, belongs to the height of iniquity

P
proudpapa

If evil, are they so by nature, or by will? But by nature souls can in no way be evil. Whence do we teach this. From the above definitions of will and sin. For to speak of souls, and that they are evil, and that they do not sin, is full of madness; but to say that they sin without will, is great craziness, and to hold any one guilty of sin for not doing what he could not do, belongs to the height of iniquity and insanity. Wherefore whatever these souls do, if they do it by nature not by will, that is, if they are wanting in a movement of mind free both for doing and not doing, if finally no power of abstaining from their work is conceded to them; we cannot hold that the sin is theirs. But all confess both that evil souls are justly, and souls that have not sinned are unjustly condemned; therefore they confess that those souls are evil that sin. But these, as reason teaches, do not sin.

P
proudpapa

I am having difficulty understanding what is being said I think I have an Idea but I trully am not good at reading comprehension. what is your take.

P
proudpapa

The quote is from Augustine: The Writings Against the Manichaeans and Against the Donatists

Chapter 12.—From the Definitions Given of Sin and Will, He Overthrows the Entire Heresy of the Manichæans. Likewise from the Just Condemnation of Evil Souls It Follows that They are Evil Not by Nature But by Will. That Souls are Good By Nature, to Which the Pardon of Sins is Granted

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf104.iv.vi.xiii.html

S
sermonindex

If evil, are they so by nature, or by will? But by nature souls can in no way be evil. Whence do we teach this. From the above definitions of will and sin. For to speak of souls, and that they are evil, and that they do not sin, is full of madness; but to say that they sin without will, is great craziness, and to hold any one guilty of sin for not doing what he could not do, belongs to the height of iniquity and insanity. Wherefore whatever these souls do, if they do it by nature not by will, that is, if they are wanting in a movement of mind free both for doing and not doing, if finally no power of abstaining from their work is conceded to them; we cannot hold that the sin is theirs. But all confess both that evil souls are justly, and souls that have not sinned are unjustly condemned; therefore they confess that those souls are evil that sin. But these, as reason teaches, do not sin. Augustine.

The condition being spoken of is evil. The action being spoken of is sin. The object being spoken of is the soul. The power being spoken of is the will or volition of the soul. The preceding conclusion is that the soul is not intrinsically evil.

Paraphrase

To speak about the soul as being intrinsically not evil, and yet to say that the soul does not sin, is madness or irrational, but to say that the soul exercises no intention or will when it does sin is to express complete madness. The soul does not need a teacher to sin, it is bounded up with the body in such a way that the soul sins by nature without effort yet not all that arises from the soul is sinful. Therefore to hold any one guilty of wilful sin if their sin is in fact that which they do without thought or wilful intent is wrong. If a soul has no freedom in their thinking resulting from a renewed mind so as to be able to know what they are doing; so that they do not have the power to resist their sinful inclinations; in short no way of deliverance, then that sin is not accounted against them. It is claimed by all others (commentators) that when the soul sins, whether perceived to be justly or unjustly condemned, sin is accounted against them. But (these) those who sin without the power of the renewed mind do not sin; as reason teaches. amrkelly

End Paraphrase


Brother here is my understanding of the passage quoted above. I cannot say if my understanding is entirely accurate. I can say that at the root of the passage lies a heresy. This is essentially that a soul, (person) whilst they are evil in the sight of God, is only accountable for their sin if they have been renewed in their thinking through the Gospel so as to know that all of their actions are both wilful and at the same time arise out of the sinful nature, if they do in fact sin. In contrast a person who though they are (as a believer is) sinful in the sight of God, cannot know that their actions are sinful and therefore by reason cannot be accountable for their sin. The argument claims that the soul is intrinsically neutral neither evil nor good and that even the unregenerate mind sins wilfully. The purpose of the argument is to reason that a person neither who being intrinsically good nor evil still exercises their will or volition when they do in fact sin. The real issue for Augustine seems to be the issue of accountability before God. It is an "as God sees it" argument though asserted by virtue of a renewed reasoning mind.

The prefix is a question. Are men evil by nature alone, or do they also have to exercise their knowing mind (wilful mind) in order to be called or accounted as evil before God? There are many Scriptures which come to mind to support elements of the presuppositions underpinning this question as well as the argument. Universalism is the principle heresy which arises from the argument. But there are other heresies inferred in the argument as well. Although I have never thought that Watchman Nee expressed any heretical thinking he also argues that the soul is not intrinsically evil. For Nee the meaning lies in understanding the relationship between the Spirit, Soul and Body. The body is always evil because it embodies the power of sin and death. The Spirit is always good as it is a spirit born of the sinless and perfect life which is in Christ. The Soul posses the body as well as expresses the new life in the spirit through a renewed mind. It has to be said that Nee’s teachings on this subject form the most controversial and difficult of his teachings because of the implications which attend to this Augustinian heresy. This is a great sadness as I have personally found Nee's ministry of teaching to be exceptional. In misunderstanding this one point much of his ministry has been rejected at a time when it is more needed than ever before.

T
twayneb

If man is evil, is it because it is his nature to be so, or is it because he has chosen to be so? That is the question.

If it is totally by nature, that is if man has no choice in the matter, then how could they be held accountable for that sin? It would be like a dog being condemned for doing what dog's do.

Augustine is, I think, arguing that man's will enters into the equation and that he has chosen to sin. I have not read the rest of what he is saying here, but in a nutshell that is the main idea of the paragraph you posted.

T
twayneb

armkelly: I have listened to others besides Nee that argue that man does not have a "sin nature". One was a man named Michael Pearl (No Greater Joy Ministries) here in the states. He has a pretty compelling teaching on the subject.

I think the idea behind those who say that man does not have a sin nature is the same as stated by Augustine in this passage of his writing. The nature of a thing is that which gives the thing it identity and that over which the thing has no control. For example, dogs do dog things and have dog behaviors because they are dogs. They cannot act as cats because they are, by nature, dogs. By that reasoning, a man with a sin nature could never become anything other than a sinner and would be reprobate.

I have found that nowhere in scripture is the sin nature identified. We were by nature the children of wrath, but that means that according to the natural state of our sinful lives we were destined for wrath, and not that we have a sin nature.

It is true that we are born in sin, but those who teach against a sin nature would not equate that with our nature, but rather with our eternal relationship to God prior to regeneration.

Interesting quote.

S
sermonindex

I think the idea behind those who say that man does not have a sin nature is the same as stated by Augustine in this passage of his writing. The nature of a thing is that which gives the thing it identity and that over which the thing has no control. For example, dogs do dog things and have dog behaviours because they are dogs. They cannot act as cats because they are, by nature, dogs. By that reasoning, a man with a sin nature could never become anything other than a sinner and would be reprobate. tanyweb.

One of the Scriptures which came to mind whilst reading the Augustine quotation was “No man has sinned after the likeness of Adam’s sin” Romans 5:14. Adam was innocent and yet he sinned. He was not deceived as Eve. yet he sinned. Clearly this verse does point to a condition which is no longer the experience of Adam’s progeny. The condition is of course innocence. Yet this Scripture does not say that men are incapable of resisting sin. In fact the opposite is inferred by the Scripture in Romans which tells us that all are without excuse. What we are told, again from Romans is that it is Adam’s sin which is accounted against all men, even as Christ’s obedience is accounted to all men. Transgression came in by one man Adam, and righteousness by one man Christ. Clearly for the transgression of Adam to become real in experience one has to be born of Adam; so that in Genesis we read that Adam begot a son after his own image and likeness.. Similarly to benefit from Christ’s obedience one has to be born of Christ’s Spirit; in this regard we read that we are changed into His image and likeness. The Scriptures in Romans also tells us that it is the physical body which is inherently sinful because it is “the body of sin and death”. Yet for those who are born again it is “the spirit which is born of the Spirit”. The danger in asserting that “flesh begets flesh” be it dogs, cats or any other is to lose sight of the fact that Scripture also teaches that “all have sinned” and so all are personally accountable as well as sinful by virtue of being of Adam’s progeny.

There is no doubt that this subject is a difficult one, but there is also no doubt that the Scripture is clear that “the heart is wicked and deceitful above all else” Jeremiah. Clearly the heart in this verse does not have to do with the physical body; it is to do with the soul. The wickedness and deceitfulness has to do with unbelief or else a refusal to acknowledge God Who is “clearly manifest through the things He has created” Romans. Universalism as a doctrine or a teaching is built upon the idea that because men cannot but sin therefore God Himself would be unjust to condemn anyone who sinned simply because they are sinners by nature. It is a claim that this would be unjust and must be therefore incompatible with a just and loving God. Added to this is the modern day teaching that because Christ has died for sin, there is no sin for which eternal consequences can be accounted to any individual, as this would itself be a denial of God’s love which sent Christ to the Cross for sin.

The Scripture teaches that the sin nature is the physical body and the soul becomes sinful insofar as it is governed by the lusts of the flesh. Once this dominion is achieved even the heart, mind and will are taken captive and become carnal my nature as well. Only new birth offers a man the opportunity to overcome this carnal mind and sinful body, by the renewing of the mind as well as by the Cross of Christ through personal experiential identification with Christ’s death and resurrection. What Nee teaches is that the soul does not always sin; not that the soul is sinless. This is different to the reasoning of Augustine who asserts that a man must wilfully sin in order to be accounted a sinner. Nee teaches that men do not sin in the first instance because they “will” to sin in some particular way or other, but that men sin in the first instance because they are sinners by nature. The singular distinction which Nee draws is a distinction between Spirit, Soul and Body, not simply Soul and Body. So that in Nee’s teaching it is possible to draw a distinction between the inevitability of sin arising from the body (the law of sin and death working in our members) as well as the soul which is governed by bodily lusts and desires, and the possibility that the soul can through a regenerated spirit do that which is not sinful by the governing principle of resurrection life having dominion over the whole man. In this view the unregenerate man will inevitably sin both in the body and the soul, i.e. thoughts and desires; (though even the unregenerate man does not always sin) but the regenerate man can have a renewed mind as well as victory over his body through the Cross of Christ. To that extent I believe Nee is arguing that the soul is not intrinsically evil. The soul does sin, but it has the possibility of becoming free from sin by the renewing of the mind, so that “you may prove that acceptable and perfect will of God”. In contrast the body must be “borne up unto death daily”. The soul is able to “do God’s will” whereas the body must become subject to the “death of the Cross”.

In Augustines argument sin is only sin where the will to sin is recognised. This leaves room for the possibility that a person can claim to be sinless before God simply because they do not wilfully sin, without the need to repent of sin, and this because Christ has died for sin. It is sin which arises from the nature or else the consequence of Adam's sin. This is the historical root of Universalism as we know it today.

P
PaulWest

Very well put Amrkelly. Your post deserves a slow, contemplative reading. There is much substance to ruminate upon. Thank you for taking the time to share it with us.

Paul

T
twayneb

the teaching of spirit soul and body is one i see very plainly in scipture. i guess the concept of sin nature is one i still wrestle with a bit. all men are born in sin. all men are bound for hell barring repentance and regeneration. but if a mans nature is that which cannot decide to change then is he born with a sin nature or is he born lost, spiritually dead to god. i guess the discussion is somewhat dependent on the definition one scribes to the term nature. of the fact that all men are born in sin and must be born again there really can be no debate. the universalist creates god in his own image so as to be ok with doing as he pleases with no consequence. of some thing the word is explicitly plain.

sorry for the topping mistakes. replying from my new phone.

B
brothagary

lately i seem to struck with awa ,and even tremble reading your writings andrew ,,,bless you brother


did agustine have this veiw spokon of here towards the end of his life,,,i was under the impresion this was his earlyer view

B
brothagary

is this the same as what the oridginal post sugests agustine taught
wikki
Augustine of Hippo (354-430) taught that Adam's sin[15] is transmitted by concupiscence, resulting in mankind becoming a massa damnata (mass of perdition, condemned crowd), with much enfeebled, though not destroyed, freedom of will.[1] When Adam sinned, human nature was thenceforth transformed. Adam and Eve, via sexual reproduction, recreated human nature. Their descendants now live in sin, in the form of concupiscence, a term Augustine used in a metaphysical, not a psychological sense.[16] Augustine insisted that concupiscence was not a being but a bad quality, the privation of good or a wound.[17] He admitted that sexual concupiscence (libido) might have been present in the perfect human nature in paradise, and that only later it became disobedient to human will as a result of the first couple's disobedience to God's will in the original sin.[18] In Augustine's view (termed "Realism"), all of humanity was really present in Adam when he sinned, and therefore all have sinned. Original sin, according to Augustine, consists of the guilt of Adam which all humans inherit. As sinners, humans are utterly depraved in nature, lack the freedom to do good, and cannot respond to the will of God without divine grace. Grace is irresistible, results in conversion, and leads to perseverance.[19]

Augustine articulated his explanation in reaction to Pelagianism, which insisted that humans have of themselves, without the necessary help of God's grace, the ability to lead a morally good life, and thus denied both the importance of baptism and the teaching that God is the giver of all that is good. Pelagius claimed that the influence of Adam on other humans was merely that of bad example. Augustine held that the effects of Adam's sin are transmitted to his descendants not by example but by the very fact of generation from that ancestor. A wounded nature comes to the soul and body of the new person from his/her parents, who experience libido (or concupiscence). Augustine's view was that human procreation was the way the transmission was being effected.

P
proudpapa

Thank you to everyone who has posted, there is so much for me to process. I will post the intire chapter 12 from which I took this excerpt from, What I am trying to figure out is did Augustines view of Human nature or nature of sin change from his early years of debating the Manichæans to his later years of debating the pelagians as what many claim, I am finding his writings written in a way that is very difficult for me to comprehend,

Chapter 12.—From the Definitions Given of Sin and Will, He Overthrows the Entire Heresy of the Manichæans. Likewise from the Just Condemnation of Evil Souls It Follows that They are Evil Not by Nature But by Will. That Souls are Good By Nature, to Which the Pardon of Sins is Granted.

16. Come now, let us see in what respect these things would have aided us. Much every way, so that I should have desired nothing more; for they end the whole cause; for whoever consulting in the inner mind, where they are more pronounced and assured, the secrets of his own conscience, and the divine laws absolutely imposed upon nature, grants that these two definitions of will and sin are true, condemns without any hesitation by the fewest and the briefest, but plainly the most invincible reasons, the whole heresy of the Manichæans. Which can be thus considered. They say that there are two kinds of souls, the one good, which is in such a way from God, that it is said not to have been made by Him out of any material or out of nothing, but to have proceeded as a certain part from the very substance itself of God; the other evil, which they believe and strive to get others to believe pertains to God in no way whatever; and so they maintain that the one is the perfection of good, but the other the perfection of evil, and that these two classes were at one time distinct but are now commingled. The character and the cause of this commingling I had not yet heard; but nevertheless I could have inquired whether that evil kind of souls, before it was mingled with the good, had any will. For if not, it was without sin and innocent, and so by no means evil.213 But if evil in such a way, that though without will, as fire, yet if it should touch the good it would violate and corrupt it; how impious it is to believe that the nature of evil is powerful enough to change any part of God, and that the Highest Good is corruptible and violable! But if the will was present, assuredly there was present, no one compelling, a movement of the mind either towards not losing something or obtaining something. But this something was either good, or was thought to be good, for not otherwise could it be earnestly desired. But in supreme evil, before the commingling which they maintain, there never was any good. Whence then could there be in it either the knowledge or the thought of good? Did they wish for nothing that was in themselves, and earnestly desire that true good which was without? That will must truly be declared worthy of distinguished and great praise by which is earnestly desired the supreme and true good. Whence then in supreme evil was this movement of mind most worthy of so great praise? Did they seek it for the sake of injuring it? In the first place, the argument comes to the same thing. For he who wishes to injure, wishes to deprive another of some good for the sake of some good of his own. There was therefore in them either a knowledge of good or an opinion of good, which ought by no means to belong to supreme evil. In the second place, whence had they known, that good placed outside of themselves, which they designed to injure, existed at all. If they had intellectually perceived it, what is more excellent than such a mind? Is there anything else for which the whole energy of good men is put forth except the knowledge of that supreme and sincere good? What therefore is now scarcely conceded to a few good and just men, was mere evil, no good assisting, then able to accomplish? But if those souls bore bodies and saw the supreme good with their eyes, what tongues, what hearts, what intellects suffice for lauding and proclaiming those eyes, with which the minds of just men can scarcely be compared? How great good things we find in supreme evil! For if to see God is evil, God is not a good; but God is a good; therefore to see God is good; and I know not what can be compared to this good. Since to see anything is good, whence can it be made out that to be able to see is evil? Therefore whatever in those eyes or in those minds brought it about, that the divine essence could be seen by them, brought about a great thing and a good thing most worthy of ineffable praise. But if it was not brought about, but it was such in itself and eternal, it is difficult to find anything better than this evil.

17. Lastly, that these souls may have nothing of these praiseworthy things which by the reasonings of the Manichæans they are compelled to have, I should have asked, whether God condemns any or no souls. If none, there is no judgment of rewards and punishments, no providence, and the world is administered by chance rather than by reason, or rather is not administered at all. For the name administration must not be given to chances. But if it is impious for all those that are bound by any religion to believe 105this, it remains either that there is condemnation of some souls, or that there are no sins. But if there are no sins, neither is there any evil. Which if the Manichæans should say, they would slay their heresy with a single blow. Therefore they and I agree that some souls are condemned by divine law and judgment. But if these souls are good, what is that justice? If evil, are they so by nature, or by will? But by nature souls can in no way be evil. Whence do we teach this. From the above definitions of will and sin. For to speak of souls, and that they are evil, and that they do not sin, is full of madness; but to say that they sin without will, is great craziness, and to hold any one guilty of sin for not doing what he could not do, belongs to the height of iniquity and insanity. Wherefore whatever these souls do, if they do it by nature not by will, that is, if they are wanting in a movement of mind free both for doing and not doing, if finally no power of abstaining from their work is conceded to them; we cannot hold that the sin is theirs.214 But all confess both that evil souls are justly, and souls that have not sinned are unjustly condemned; therefore they confess that those souls are evil that sin. But these, as reason teaches, do not sin. Therefore the extraneous class of evil souls of the Manichæans, whatever it may be, is a non-entity.

18. Let us now look at that good class of souls, which again they exalt to such a degree as to say that it is the very substance of God. But how much better it is that each one should recognize his own rank and merit, nor be so puffed up with sacrilegious pride as to believe that as often as he experiences a change in himself it is the substance of that supreme good, which devout reason holds and teaches to be unchangeable! For behold! since it is manifest that souls do not sin in not being such as they cannot be; it follows that these supposititious souls, whatever they may be, do not sin at all, and moreover that they are absolutely non-existent; it remains that since there are sins, they find none to whom to attribute them except the good class of souls and the substance of God. But especially are they pressed by Christian authority; for never have they denied that forgiveness of sins is granted when any one has been converted to God; never have they said (as they have said of many other passages) that some corrupter has interpolated this into the divine Scriptures. To whom then are sins attributed? If to those evil souls of the alien class, these also can become good, can possess the kingdom of God with Christ. Which denying, they [the Manichæans] have no other class except those souls which they maintain are of the substance of God. It remains that they acknowledge that not only these latter also, but these alone sin. But I make no contention about their being alone in sinning; yet they sin. But are they compelled to sin by being commingled with evil? If so compelled that there was no power of resisting, they do not sin. If it is in their power to resist, and they voluntarily consent, we are compelled to find out through their [the Manichæan] teaching, why so great good things in supreme evil, why this evil in supreme good, unless it be that neither is that which they bring into suspicion evil, nor is that which they pervert by superstition supreme good?

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf104.iv.vi.xiii.html

S
sermonindex

Adam and Eve, via sexual reproduction, recreated human nature. Their descendants now live in sin, in the form of concupiscence, a term Augustine used in a metaphysical, not a psychological sense.[16] Augustine insisted that concupiscence was not a being but a bad quality, the privation of good or a wound.[17] He admitted that sexual concupiscence (libido) might have been present in the perfect human nature in paradise, and that only later it became disobedient to human will as a result of the first couple's disobedience to God's will in the original sin. Quoted by Brother Gary.


I hope that proudpapa is not offended by my posting directly into his post with my own answers. But he asks such provoking questions at times and they often seem to have at their root something of a controversy in that they innocently challenge profound ideas which every believer ought to understand; who are easily carried away with philosophy. This is quiet a skill of proudpapa and a good thing in my thinking. So to answer you Brother Gary:

Metaphysical thinking has its roots in Greek philosophical thinking. When employed by one who knows Christ, yet is vain and confident in their own reasoning mind, it becomes a way to expiate physical reality by either alluding to something physical, but yet ends up denying a physical truth; or else it is to state a physical reality but with the intention of producing a lie. This is because reason without the Cross equals vanity and the working of Satan. Apart from any academic understanding of the term, as those who love The Lord Jesus, we should seek to understand or else discern what is intended by the words used by such men as Augustine. Trying to understand the Greek philosophers would be an imaginative exercise but in the end we would only be drawn into reason and would as they were become deniers of the Truth. Whilst they acted ignorantly in as much as they did not have the true knowledge of God and Christ, Augustine is without excuse. So although Greek philosophical thought came into western culture and thinking in its pure or direct form via the Crusades against Islam in the east in the 11th and 12th centuries, it is important to remember that through Augustine this philosophy of reason came into the Church (Catholic) in the 4th century. Although we tend to think of Augustine in terms of the middle ages and the monastic life, his influence is endemic throughout the post apostolic church. He was a vain and conceited man who although he is praised to the roof, he is in fact responsible for firming up a natural philosophical perspective of the church, as a catholic church. His powers of reason laid a basis for the Reformation fathers, yet he has also contributed considerable heresy into the church because of his attendance to natural philosophy. In short he held to a state of reason which had its roots in the same philosophical works which also gave rise to occidental occultism.

Our confidence must be in the Scriptures and in Revelation of God. We must put our reliance on our relationship with Christ and determine not to remove beyond what the Scriptures tells us is our measure. Putting confidence in philosophy and reason is simply vain. Words can and do mean many things. We can state something which on literal understanding may very well be truthful but which when accepted into the heart through the reasoning mind becomes a lie when it is mingled with the deceitful and vain heart. This business of the sinful nature is profoundly in that category.

What Augustine calls concupiscence is a construction borne out of a natural philosophical understanding informed by early as well as Late Greek philosophical thinking and is an attempt to deny the very fabric of reliance on the reality of Christ’s body crucified for sin. The word emphasises the sexual component of union between a man and a woman making libido or sexual awareness as a root of an individuals awareness of the sinful nature. If you want to understand how it is that something which is in fact holy, being an act of separateness of one man and one woman to each other, can become viewed as unclean and filthy, you have to look no further than Augustine. This metaphysical or natural philosophical understanding has been so successful an invasion of the western church that many believers even find it difficult to accept the simplicity of what constitutes the sinful nature, its power and source. The sinful nature has its source and power in the body. It is the body of sin. Unless we reckon with this body of sin, according to God’s estimation we will not overcome sin, the flesh or the Devil working in our lives.

It is true that Augustine promoted a less philosophical or metaphysical view of the sin nature in his later life. This shift can be understood in the way in which the medieval western church embraced self mortification by applying the rod to the physical body itself as a remedy for dealing with its lusts and influence on the soul. Yet even in this regard it amounts to a man’s efforts and takes no reliance on God’s remedy which is the Cross of Christ laid hold of in experience by faith. It must be a looking to the Cross by faith as well as a reckoning with the body of flesh. It must be a looking to the Cross by faith as well as taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ Himself. It must be a putting no confidence in the flesh, and taking every confidence in the Lord’s obedience unto death. It is a being born of water of our mother womb and being born again of the Spirit of God. It is a new creature and an old man. It is being buried with Christ into death and a walking in resurrection of life. It is by faith, yet it is a not puffing at the air with words, but a bringing of the body into subjection, lest we be found to have run in vain. In the end it is the physical body, yet it is not a physical inheritance but a spiritual inheritance and a new body at the Lord’s return.

Proudpapa I will try to answer your question regarding Augustine’s contending with the Manichaean heresy as well as the Pelagius heresy when I have gone through chapter 12 as posted. I need breakfast first it’s been a long night.

P
proudpapa

Hi amrkelly

RE: amrkelly wrote ///I hope that proudpapa is not offended by my posting directly into his post with my own answers.///

No, I am not at all offended by posting directly into my post, nor have I felt offended at anything that I have read of yours in this thread or any other thread, even though I do not always agree with everything you or anyone else at times post, I have a high amount of respect for how Graceful and well thought out most of your post are. Even on things that I do not agree with you on, I find that I am humbled by your knowledge and learn much and it helps me relize that I do not have all the answers and still have much to learn. thankyou for your insightful post amrkelly.

RE amrkelly wrote ///Proudpapa I will try to answer your question regarding Augustine’s contending with the Manichaean heresy as well as the Pelagius heresy when I have gone through chapter 12 as posted. I need breakfast first it’s been a long night.///

Whenever you get a chance I would love to read your thoughts on it. Thankyou!

S
sermonindex

Come now, let us see in what respect these things would have aided us. Much every way, so that I should have desired nothing more; for they end the whole cause; for whoever consulting in the inner mind, where they are more pronounced and assured, the secrets of his own conscience, and the divine laws absolutely imposed upon nature, grants that these two definitions of will and sin are true, condemns without any hesitation by the fewest and the briefest, but plainly the most invincible reasons, the whole heresy of the Manicheans. Augustine.

The “these things” are the two definitions of will and sin which Augustine established and which form the underlying argument by which Augustine asserts that he defeats the Manichaean heresy. The pivot of the assertion is that it is in the inner mind or conscience where the proof lies because the proof is itself attendant to the physiology or physical nature of a man by imposition of God. This is what is called elemental philosophy and represents early Greek philosophical thinking. A quote reflecting modern day thought demonstrates how much this way of thinking still shapes modern life. "After industrialization, knowledge became fragmented and people lost touch with the material realities of the places in which they lived. David Macauley blends ancient Greek precepts with twenty-first century circumstances: earth, air, fire, and water call upon us from across the millennia to reanimate humanity's connection to our home planet." --David Spanagel, Worcester Polytechnic Institute. If this sounds “New Age” in its direction then that is because it is the tip of an intellectual iceberg of thinking which has collectively been called the Age of Aquarius. It is however nothing more than elemental philosophy.

The simple point is that Augustine was influenced directly by elemental philosophy to such an extent that he couldn’t remove himself from the knowledge that the very body itself is physically attendant to God’s elemental governance. To the extent that were one to press into that hidden understanding one would recognise this elemental reality and this would irrevocably settle the Manichean heresy that there are two kinds of souls one good and one evil. Apart from acknowledging that every element of the universe is in God’s hand, we would have to assert that the rest is vanity. This is because the very elements themselves are disturbed and changed by rebellion of both Angels and by disobedience of men. The fall and subsequent judgment of the evil one laid waste to the heavens and the earth. In Genesis 1:2 the earth is in a state of chaos and is uninhabitable. Yet in Genesis 1:1 we are told that God made the heavens and the earth. Adam’s very body became fallen. It became subject to the law of sin and death. The orderly and therefore everlasting body which Adam was given became itself subject to chaos and inevitable death. This condition is so grave that God Himself puts Adam out of the garden and away from the Tree of Life to prevent Adam from being able to live for ever in a ruined state. This is God’s mercy.

Any looking into ones self to understand or else to estimate ones self is bound to produce a wrong outcome. What you will observe is chaos and ruination. In assessing the inner man in the mind of reason bounded by physical perceptions and in the knowledge of elemental philosophy, Augustine made a profound wrong assumption; namely that the elemental universe is orderly and harmonised; therefore so must a man be orderly and harmonised even in a fallen state. What are missing are the knowledge of Scripture and the leading of The Holy Spirit to understand that God Himself has, since the fall of that former Covering Cherub, even the wicked one, subjected the whole universe to futility. God’s own estimation and the limits of His determination is that all men are able to observe outwardly His existence by the things He has created. In this all man are without excuse. Creation visibly bears witness to God Himself. If we press inwards becoming like god’s as Satan promised Eve, we will encounter futility and God’s own snare to prevent men from ascending to the heavens without dependence on Christ. Only in Christ can we truly understand our part in the heavens which is our being presently seated in Christ at the right hand of The Father, and hereafter New Jerusalem and a new heavens and a new earth.

Empedocles was a Greek pre-Socratic philosopher and a citizen of Agrigentum, a Greek city in Sicily. Empedocles' philosophy is best known for being the originator of the cosmogenic theory of the four Classical elements terra, era, ignis and aqua. This elemental view of life and the cosmos forms the early part of Greek philosophical development. The progression becomes increasingly rationalistic and increasingly sets men apart from God Himself, driven as it is by Satan who is concerned to make himself the god of this world. By the time of The Lord Jesus he has indeed become the God of this world and all men are in him, because the whole world has believed his lies and followed his direction. Augustine as with many others who have come down to us as foundational truth was in a true sense following in this same path of reason and self enquiry. Consider therefore what the outcome of this was even at the time of The Lord’s earthly ministry.. “He, who has supped with Me, has lifted up his hand against Me” (Paraphrase) “Behold the god of this world comes, yet he has nothing in Me”. If Judas had not attended to his reason and lusts, he would not have betrayed Christ. He would like the other apostles have cast down his means of sustenance and followed Christ as one trusting in God Himself.

The whole of western culture is rooted and founded in rationalistic and reasoning philosophy brought to England as well as central Europe in the 11th and 12th centuries by Crusaders returning from the Islamic territories conquered in the name of Christ. These soldiers as well as Roman Catholic priests brought with them the early and late Greek philosophies and thereby made full that which was started by men such as Augustine in the introduction of philosophy into church doctrine, marking the true beginning of the Mother of Harlots of Revelations. Today we live in a so-called post rationalistic society where men believe that by looking into the actual physical cosmos of atoms with electron microscopes we have somehow escaped the vulgar though admirable efforts of the ancients; we have indeed become god’s ourselves. Yet the evidence in all our lives tells us that we are more driven by selfish and carnal ambitions than at any other time in the history of the world. Today a small child can have as much comfort and possessions as a prince had in ancient times. Psychology, Sociology, Zoology and Anthropology are all grounded in rationalistic reasoning and have all drawn men away from God and into self determined lifestyles. They are all informed by philosophical reasoning based on a denial of God and a hope in man.

The teachings the Manicheans proclaimed were attacked by Augustine when he had become a member of the Catholic Church. He presented the views of Catholicism as opposed to the Manichean teaching, making a personality whom he calls ‘Faustus’ the advocate of Manicheanism. It is the dualistic conception of good and evil that distinguishes it from Western Christianity. Manicheanism is supposed to have taught that evil is eternal, like the good, that there is no resurrection and that evil has no end, that it has the same origin as the good and is without beginning and hence without end. The man accredited with the origin of this dualistic heresy is Mani who is a Babylonian prophet from Persia who left his writings to his widow who then allowed them to be developed by others and which in the end were held to by so many people that they were for a while, in north Africa, almost a certain challenge to the true faith. It is in North Africa that Augustine developed a catholic (world view) of the true faith which gave a deep philosophical and intellectual satisfaction to the newly accepted Christian faith some 70 years earlier by Constantine. The preceding 270 years approximately is characterised by 1st century bestial persecution of the churches by the Caesars directly and personally, thereafter in the 2nd and early part of the 3rd century it is the State more directly driven by laws and by now an almost societal obligation to hate Christians and to persecute them by pressing them to the extremes of society and life itself. Until the 30 years or so in the life of Constantine whose mother Helena was a believer, this pattern continues, only now the change to a state sponsored belief system begins. Also this provides the circumstance both politically and societal which made it possible for Augustine to apply his intellect to the problem of finding the philosophical bridge which would connect the true faith and the state as an harmonious entity.

He did this by conceiving of a great city (at that time mystical) which would demonstrate how truth and political thinking could exist side by side without conflict. It was a type of New Jerusalem of Revelations. In reality it was the laying of the foundations of that city, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots, yet at this time presented as a mystery. It is worth realising that again attending to Greek philosophy the term politic means to live in a city. Also that Apart from earthly Jerusalem only New Jerusalem in the new heavens and the new earth do we find God Himself living in a city with his people. The Greeks coined the term politic to collectivise the understanding which arises from living in a city, peacefully and rationally; namely subject to law and reasoned debate. At this time of Augustine the invisible union of true religion and rebellious independent men finds its expression in the most significant expression of a mystery which was already at work from the time of Nimrod the first king named in Scriptures as the first king of the land called Babel.; namely mystery Babylon. Though Nimrod was minded to build a city, he also had his mind set on heaven, hence the tower of Babel, mans first attempt to enter heaven without Christ.

The tower which Nimrod built or caused to be built is so called not because it was on the geographical boundary of a land called Babel, but because God Himself divided men by tongues thereby setting the distinction between those who would become Israel and those who would become the nations. The city of Babylon built by Nebuchadnezzar was a city of great administration as well as a city of physical beauty and religious sophistication. The hanging gardens were a wonder of that ancient world. But the administrational ability through writing down the laws of the kings and the rulers was also a significant feature as well. In the end Darius the King of Babylon was himself snared by this system and found him kneeling at the opening to the lions den, declaring to Daniel, whom he cared for, “may your God preserve you Daniel”. The effect of this mystery of Babylonian determination to enter heaven itself by the works of their own hands began with Cain, who showed his true heart by choosing to bring to God a sacrifice of his labours which was cursed, even the fruit of the earth, which was cursed. God can no more receive a thing cursed as a sacrifice by the hands of men unless it is Christ Himself cursed by being hung on a tree, than fallen men can naturally receive Christ. The twist which lies at the root of this reality is that men perceive in their own hearts the need to draw to God’s attention the curse, but do not incline to seeing that God Himself also has His remedy for that curse. So in the end through a lack of trust in God men are ever willing to seek to storm heaven itself in order to demand of God, that which God has always been willing to give, even a remedy for sin and death. Yet this remedy was revealed in Eden to Adam and Eve in the form of the promised seed. So that we can easily understand that from the beginning rebellion against God has hinged on not trusting God. When we speak of Cain’s heart or else the heart of Nimrod or Nebuchadnezzar we need to understand that the understanding of their condition is a matter which belongs to God Himself. We are not their judge. Yet their condition is revealed for our sakes as a warning.

All the efforts of men are of course overshadowed by that which is truly wicked, which is the mind and ambition of the wicked one, even Satan. As long as he is able to compass heaven itself according to God’s command, men will always be both drawn as well as driven to enter heaven unlawfully in order to commune with those principalities and powers of wickedness in heavenly places, amongst which Satan is the chief. Herein lies the true heart of wickedness in some men, who not only grumble against God, but they knowingly lend themselves to an agreement which though unspoken, amounts to being represented in heaven rebelliously, through the wicked one who is still labouring to draw the angels away from God to himself. It is of course pure madness and vanity because in an instant Michael and his angels will wage war against him and he will be cast down to the earth. At this time, those who have laboured to enter heaven unlawfully will themselves be faced with the reality of having only Hell to enter into. Yet in their madness they will still persist right to the end. The full visibility of all this is a man standing in the Holy Place declaring blasphemies, changing times and seasons, making himself to be god and leading the whole world in rebellion against God openly.

Why draw into these things in this way? Why not just simply answer a question concerning wickedness and vanity with an affirmation of goodness, of God and Christ? The reason is because of the times in which we live, when all of Satan’s efforts to deceive man, as well as to utilise man’s discontent with God, will come to a fulfilment. Without men Satan would be incapable of doing anything beyond him self and a number of angels which followed him in rebellion in former times. He as well as they were judged at that time in their bodies as well as their ambitions being brought to nothing. The wicked one though he still possesses a body was destroyed internally and outwardly in appearance by fire from within him. The principalities and powers today which labour with him are similarly judged, yet they are still able to conduct their original purpose of God, which was to govern and direct the very elements of the universe according to God’s command. When men are drawn away from trusting in God they too look to their own bodies and minds to find the answers to their own condition and discontent. Philosophy by what ever measure will always lead men astray. This is why it is written that God has chosen not the wise of this world but the foolish in order to put those who are wise to foolishness.

The need for discernment is never greater pressed upon us than it is today. Unless we learn to deny our selves, a thing which we cannot do of ourselves, we will risk being a part of the problem of rebellion against God even though we will be certain because we love God and Christ that we could not be so inclined. Yet the same malady of discontent is evident today amongst those who are called and chosen as it has been in every day. The cross is not only the place whereon Christ was crucified for sin, but it is insofar as we realise the union, the same place whereon all men, in Christ’s body were also crucified unto death. Only union in Christ’s death can lead to walking in His resurrection life.

Vanity, vanity all is vanity.

Apart from obvious historical references or else so-called academic enquires there is nothing which cannot be understood by discernment. This gift of God is an ability to know without enquiry the nature of a thing. Is it of God or is it a man or else an angel? That which truly sets a man apart for God cannot be achieved through reason or enquiry alone. Unless God Himself draws a man to Christ, it is impossible to know Christ. This is something which we find hard to accept or perhaps to understand. This is because our hearts do not think as God Himself thinks and our minds are not taught so as to prove that acceptable and perfect will of God. Yet this is what is before us in Christ and it is a most precious reality. To have your mind renewed so as to be able to think as God thinks is truly astonishing. It is written that when we speak, we should speak as though we speak the Word of God. If this were not possible God could not have asked us to have such a mind. Yet God both asks and provides the Way to such a mind. It is the mind of Christ which we already posses if we have truly believed. If we want to succeed in obedience we will also have to have a mind to suffer. Only God knows the heart, we do not even know our own hearts unless God shows it to us for our edification, either to grant repentance or else to encourage. All things are so ordered by God that it is impossible to lay hold of Him by reason alone neither can the nature and substance of deception be understood by reason alone.

As Paul spoke to the Galatians, “who has bewitched you? Before whose eyes Christ was publically portrayed crucified! Are you now to complete in the flesh that which was begun in the spirit?” (Paraphrase). Now we know that Christ was crucified outside Jerusalem and not in Galatia. The presentation was the apostolic preaching of Christ crucified for sin, which to the inner man is the same as having witnessed it at Jerusalem. Such is the gospel when it is presented as it was taught to the apostles by Christ Himself. In such a presentation we are able to trust God, for though we do not know our own hearts yet we are able to trust God to complete what He has started in us. In this we will be set free from vain philosophy and attend to the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Trusting God can of itself produce suffering because at times we may have no confidence at all that God does indeed love us. This may come about as a result of walking in the flesh or it may be as a result of the enemy of our souls. In such a mind trusting God becomes obedience which itself keeps us from becoming discontent with God Himself and acting independently so as to satisfy the demand of the flesh, resulting in our resisting suffering itself.

Augustine no doubt was perceived as being successful in resisting the Manichean as well as the later heresy of Pelagius. Pelagius is said to have repented of his early writings. It is a remarkable thing that this heresy of Pelagius has found little ground in either worldly thinking or else in church doctrines. Manichean thinking on the other hand has both prevailed in church doctrine through Roman Catholicism as well as influencing the wisdom of this world. Look no further than bi-polar disorder which is also called manic depression. The term manic is from the name of the man Mani whose writings laid the foundation of this heresy. Sigmund Freud bases his theories on a similar polar theory claiming that there is a conscious as well as subconscious mind, both of which are equal participants in the life of an individual. If you think about the outworking of this claim of Freud it is easy to realise that whatever comes out of the subconscious part is the same excuse of an individuals conduct as Manichean thinking which speaks of polar realities in which God is not sovereign, but where good and evil are polar opposites in outworking. In seemingly defeating this heresy of Mani Augustine in fact embraced an element of it or else a consequential outworking of it, which is seen and understood through Freud’s writings. It is that a man is not responsible for his actions as it arises from his subconscious mind so that he is incapable of doing other than his nature intended. Freud also postulated that the driving energies of the id both informs and expresses itself through libido. He also postulates male and female variants of these characteristics.

Augustine said “to hold anyone guilty of sin for not doing what he could not do belongs to the height of iniquity.” Augustine also postulated that libido is the outward evidence of self awareness which informs a person of their sinful nature.

God’s estimation of the heart is that every thought of man is continuously wicked and that it is only the Word of God which is able to separate spirit and soul, even the thoughts and the intentions of the heart. If we are born again we have been given a new heart. It is in this knowledge which we can take confidence and accept God’s estimation of all flesh and His remedy, even the Cross of Christ unto death.

Vanity, vanity all is vanity.

May the Lord deliver us from vain philosophy and reason?

P
proudpapa

thankyou amrkelly.

S
Stevey_P

Dear Proudpapa, thank you for directing me to this forum! Very interesting indeed. I have to admit I've been divorced from these kinds of in-depth discussions for a long time so it'll take a while for the gears to get cranking! But I'm glad to see a discussion about the distinction between sin which exists as part of our natural condition and sin which exists as a deliberate act of will. I love David's prayer, where he asks to be kept by the Lord from deliberate sins so they may not rule over him and make him guilty of great transgression, yet also asks the Lord to forgive him of his hidden faults (Psalm 19 vs 13/14). This implies to me that there is something wrong with our basic condition - whether you want to go on to discuss whether we are intrinsically good or bad is a massive step beyond the basics (and quite confusing to me!).

The difference between intentional and non-intentional sins is clear in scripture but, as we see in Leviticus, punishment and judgement is given over sins which are non-deliberate also. If I do not deliberately forget that it was my sisters birthday and do not get her a gift, I did nothing wrong by deliberation, but my forgetfulness could be the symptom of a deeper inner condition which results in my sister feeling the sting of neglect (albeit mild). Sinister as it may sound, I know there is a sin which sits inside me which causes fruitlessness in my life which I may not deliberately intend. A lack of love, or an apathy, or a drivenness of soul... all these can produce quite bad fruit.

To aim only to be free of deliberate sins can easily end quite legalistically. Paul manages to attain a perfect legalistic righteousness in his zeal for God (Philippians 3.6) yet was an enemy to the Gospel at the time. On paper, I can force myself into all sorts of righteous habits and keep a blameless record - I can, thus, deceive myself into thinking I am spiritual. Blamelessness, righteousness, and upholding the law are a) possible (Proverbs 2.21, 1 Thessalonians 5.23) and b) required (Romans 3.30-31), but if we satisfy ourselves only to accomplish these goals only, we neglect to realise that love goes far beyond the basic requirements of the Law.

Many Pharisees may have been like Saul, having a legalistic righteousness and being righteous on the outside, not deliberately acting sinfully. But true purity is not found on your outer record, but it is found in your inner condition from which the outer record results. A good tree produces good fruit...

It is not enough for me to claim innocence because my sins were not deliberate - though the devil might tempt me. I need to actively pursue cleansing my heart before God because if I don't, bad fruit will result from a bad inner condition. It just will, regardless of whether I intend it or not, regardless of whether I can help it or not (the Romans 7 dilemma)! If you think you're okay just because you manage, normally, not to deliberately sin, your house is on the sand and will not stand when the storm comes your way. True spirituality goes much deeper than the written code.

So I pursue a purity of heart so that I can trust that when the moment comes and I don't have time to think or deliberate, when temptation hits me like a hammer in the dark, good fruit will result automatically, without me needing to think or try so hard it just... will... happen! Sin sits there, waiting for an opportunity to catch you unaware. So best not tolerate it by excusing yourself in saying it was not deliberate and you can't help it... best catch it before it catches you! Judge yourself so that judgement doesn't come upon you (1 Corinthians 11:32). Actually, people who truly seek God cannot stand the thought that sin lurks in waiting for them to catch them. Rather, those who truly seek God hold every thought captive and purify their hearts - that way they see God better! Dig the weeds up from the root, don't be happy just to cut off that which is obvious and above the surface!

Summarised to a point of simplicity; we're talking about the war between two natures; the sinful and the spiritual. Quite naturally, children sin without being taught (quite non-deliberately too). Quite naturally, a parent punishes the child so that they may learn. Quite naturally, a man whose mind is controlled by the Spirit (Romans 8:6) produces good fruit without too much need for manufactured deliberation.

You can manufacture goodness in your life by forcing your outer actions to take on the appearance of goodness; but then it is no longer natural nor spiritual and most probably disgusts God with its lukewarm half-good-but-not-natural odour. Better to actually *be* good, from your very gut, with the goodness of God won for you by Christ and manifested in you by the power of the Holy Spirit. Then watch and wait, and the good that you accomplish will have a taste and nature that is so appealing that the counterfeit will be distinguished from the true, just like when the people saw that Jesus' authority was real, as opposed to the Pharisees, whose authority was only a manufactured outer facade.

That's how I see it anyway. Did I understand the subject?

Many thanks.

P
PaulWest

Real strong post, Stevey_P., with lots of meat. I don't have time to comment on the particulars that stand out to me, but it is all very good with sound exegesis and I am agreement with you. Welcome to the forum, by the way! It is a pleasure to have you here brother.

Paul

T
twayneb

Stevey_P: Welcome to SI. Great post. You are absolutely right. To try to manufacture holiness as a carnal act of the human will is to enter into a legalism akin that of the Pharisees. I think it was C.S. Lewis, I could be mistaken, who said that no act of good, no matter how good it may appear in the flesh, is really good if the heart from which it came is evil. Another way to put it would be, who wants to be the best sinner who ever went to hell? But when we learn to live out that which is true of us in the spirit when we are born again, when we allow God to live through us being dead to self and alive unto Him, then our actions are a natural outflow of the Spirit of God within us.

I am not sure I have come to a conclusion about how I see man's nature. I am not sure that man is born with a sin nature, although I am sure that man is born in sin and bound for hell barring the rebirth. Perhaps I will never be totally settled on this issue, perhaps I will. I am convinced that there is no duality of natures in a born again man. But then I guess I am speaking entirely of the spirit of man and not the physical body, because I am also convinced that the soul and flesh of man (body, mind, will, emotions) are not born again, and will not be until that time when in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye... So, even a born again man will battle the unregenerate flesh and must learn to walk in the Spirit rather than to fulfill the lusts of the flesh.

ArmKelly: Really appreciated your posts. I am going to have to go back and reread them as I get a chance. I honestly have never studied the writings of Augustine and have only a cursory knowledge of some of the teachings and writings of the early church fathers. One only has so many hours in a day and a lot of commitments. So, I spend most of my time purely in the Word. I am not one that is much for studying various theological perspectives. But I found what you wrote about Augustine interesting and hope to chew on what you said.

Blessings Brothers in Christ.

B
brothagary

a phenominal amount of knowlage in your answer to proudpappa ,andrew ,,,iv never read anything like that last post

a question ,,do you think that agustine was ever bornagain

and im not sure if you answerd this question ,,,,do you think he changed his mind about his early teachings

B
brothagary

hi stevyp,, nice to read your last post ,resonates much with my heart

brother you said you persue an inward purity ,and i see by your post a verry high standered , god blees you in your goal

have you acheieved it ,and are you talking about absalut sinless perfection ,,

blessings ,

S
sermonindex

I honestly have never studied the writings of Augustine and have only a cursory knowledge of some of the teachings and writings of the early church fathers. One only has so many hours in a day and a lot of commitments. So, I spend most of my time purely in the Word. I am not one that is much for studying various theological perspectives. twayneb.

Strange to say but I completely agree with you about how we use our time. Theological perspectives must in the end be a futile endeavour if we pursue understanding by that means. The church is so established on the earth that there are relatively few men who have been used by whatever means to contend for the faith in the way the early Fathers of the Catholic Church have been used. Even the great scholars who translated the bible into English, firstly in the 14th century and thereafter in various seasons, or else those men who were used to restore apostolic truths to the Church, were few in number. Much more prevalent are those who felt it necessary to follow these few men as a ministry of contention. It may well be that in divers times this contending was necessary of else beneficial. Today it really does seem that western culture itself has moved into a place where societal acceptance of rational goodness and decency, produced by the light of Christ, expressed in laws and a willingness to be constrained by these things, is all but passing away. Replacing it is pure humanistic rationalism on the one hand, and an apostate church on the other! Apart from these two things, their lies as always a remnant of God both within Israel and the Church, who are not able to bow the knee to men or a false gospel!

S
sermonindex

a question ,,do you think that agustine was ever bornagain

and im not sure if you answerd this question ,,,,do you think he changed his mind about his early teachings Brother Gary.

Yes brother I do believe that Augustine both knew and understood very well the reality of Christ. So I cannot easily imagine that he didn’t have a new life in Christ. Augustine knew how to contend for the gospel and much of his efforts laid a written basis for believing that he was born again.

To make sense of Augustine as a man as well as a bishop necessitates placing him in context of his day. This is almost an impossible task clearly as “his day” is long gone. Academic insights may help if you can believe what you are reading and understand the whole motive of the historical presenter. This too requires a full knowledge of the presenter as well and so it goes on into pure vanity or else confusion. What you can do however is ask God Himself to show you what it is that He would have you to do in this life, which may be mundane as well as sacred. You can also examine your time in Christ to date and ask yourself what the direction of your trust in Christ really is. In short we should know what is God’s calling in our lives beyond what is ordinary and necessary for the mundane. We need to know what is necessary for the sacred as well.

Grounded in this way as I have described it you may be able to see that Augustine was a man. That whilst he was profoundly well read and had a great intellect, as well as an ability to resist heresy in his day, one might be less inclined to hold him up as an icon and realise his humanity if you understood your own humanity as God sees it. This will almost certainly lead to brokenness in some measure. Brokenness before God seems to take at least two forms. Both require God’s intervention in our lives.

The Art Katz testimony which you shared regarding him being laid out in a moment of utter illumination of God is a good example of the first type. Art was going to preach on the subject of mercy. I imagine that by the time the Lord had done with him, he was quiet certain about the mercy of God. The Kleenex tissues are a testimony to that. What really strikes me though is how he felt it necessary to go to the meeting where he was going to preach on mercy of God by a different route so as not to have to come into contact with others on the way. This need speaks of God’s Holiness and so I believe that what Art saw through that small opening of the veil which separates men from the Glory of God, was God Himself. That is to say he saw the true Holiness of God. All such seeing produces a deep wrenching of the soul and exposes the man who so sees to his own true condition as a man. This is God’s mercy and it results in many tears. Not the shaking of the shoulders, but the breaking open of the heart before God. Something only God Himself is able to do.

The second kind of brokenness does produce as its initial effect the shaking of the shoulders. In that because we are weeping for ourselves our whole bodies become caught up in the event. This is when God grants us repentance, though for many seasons or few we have been hard hearted and wandered away from the One who gave His life for us, nevertheless God still grants repentance where it is truly sought. Having tasted the good things of God and having understood even for one hour that Christ has died for us to redeem us to the Father in Heaven, if we somehow or other come to prefer the filthy and unclean thing of the world, the flesh and in some cases the Devil, we may well come to a place where we need to repent. It may not take a great deal of denying God to produce such a need to repent, what we have been given by God may well produce a willingness to turn back very quickly.

Isaiah cried out before the altar when he said “Woe is me for I am a man of unclean lips and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips, for mine eyes have seen the King, The Lord of Hosts”. This cry of Isaiah did not produce bitterness of the soul, but it did reveal to him his true condition. For Art Katz preaching on God’s mercy that day perhaps reflected that it was God’s intention to show mercy to more than one man; even those who were to hear a man. So that as Isaiah heard the words “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?” perhaps Art needed this type of dealing of God. Only a man who has this certainty before God is able to say before God “Here I am. Send me!” More over only when this is true will God say “Go and tell this people!” (Isaiah 6:5-9)

The Apostle Peter was given much, to him alone was given revelation by the Father that Jesus was the Christ, The Son of the Living God, yet he denied Christ three times in a single night. The bitterness of his tears when he heard the cock crow speaks of the whole body being drawn into travail; it is a shaking of the shoulders, but the knowledge of the Lords words “when you return” uplifted him and turned him back without fear of men. Before this Peter boasted that he would give his life for the Lord. I’m sure he really meant it. What he couldn’t have realised was the inclination to self preservation when the risk to his life came. Afterwards Peter no doubt understood the deep reality of bitterness of the soul in light of Christ’s words to him.

The first (Isaiah) is wretchedness of the soul and the second (Peter) is bitterness of the soul. Both produce a good outcome. The one is God’s choosing the other is turning back. The one is the sin nature exposed by God (Woe is me); the other is the outworking of sin, by the will of the soul in an act of self preservation, to bear false witness. (I do not know Him).

Did Augustine change his mind about his early writing? I have no knowledge of it. But I can believe that God was able to do it. In hope I believe it. Turning back to the beginning of this post placing Augustine in the context of his day makes more sense than to try and judge him outright by his writings alone. Although I have said some things here which may well seem arrogant to some brethren I am certain that saying what you really believe to be true, even though to say so is to put yourself up for judgement, is better than completely rejecting something which may be beneficial both to working out ones own calling, as well as seeking to reveal something which attends to understanding the day we live in.

One thing which I am certain about is that the end of this age is already upon us, though its outworking in visibility is not yet seen. Whilst meditating on this answer to your questions Gary I was led to read 1 Thessalonians chapter five. Of all Paul’s letters this one deals more fully with the Lord’s return than any other letter. In thinking of the time in which we live and the growing emphasis on the end of the age, we have to remember that the balance, indeed the foundation for understanding the end of the age is not principally an understanding of the coming of the Man of Sin, but it is rather the hidden nature of the Lord’s return, proceeding the visibility of the Man of Sin. Only at the moment of his judgement and the judgement of the false prophet, will all men see Him coming as the veil of the cloud is removed.

In reading chapter five of 1 Thessalonians we get a clear exhortation by the Apostle of that Church, as to the substance of the confidence he had, namely that the Thessalonians were themselves walking as children of light. In this letter The Lord is described as coming as a thief in the night. Yet the Thessalonians were not only children of light but were also walking as children of light. It is therefore easy to understand why Paul is confident in them. It also reveals something of the nature of the Lord’s return, which in the first instance is not seen except by those who are awake, walking in the light. To everyone else Jesus is unseen as He takes that which is his possession, as though He were a thief coming in the night so as not to be seen. This is of course only “as a thief” in the night and not "a thief" in the night. We are all His righteous possession so we should expect to be taken by Him. Yet if we sleep and do not walk in the light as He is in the light, we will find that walking in the darkness of this hour in which we live, will prove to result in being left behind. Later Paul revisits this theme in 2 Thessalonians Chapter 2 because some were disturbing the faith of the Thessalonians by reporting that the Lord had already returned in the hidden way described in 1 Thessalonians chapter five. Clearly if there were no substance to the claim that it may be possible to be left behind at the Lord’s return no one could have been disturbed at all. It is also significant to us today to recognise the same test or criteria which will mark or else prove that hour of the Lord’s return in the clouds before He is become visible to all men.

Augustine as with many of the early Catholic Fathers was not set on a course of Apostolic unity of faith, he was building something which is at once a mystery and first reveales itself in Cain outside of the Garden of Eden, but which was also visible as a political city in the day of John as seen in Revelations, yet still had to be connected both as a mystery and as a city. Only in this connection do we see the rise of The Mother of Harlots. The mystery is mystery Babylon, the city is Babylon the Great. What this city was called in that day or else in this day is in truth of no consequence. It is the unity of purpose in the working of Satan which needs to be discerned if we are to hold our confidence in the Lord. If we do not discern the times in which we live, we will be shaken and disturbed today as were the Thessalonians at risk of being disturbed in their day. 1 Thessalonians chapter five is a wonderful passage of Scripture because in it is expressed an apostolic hope and confidence in Christ working in us to bring us safely to Himself in the clouds as well as demonstrating what the true apostolic heart is; confidence in Christ and a willingness to serve and warn according to sound doctrine and truth, with love.

B
brothagary

bless you andrew ,,your confadence in the lords return in the maner in which you expect, in the contex of a rapture,,leaves me in a state to surely concider things i was not concidering ,,,your words seem to me to come from nights of prayer and fastings ,,i will need to read this over again

thanks for answering about augustine my knowlage about him,is limited i know more about people who know more about men like calvin and luther ,and calvin and luther new about and thought highly of augustine

so for me it was satisfing to here what you think about him , being that you know morethen a fair bit about him

bless you andrew ,i feel some times i would like to copy what you have writting here in sermon index and put in in a book ,,,,have you by the grace of god ever concidred writing a book

S
Stevey_P

Hi brother Paul! And thank you for the very warm welcome. I'm fascinated by the discussions and find the whole atmosphere very encouraging. In 2008 I completed a degree in Philosophy and Biblical Studies and the atmosphere and attitude with which many debates were held there left me with a bitter after-taste for these sorts of discussions. But it's wonderful to see so many people coming together here to earnestly, honestly and lovingly seek out the truth together in open discussion.

I look forward to reading more!

Blessings

Steve.

S
Stevey_P

Nice to meet you twayneb! Thanks for your response! Yes, the whole subject of whether we are intrinsically of an evil or godly nature is one big web of complexity tangled together over centuries of men and women much smarter than me trying to figure it out! My reference point is a) myself and b) Scripture. Myself: I see that inside of me there is a war of some kind as two opposing sides try to take hold of my heart. Scripture: this same struggle is described by Paul in Romans 7, the solution of which lies at the end (thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord - it was on hearing my mum read that very verse that I became a Christian) and start of Romans 8 (now there is no condemnation for one who is in Christ).

That which was bad once dominated me and I was a slave to one reality (or nature?), but now I have a new obligation to the Spirit, to live according to it as a 'slave of righteousness' (Romans 6:18). What was produced naturally in me as a result of sin has now been put to death, and what is now produced naturally in me is the result of the Spirit, which gives life (John 6:63).

So... was I intrinsically bad? Am I now intrinsically good? I guess it's not as simple as all that. I'm all ears to hear anyone's thoughts! And I suppose I need some convincing of the relevance of seeking an answer, which I'm open to as well.

Thanks for your reflections twayneb!

God bless.

Steve.

S
Stevey_P

Dear Proudpapa! On my first post on this forum I've already managed to embarrass myself by managing to confuse you with amrkelly who is actually the one who directed me to this thread! So I apologise for any confusion caused, it's all been cleared up now!

Thanks for starting what has turned out to be a very interesting thread!

God bless you.

Steve.

T
twayneb

Steve: I personally think the idea of intrinsically good or bad just might be asking the wrong question. It seems to me that Paul, in Romans 7, does not speak of a duality of natures, i.e., intrinsic goodness or badness, but rather the futility of trying to be good or righteous in ones own flesh or carnal efforts. In chapter 6 he deals with the death of our flesh and our subsequent life through Christ. In chapter 7 it seems pretty clear to me anyway that he is dealing with his utter despair at trying to be righteous in the eyes of God by keeping the law through his own efforts. The solution was found in the atoning work of Christ. Now, Romans 8, we no longer walk after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

I believe that man was born in sin (original sin). I believe that the law was given to bring man, through the futility of self effort, to the realization of the need for a savior and a basis of righteousness other than man's own efforts. I believe, from John 3 and other passages, that man's spirit is regenerated at the rebirth, and not man's soul (mind and emotions) or man's body.

If that is the case, then as a man I used to walk after my flesh. I was unregenerate and under bondage to the law of sin that was in my members. I was a sinner, and so I sinned. I was spiritually dead to God. But now I am born again. My spirit is alive unto God. However, I still battle a flesh (body and soul) that is not born again. It does not mean that I am intrinsically anything in my opinion. I am a man made righteous by the blood of the lamb. My spirit has been born again and is just as righteous as it will be in all of eternity. But my salvation is only 1/3 accomplished so to speak. My body groans for the time when it will also put on immortality and the battle with unregenerate flesh will be over forever.

So the war, I believe, is not a "white dog / black dog" battle between natures that some have painted it to be. I am not a bi-polar believer. But I battle the flesh, and will to the end.

So, as you can see, the question of man being intrinsically good or bad is, to me anyway, asking a question that does not need to be asked.

Z
Zionshield

Romans 9:13-24 speaks to this. "And what if God, desiring to display His wrath and to make His power known, endured with great patience objects of wrath ready for destruction."

Although we are born into sin we are still culpable because we also choose to sin.

C
Christinyou

Quote: """Although we are born into sin we are still culpable because we also choose to sin. """

This is true.

But, Now that we are born again of the Spirit of Christ in us, we are His. Romans 8:9-13 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

The real me is Christ in me, by His Spirit I now live in the flesh, Quickened, not to be in debt to sin, that this mortal body is not to live after the flesh, but by the Spirit of Christ that is in me, I can mortify the undesirable deeds of this body of flesh. Which is a war and the more I have faith to believe as Paul did, I can say as he did, "it is no longer"; Ro 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Ro 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

By the Spirit of Christ that lives in me I can now live by the Faith of the Son of God. Galatians 2:16-21 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

Since we are His, His workmanship, by His Spirit that lives in us, whose were we before we were born again by the incorruptable Seed of Christ? WE were satan's by his spirit that lived in us birthed into sin, all this before the Cross, now the spirit of satan is out and the Spirit of Christ is in, regenerated, rebirthed into the righteousness of Christ that dwells in us.

What is God most concerned with? That I renew my soul/mind to the mind of Christ by His faith and the power of His resurrection by the Holy Spirit, the single most important thing God has done for the believer, which is "Christ in you the hope of Glory", being apprehended by Christ, we are to follow Christ as Paul did, that we might apprehend Christ. Philippians 3:12-15 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

How can anyone be perfect except it be Jesus Christ the Son of God? But! we are perfect by the Christ that is in us, His Spirit, we are becoming perfect in soul/mind and are to be thus minded, not otherwise minded, "be ye perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect". God will reveal even this unto us. Even our flesh and bones will be perfect on resurrection day. For now, WE FIGHT, We FIGHT. (Red Tails) Knowing who we are in Christ Jesus by Faith. Sons of the Living God.

Romans 8:38-39 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

In Christ: Phillip

S
sermonindex

andrew ,i feel some times i would like to copy what you have writting here in sermon index and put it in a book ,,,,have you by the grace of god ever concidred writing a book Brother Gary.

You may be surprised to know Gary that I have never preached in a church, nor have I taught in any context whatsoever, nor have I written anything other than a few letters to certain brethren privately. The posts made here on SI represent the only writing in any public sphere. You appear to have a high opinion of me Gary so you ask or believe that what I have shared here on SI must somehow come from many nights of prayer and fasting. This is not true however, though I do understand why you would be gracious to think it. I did once in the mid 80’s undertake the writing of a book called “A Question of Salvation”. After 5 years work I shelved it in the realisation that it was a mere vanity. I do not fear men. God I do fear and am well cognisant that what we write or say is a matter to be judged. I also always write with a purpose, what some here on SI term an agenda. Inteligence is dispised and truth is become a milking cloth soaking up everything, which in the end stinks.

Z
Zionshield

Amen! Thank you for sharing these srciptures.

S
sermonindex


I used to be extremely interested in this subject and spent many years debating it but now I do not even consider this topic a real issue at all.

Let us look at a few things that God in Christ has already accomplished for us and in us.

We have been reconciled to God.

Romans 5:10, "For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."

2 Cor. 5:19, "To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation."

We are now a new creation in Christ.

2 Cor. 5:17, "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."

We are IN Christ

1 Cor. 1:30, "But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:"

"It is because of Him that you are in union with Christ Jesus, who for us has become wisdom from God, as well as our righteousness, sanctification, and redemption." (ISV)

We have been crucified, buried and raised through Him. Our old nature is completely dead. We are freed from sin.

Romans 6:1-23

All of our sins have been totally removed.

Col. 2:12-14, "Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross."

Heb. 8:12, "For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more."


WE are Complete in Him.

Col 2:10, "And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:"

We are Righteous.

2 Cor. 5:21, "For He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him."

We are Holy.

1 Cor. 6:19, "What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?"

God has given us EVERYTHING we need. Nothing is lacking.

2 Peter 1:2-4, "Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust."

Now I could go on and on concerning all what God in Christ has already accomplished for us and in us but this should be enough to get you to at least consider these divine facts.

Under the New Covenant, God has already totally dwelt with the sin issue once and for all. He has also totally dwelt with the sinful nature. It is dead and buried. We now have Christ Himself living within us. We now have a new clean heart and a new spirit.

So now the only and real issue is, do we through repentance and faith become a real and active participant in what God has already accomplished for us and in us?

No one can ever change these divine facts but if we do not embrace daily what God in Christ has already accomplished for us and in us, we will never experience the reality of living by Christ's Life within us.

*edit spelling

S
sermonindex

I used to be extremely interested in this subject and spent many years debating it but now I do not even consider this topic a real issue at all. tuc.

Your list of the Lord’s accomplishments is edifying and good to read. It must be true as well that to simply debate a subject which is in any case dealt with through the true knowledge of God and Christ, is futile if we have that knowledge ourselves. Below is a repeat of an element of what was posted earlier in this thread. I have expanded it a little to make sense of why there is a real issue to be considered, though anyone of us who love the Lord could be delivered from all foolishness in an instant if it pleased God to do so, I have met very few believers over the years who have been dealt with in this way. It seems to me that God Himself has ordered things according to His own purposes and at the heart of this lies an issue of accountability before God when all men, including all believers will have to give an account to Christ. As far as I am able to understand this, the only people who will not be judged in the future are they that have judged themselves now. They are the faithful and the few who are able to stand before Christ at His coming and receive the words “well done My good and faithful servant”. Any one of us could be in that number if we are called of God, yet only those who themselves have chosen to deny themselves and like Christ Himself, take their cross, will be able to follow after the Lord, and will thereby be found faithful as He was faithful through obedience.


Why draw into these things in this way? Why not just simply answer a question concerning wickedness and vanity with an affirmation of goodness, of God and Christ? The reason is because of the times in which we live, when all of Satan’s efforts to deceive man, as well as to utilise man’s discontent with God, will come to a fulfilment. Without men Satan would be incapable of doing anything beyond him self and a number of angels which followed him in rebellion in former times. He is already judged in his body as well as having his ambitions brought to nothing. The Lord overcame him through the cross and his end is certain.

He is called “the Prince of the Power of the Air” not the “Prince of the Air”. It is the power of the air and not the air itself. The air belongs to God, but the power over it is given to principalities who themselves must give an account. On the other hand he is also called “the god of this world” or the “ruler of this world”. The heavens and the earth belong to God, but the world is Satan’s dominion. Unless we get this we will have no real understanding to base our warfare on. Neither will we be able to resist contending with men on matters which in truth belong to God. Yet contend some must according to God’s calling, both men and angels because of the rebellion of men not the rebellion of Satan who is already defeated and laid waste by the work of the Cross. When men are drawn away from trusting in God they too look to their own bodies and minds to find the answers to their own condition and discontent. Philosophy by what ever measure will always lead men astray. This is why it is written that God has chosen not the wise of this world but the foolish in order to put those who are wise to foolishness. Yet the gospel of grace has itself been philosophised even by those who are soundly saved. It is the subtly of the wicked one that where he is able he will use this schism of reliance upon the flesh by men, not angels, which all of us can fall into and thereby many do not believe even in the grace of God as a sufficiency for walking. So that on the one hand many saints become individualistic and lawless resulting in Christ Himself being impugned amongst unbelievers.

The need for discernment is never greater pressed upon us than it is today. Unless we learn to deny our selves, a thing which we cannot do of ourselves, we will risk being a part of the problem of rebellion against God even though we will be certain because we love God and Christ that we could not be so inclined. Yet the same malady of discontent is evident today amongst those who are called and chosen as it has been in every day when saints do not take up their cross. The cross is not only the place whereon Christ was crucified for sin, but it is insofar as we realise the union, the same place whereon all men, in Christ’s body were also crucified unto death. Only union in Christ’s death can lead to walking in His resurrection life. Only the resurrection life in Christ has overcome the world. If we desired to overcome the world as well we would not only have to be in Christ by faith, but we would also have to walk in His strength and life.

If in our minds we do not think as God Himself thinks , being yet untutored we risk becoming apathetic. Yet in a renewed mind are we able to prove that acceptable and perfect will of God. If we do not have this mind to overcome sin, the flesh and the devil, we will follow the heart which having once again come under the dominion of the body will be led astray. Yet this is what is before us in Christ, not only a new heart but a renewed mind also. To have your mind renewed so as to be able to think as God thinks is truly astonishing. It is written that when we speak, we should speak as though we speak the Word of God. If this were not possible God could not have asked us to have such a mind. Yet God both asks and provides the Way to such a mind. It is the mind of Christ in the spirit, which we already posses but it must also be the natural mind having been brought into subjection through obedience to the calling of God, which is taught by God Himself. Therein lays the substance of faith, that having been saved, we would make certain our salvation through this obedience.


A
arkp


PAUL, your friend: writting to the Thessalonians, perhaps on the authority of a forged letter as from Paul, that the persecution they ((The)) Thessalonians were suffering were those of the "great and awsome day of the Lord". They were decieved.

This is a lie, Sad to Say that Paul was not able to produce statistics to justify and quantify the actions of those that were falsefing such a claim to defend there own inaccuracy's and lack of knowledge.

Paul in his Zeal to again comfort and encourage, setting apart his personal feelings of the Lawlessness that which was taking place of "He" the restrainer the Holy Spirit.

For the mystery of the Lawlessness is already at work: only He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed. Whom he Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying words, and with all unrighteouness deception among those who perish because they did not recieve the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

This could only take place, once the restrainer the Holy Spirit was taken out of the way.

Here Paul, encourgaes the Thessalonians; Now may our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and our God and Father, who has loved us and given us everlasting consolation and good hope by grace, comfort your hearts and establish you in every good word and work.

At the End of this chapter, I came to the realizaiton that they did not have any peace. The enemy was exposed and the people are reminded of there believes and faith. He reminds them that they are Christians and therefore are to walk in Love and Forgiveness.

2 Thessalonians 3:16

Now may the Lord of peace Himself give you peace always.

The word PEACE found in the bible 76 x's throughout Scripture each time having it's own unique meaning and translation.

Here the Word Peace and it's translations;

1. SECRET-(SIGAO), to hold one's peace to keep a serect.

2. SILENCE-(SIOPAO), to hold one's peace thou
shall be silence.

3. QUIET-(HESUCHAZO), to hold one's peace being still.

4. STILL-(PHIMOO), to hold one's peace be still.


John 14:27 Peace, I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you, Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.

Phil 4:9 Those things, which ye both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you.

The word Peace in the Churches as in 1 Corn 14:33 that harmonised relationship between God and man, accomplished through the gospel.

1 Corn 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all Churches of the saints.

I have to go, hope this clarifys in part what Sin means to me..

Acts 10:36 The word which God sent unto the children of Is ra-el, preaching peace by Je sus Christ: (he is Lord of all:)

Eph 2:17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.

Matt 10:13 And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.

Luke 1:79 To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace.

Romans 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

This discussion is archived and closed to new replies. Start a new discussion to carry the subject on.
Archived
1 of 35 posts

Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.

Donate