ࡱ> 35012q /bjbjt+t+ -AA/]2222222FFFFFZLF (      $  2 22  2 2  FF2222 OV 22 <"FF The Lordship Controversy and The Carnal Christian Teaching HYPERLINK "cover.html" \l "e_reisinger"Ernest Reisinger [This is the 10th in a series of articles on the Lordship controversy.] We continue our studies in the Lordship controversy by examining another major theological difference between the Lordship and non-lordship teachings. In this study we will consider the differences of the two views concerning the "Carnal Christian" theory. This is one of the most perverted teachings in our generation. It is not only dangerous and self-deceiving but in many cases it is damning. As a result of this erroneous teaching many who regularly occupy our church pews on Sunday morning and fill our church rolls are strangers to true conversion. They are strangers to heart religion because they have never experienced the power of a changed life. They are not new creatures and for them old things have not passed away (2 Cor. 5:17). This "Carnal Christian" teaching was invented to accommodate all the supposed converts of modern evangelism. The non-lordship teachers had to have some explanation for the thousands and thousands of those who are products of an evangelism that leaves out Bible repentance from their evangelistic message. I am referring to those who make "decisions," walk aisles and make professions of being Christians, but their lives have never been changed by the power of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, they do not love what Christians love and hate what Christians hate. They act, think and live like non-Christians, but their teachers must have some explanation for their unchanged lives. Thus the unbiblical category "Carnal Christian" was invented by the non-lordship teachers. The non-lordship teaching is a two-experience theory of the Christian life. Stage one is conversion, which they teach is making a decision to receive Christ as your personal Savior (this will keep you out of hell). Stage two is another decision, which is to make Christ Lord. What the non-lordship teachers seem to ignore is that no human makes Christ Lord. He is Lord regardless what sinners say, think or do. He is Lord by God Almighty's decree: "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:36). This verse settles the question of who makes Christ Lord. Between these two experiences the supposed convert may live like an unbeliever. The testimony goes something like this: "When I was 7 or 8 years old (or older perhaps), I received Christ as my personal Savior, but I did not make Him Lord until much later in life." This kind of testimony reflects an erroneous interpretation of one's experience. To avoid this serious error we must hold tenaciously to a fundamental principle, that is, we must always interpret our experiences by the Scripture and never interpret the Scripture by our experience. This teaching of two kinds of Christians by the non-lordship advocates is just a new dress for the old error of the second blessing teaching. Any teaching that sends Christians on a quest for a kind of holiness that is obtained by some single, religious, crisis experience rather than by daily submission to the will of God is both erroneous and dangerous. The holiness that all Christians desire will not be complete in this world--O, that it could be! In contrast, Lordship teachers teach that there are as many kinds of Christians as there are Christians, but they deny that there are two categories--spiritual and carnal. The Lordship teachers teach that all Christians are carnal in some area of their life at some time and that all Christians are spiritual or else they are not Christians at all (Rom. 8:5-15). We must be mindful of that warning in Hebrews 13:9, "Be not carried away with divers and strange doctrines." Another translation puts it like this: "So do not be swept off your course by all sorts of outlandish teaching..." Another: "So do not be attracted by strange, new ideas." Believe me, this "Carnal Christian" teaching is a strange and outlandish teaching. I have good reason to believe that this "Carnal Christian" teaching has spawned this terrible perversion of the non-lordship salvation. Two hundred years ago the "Carnal Christian" theory would have been considered a strange, outlandish teaching--a new idea based on erroneous interpretation of one single passage of Scripture (1 Cor. 3:1-4). We will consider the passage later. As I take up my pen to write on this very live issue I do so with a deep feeling of sorrow and anxiety. Why? Because the teaching that I wish to expose is held by so many fine Christians and is taught by so many able and respected teachers. This fact causes me to approach the subject not only with deep concern but also with great caution. For many years I espoused and taught the carnal Christian error. The Lord had mercy on me! While pointing out some of the errors and ignorance surrounding this carnal Christian position it must be remembered that a Christian's experience with God can be better than his understanding of divine truth; his understanding may be tainted with error and ignorance. The opposite may also be true, that is, a man's intellectual understanding may be good but his experience may be faulty. The Church of Sardis had the name that they were alive but in experience they were dead (Cf. Rev. 3:1). My motive, purpose and prayer in these studies is to promote true holiness and usefulness among Christians. Popularized by the Scofield Bible The teaching of the two categories of Christians has been popularized by the Scofield Bible, Dallas Theological Seminary and Campus Crusade for Christ. A quote from the Scofield Bible clearly sets out exactly what the teaching is: "Paul divides men into three classes: 'Natural' i.e. the Adamic Man, unrenewed through the new birth; 'Spiritual' i.e. the renewed man as Spirit-filled and walking in the Spirit in full communion with God; 'Carnal,' 'fleshly,' i.e. the renewed man who walking 'after the flesh,' remains a babe in Christ" (Scofield Reference Bible, pp. 1213, 1214, Cf. Rom. 8:5-15). It is very important to observe the two main points in this Scofield note. First, the division of men into three classes; second, we are told that one of these classes of men comprises the "carnal," the "fleshly," "the babe(s) in Christ," "who walk after the flesh." To "walk" implies the bent of their lives; their leaning or bias is in one direction, that is, towards carnality. One of the most common and popular presentations of this position is available in the form of a small tract which presents the teaching like this: After you have invited Christ to come into your life, it is possible for you to take control of the throne of your life again. The New Testament passage, 1 Cor. 2:14-3:3, identified three kinds of people: PRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=(diagram)"INCLUDEPICTURE \d \z "carnal.gif" There will be no dispute about the first circle which represents the non-Christian. Note the position of the Ego, indicating that self is on the throne. The natural man is a self-centered man; his interests are controlled by self, the cross is outside the person. Now compare this with the second circle-the only difference is that a cross (representing Christ) appears inside the person although not on the throne. And the same little dots are in circle two that are in circle one, indicating that there has been no basic change in the nature and character. That is to say, the bent of the life of the carnal Christian is the same as that of the non-Christian. Circle two gives basically the same picture as circle one, the only difference being that the carnal Christian has made a profession of receiving Jesus, but he is not trusting God. A brief examination of this diagram and its interpretation of 1 Corinthians 3:1-4 will show that it is an accurate presentation of what we have already found in the Scofield Bible notes. We ought not to miss three very salient and important facts about the teaching. First, we note again that it divides all men into three classes or categories. With this fact none of its proponents disagree, though they may present it differently and apply it differently. Secondly, one class or category is set out as containing the "Christian" who "walks after the flesh". The center of his life is self, and he is the same as the unrenewed man as far as the bent of his life is concerned. Thirdly, all those who accept this view use 1 Corinthians 3:1-4 to support it. Consequently, if it can be established that the preponderance of Scripture teaches only two classes or categories of men--regenerate and unregenerate, converted and unconverted, those in Christ and those outside of Christ--the non-lordship position will be shown to be untenable. Before I turn to some of the errors and dangers of the "'Carnal Christian" teaching it may be wise to indicate what I am not saying. In this study of the "Carnal Christian" theory I am not overlooking the teaching of the Bible about sin in Christians, about babes in Christ, about growth in grace, about Christians who backslide grievously, and about the divine chastisement which Christians receive. I acknowledge that there are babes in Christ. In fact there are not only babes in Christ, but there are different stages of "babyhood" in understanding divine truth and in spiritual growth. I also recognize that there is a sense in which Christians may be said to be carnal, but I must add that there are different degrees of carnality. Every Christian is carnal in some area of his life at many times in his life--"the flesh lusteth against the Spirit" (Gal. 5:17). All the marks of Christianity are not equally apparent in all Christians. Nor are any of these marks manifest to the same degree in every period of any Christian's life. Love, faith, obedience, and devotion will vary in the same Christian in different periods of his Christian experience; in other words, there are many degrees of sanctification. The Christian's progress in growth is not constant and undisturbed. There are many hills and valleys in the process of sanctification; and there are many stumblings, falls and crooked steps in the pathway to the Celestial City. There are examples in the Bible of grievous falls and carnality in the lives of true believers. Thus we have the warnings of temporal judgment and of chastisement by our heavenly Father. These truths are all acknowledged and are not the point of this present study. The question we have to consider is: Does the Bible divide Christians into two categories? This is the issue at the heart of the "Carnal Christian" teaching. Errors in the Non-Lordship Teaching on the Carnal Christian First Error. This "Carnal Christian" doctrine is erroneous because of a wrong interpretation and application of the single passage of Scripture on which it is based, namely, 1 Corinthians 3:1-4. The historical and true interpretation will be dealt with at length later. The most doctrinal portion of the New Testament is the epistle to the Romans, and on this all reasonable Bible scholars and theologians would agree. Most scholars (if not all) would further agree that Paul's epistle to the Galatians is the second most doctrinal portion of the New Testament. The first epistle to the church at Corinth is primarily dealing with practical problems in the church: PRIVATEChapters 1-3Strife and contentions about the ministers (Cf. 1:12,13; 3:3-6; 3:21,22).Chapter 5Immorality and incest (v. 1). No repentance (v. 2).Chapter 6:1-10Lawsuits against one another (v. 7). Defrauding and wronging one another (v. 8).Chapter 7:1-17Sexual problems between husbands and wives. Instruction to explain that sex was for more than procreation.Chapter 8:1-13Christian liberty. Weak and strong Christians. Fighting over meat offered to idols.Chapter 9Paying the preachers and Paul's Apostleship.Chapter 10Christian liberty.Chapter 11:1-16Problems with women and their hats and hairdos.Chapter 11:17Their public coming together did more harm than good.Chapter 11:20-23Disorder at the Lord's Table.Chapter 12-14Spiritual gifts, lack of love (v. 13).Chapter 15Doctrinal error of the worst sort. Foundational doctrine of Christianity--the resurrection.Chapter 16Problems with the collection.All of these problems are examples of carnality in Christian behavior. Therefore, the strife, division and contentions over the ministers in 1 Corinthians, chapters 1 to 3 is just one of the problems, and in this area of their lives, the Corinthians were carnal. That is, they acted like babies and just like the unregenerate in this particular area of their lives. The passage is not teaching three categories of mankind, or two classes of Christians. Such a view is foreign to the rest of the Bible. The following two quotations are only two of many Scriptures which clearly teach that all mankind is divided into two categories and no more There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh; but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life-and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not his" (Romans 8:1-9). For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of the which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in the time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. And those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires" (Galatians 5:17-24). These two passages simply set out what the rest of the Bible clearly teaches, namely, that there are only two classes or categories of men and within these two classes there may be many shades and degrees. To interpret 1 Corinthians 3:1-4, therefore, in such a way as to divide men into three classes is to violate the cardinal rule of interpretation. This rule requires us to interpret all single passages in the light of the whole, to interpret all subordinate passages in the light of the leading truth, or to interpret all obscure passages in the light of clear passages. This teaching is erroneous because it is an incorrect interpretation and application of the single portion of Scripture on which it is founded. Second Error. The "Carnal Christian" teaching is erroneous because it contradicts and perverts the two basic blessings of the new covenant--justification and sanctification--and their relationship to each other. Justification is what Christ does for us in heaven. Specifically, He covers our record with His blood and gives us a legal right to enter in. Sanctification is what Christ does in us by His Holy Spirit on earth-this gives us some practical fitness. (See FJ 15). The working of His Spirit in us and the cleansing of His blood for us are inseparably joined in the application of His grace. Therefore, any attempt to place the act of submission subsequent to conversion is to cut the living nerve out of the New Covenant. The "Carnal Christian" teaching does just that; it separates what God has joined together and thus perverts biblical Christianity, bringing dishonor on the blood of Christ that was shed to enact the entirety of the New Covenant which includes both justification and sanctification. The Children's Catechism sums it up beautifully "What did God the Father undertake in the Covenant of grace? Answer: to justify and sanctify those for whom Christ should die." For you, is your creed; in you is your experience. Third Error. The next major error is that this teaching does not distinguish between true, saving belief and spurious belief. This distinction is found throughout the New Testament. Many believed but Jesus did not commit Himself to them (John 2:23, 24); they believed but did not confess Him (John 12:42, 43); they believed for awhile (Luke 8:13); Simon Magus believed and was baptized but he thought he could buy the Holy Ghost (Acts 8:12-32); Peter said he would perish, (v. 20); his heart was not right (v. 21); therefore not changed, he was in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity (v.23). But the strongest evidence is in his prayer--he, like the unregenerate, was only concerned with the consequence of sin and made no request to be pardoned and cleansed from sin--just, "...that none of these things come upon me." Just like the so-called carnal Christian he wanted Jesus as a kind of hell insurance policy but does not want delivered from sin. James 2:19 says, "the devils believe..." In all of these cases people believed, that is, they had faith but it was not saving faith. Similarly all of the carnal Christians have belief, but it is not always saving belief (see FJ 10 & 11). Fourth Error. The "Carnal Christian" teaching excludes repentance, at least by implication, in the fact that they teach that the carnal Christian has not necessarily changed in practice but lives and acts just like the natural man. This is easily seen in the diagram where self is still on the throne. Not to teach the necessity of repentance is a very grave error, and to depart from the Apostolic example of the gospel message and its propagation (see FJ 14). Fifth Error. The "Carnal Christian" position ignores much biblical teaching on the doctrine of assurance, namely, that Christian character and conduct have something to do with assurance. For the Lordship view of assurance see the Baptist Confession of 1689, chapter 18. I will have more on assurance in a future article. Questions Raised by the Carnal Christian Teaching 1. Are we sanctified passively, that is, by faith without the deeds of the law? (Note: I did not say justified but sanctified.) If sanctification is passive--a kind of "let go and let God"--then where do we place the apostolic admonitions in the New Testament such as, "I fight," "I run," "I keep under my body," "let us cleanse ourselves," "let us labour," "let us lay aside every weight"? None of these are passive expressions nor do they express some single act as the experience of victory or some single experience as the means of becoming more spiritual and mature. 2. Does not appealing to the so-called carnal Christian to become a spiritual Christian depreciate the real conversion experience by over-appreciating the second experience by whatever name it may be called (which is variously designated higher life, deeper life, spirit filled life, triumphant living, making Christ Lord not just Savior, etc.)? "Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new" (2 Cor. 5:17). This passage is not talking about a second experience but rather about what happens in a real conversion experience. Has the spiritual Christian finished growing in grace? If not, what is he to be called, as he continues to grow in grace? Do we make still more unbiblical categories, such as, "spiritual, spiritual Christian" or "super spiritual Christian"? 3. Who is to decide who the carnal Christians are and exactly what standard is to be used in determining this? Do the spiritual Christians decide who the carnal Christians are? Does a church or preacher decide where the line is to be drawn that divides the two classes or categories? Would you like the responsibility of dividing the members of your church into unsaved, carnal Christian, spiritual? Since all Christians have remaining sin in them and since they sin every day, how much sin, or, what particular sins classify a person as a carnal Christian? 4. Do not all Christians act like natural men at times in some area of their lives? 5. Do not the inward sins, such as, envy, malice, covetousness, lasciviousness (which included immorality on the mental level) prove that a person is carnal just as much as some outward manifestation of external sins? 6. How much sin can a spiritual Christian commit and still be in the spiritual category? 7. Does the Christian go back and forth from spiritual to carnal and carnal to spiritual? How often can this changing of categories take place? 8. When and how does a carnal Christian become a spiritual Christian? 9. Are there different degrees of carnality and different degrees of sanctification in the so-called spiritual Christians? If some of these questions seem a bit ridiculous it is because they are raised by an unbiblical, ridiculous teaching. If all the carnal Christian teachers would seriously study the following questions and answers found in the Larger Catechism they would stop teaching the unbiblical theory of the carnal Christian category. Q. 75. What is sanctification? A. Sanctification is a work of God's grace, whereby they whom God hath, before the foundation of the world, chosen to be holy, are in time, through the powerful operation of his Spirit applying the death and resurrection of Christ unto them, renewed in their whole man after the image of God; having the seeds of repentance unto life, and all other saving graces, put into their hearts, and those graces so stirred up, increased, and strengthened, as that they more and more die unto sin, and rise unto newness of life. Q. 77. Wherein do justification and sanctification differ? A. Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification, yet they differ, in that God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ; in sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof; in the former, sin is pardoned; in the other, it is subdued: the one cloth equally free all believers from the revenging wrath of God, and that perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation; the other is neither equal in all, nor in this life perfect in any, but growing up to perfection. Q. 78. Whence ariseth the imperfection of sanctification in believers? A. The imperfections of sanctification in believers ariseth from the remnants of sin abiding in every part of them, and the perpetual lustings of the flesh against the spirit, whereby they are often foiled with temptations and fall into many sins, are hindered in all their spiritual services, and their best works are imperfect and defiled in the sight of God. Let me give a short review of our last study on the Carnal Christian teaching: The "Carnal Christian" teaching is primarily based on an erroneous interpretation of a single passage of Scripture (1 Cor. 3:1-4). The "Carnal Christian" teaching perverts many other doctrines of the Christian faith. The "Carnal Christian" teaching separates the two main doctrines of the Christian faith--justification and sanctification. The "Carnal Christian" teaching separates the new covenant by making the act of submission to Christ optional--what God has joined together let no man or teaching put asunder. The "Carnal Christian" teaching makes holiness, obedience and discipleship optional. See John 10:26-28; 14:21-23; 15:10; 1 Pet. 1:155,16; Heb. 12:14; Titus 2:10-14. The "Carnal Christian" teaching breeds antinomianism and gives a false standard of what a Christian really is. The "Carnal Christian" teaching is the mother of many of the second-work-of-grace errors. The "Carnal Christian" teaching actually teaches two ways to heaven: one, the carnal-Christian way and two, the spiritual-Christian way--whichever your prefer. The "Carnal Christian" teachers ignore the biblical distinction between the grounds of salvation and the grounds of assurance. The "Carnal Christian" teaching breeds a false spirituality and Pharisaism in the so-called "spiritual Christians" who have measured up to some man-made standard of spirituality. There ought to be no professed "spiritual Christians," much less "super-spiritual" ones! George Whitefield, a man who lived very close to his Savior, prayed all his days, "Let me begin to be a Christian." And another Christian has truly said, "In the life of the most perfect Christian there is every day renewed occasion for self-abhorrence, for repentance, for renewed application to the blood of Christ, for application of the rekindling of the Holy Spirit." Many are comfortable living sinful lives while hiding behind a teaching that is not biblical, comfortably going to hell on a false teaching. It is one thing to speak and teach that Christians have carnal out-breaks, which is biblical, but it is another thing altogether to make a third class or category of men--"Carnal Christians." The Bible teaches only one church. From the human side it is the visible church made up of both professors and possessors. But from the divine side it is made up only of possessors. Since we are on the human side we should take three lessons from Matthew 3:12, "Whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." John the Baptist is speaking about our Lord and the three things the text teaches are very applicable. There will be a separation between the real and the spurious--the true and the false--possessors and professors. The time of this separation is not now. The winnowing fan in not in our hands. We do not always know who has been born again. Therefore, when speaking of a back-slider two errors must be avoided: (1) to say unequivocally he is not a Christian; (2) to say unequivocally that he is a Christian. We do not know, we cannot know. It is not a sin not to know. This is another reason this "Carnal Christian" doctrine is so dangerous, deceiving and damning. How do you know such a person's profession was genuine? How do you know it was not genuine? You don't! It is therefore very dangerous to classify people as carnal Christians who give no evidence of being born again. There are always two possibilities: they may be true Christians in a back-slidden condition, or they were never savingly united to Christ. Only God knows and it would be well if we would say, "I don't know," rather than squeeze out of some text of Scripture a meaning that the Holy Spirit never put there by making a category of men that the Bible knows nothing about. 1 Corinthians 2:14-4:15 Let us consider the passages that the "Carnal Christian" teaching is based on. What is the teaching of 1 Corinthians 2:14-4:15? This is the most important point in our argument, namely, what is the interpretation and application of the single passage of Scripture on which the three categories of men is based. I think a quotation from one of the church fathers is very apropos: "If you only have one Scripture on which to base an important doctrine or teaching you are most likely to find, on close examination, that you have none." This is precisely what we have with the three-category theory. We must remember that 1 Corinthians is not particularly a doctrinal epistle. Though, like all Scriptures, it contains doctrine it was not written to lay a doctrinal foundation. This epistle was primarily written to deal with practical problems in this young church which was not yet 100 years old. The particular position of the letter which we are considering is dealing with just one of the many problems in the church at Corinth. Specifically this issue is namely, schism over the ministers. Consider the context of 1 Cor. 3:1-4., "For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe's household, that there are contentions among you. Now I say this, that each of you says, `I am of Paul,' or `I am of Apollos,' or `I am of Christ' (1 Cor. 1:11, 12). "For when one says, `I am of Paul,' and another, `I am of Apollos,' are you not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers through whom you believed, as the Lord gave to each one? I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase" (1 Cor. 3:4-6). "Therefore let no one glory in men. For all things are yours: whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas, or the world or life or death, or things present or things to come - all are yours. And you are Christ's, and Christ is God's" (1 Cor. 3:21-23). "Let a man so consider us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other" (1 Cor. 4:1, 6). It is very important to see that this whole section of 1 Cor. 2:14-4:15 is dealing principally with one problem--schism. And like all the other problems in this letter, such as, defrauding one another, the disorder at the Lord's Table, etc., it is the result of carnality, or more accurately, a result of the remaining principle of sin in all believers. These problems illustrate Paul's teaching in Rom. 7:21-23. "I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members." First, we must note in chapter one that the Corinthians got off to a good start. Paul says they were sanctified in Christ Jesus (v.1); they were recipients of the grace of God, (v.4); they were enriched by Christ in all utterance and knowledge (v.4); the testimony of Christ was confirmed in them (v.6); and, they came behind in no gifts (v.7). Some of the Corinthian Christians had attached themselves to one of the great Christian teachers or preachers and some attached themselves to another, thus setting up rival leaders of opposing parties. Some would follow Paul, some admired Apollos, and others extolled Peter. "Now I say this, that each of you says, `I am of Paul,' or `I am of Apollos,' or `I am of Cephas,' or `I am of Christ' (1 Cor. 1:12). "For when one says, `I am of Paul,' and another, `I am of Apollos,' are you not carnal?" (1 Cor. 3:4). "Therefore let no one glory in men. For all things are yours: whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas, or the world or life or death, or things present or things to come--all are yours" (1 Cor. 3:21, 22, cf. 1:12; 3:4, 21, 22). They were all making idols out of secondary causes and forgetting the first Cause where the glory should lie. Instead of saying, "We are Christ's disciples" and uniting together in Christ they made parties and said, "We are Paul's--he founded the church." "But Apollos is more eloquent than the Apostle and he edifies us more. We have gone beyond Paul, therefore, we are of Apollos." And a third party said, "We are of Peter." Ah, but they were forgetting that these were men and only laborers in God's farm and they all labored together with God. This was causing "envying, strife and division" (3:3). They were carnal, they were acting like the unregenerate; therefore, in this area of their lives they were carnal. The carnality evidenced itself in their factions over the different servants of Christ (cf. 1:11, 12; 3:3-5, 21, 22). In 3:1-4 Paul charges them for their carnality and division. He then instructs them on how to correct that which was wrong. Their ministers were only ministers (3:5). All these ministers carried on the same design and purpose (3:6-10). The ministers were building on the same foundation (3:11-15). The great apostle exhorts them not to glory in particular ministers because they should have an equal interest in all true ministers. "All are yours and you are Christ's" (3:22, 23). In 1 Cor. 3, the Apostle resumes the subject of contention mentioned in 1:11-13. Chapter 3 is a transition from the defense of his mode of preaching (chapter 2) to the subject of their divisions (3:1-5). The true relationship of ministers to the church is as servants and not party leaders. Their dissentions and divisions were in reference to their religious teachers. The Apostle tried to correct this by showing the true place of the ministerial office. Ministers were servants without any authority or power of their own. One may plant, another may water BUT ONLY GOD can give the increase (3:5-7). Ministers are one - they have one master, one work - just different departments in the great work - like fellow laborers on the same farm or fellow-builders building the same temple (3:8, 9). In discharging their duty they have a great responsibility as to how they build and what they build (3:10-15). Because the church of God is the temple of God ministers will be held accountable for the doctrine they teach and preach in executing their duties (3:16, 17). No minister should deceive himself. He cannot preach a higher wisdom than the wisdom of God, and to learn that wisdom he must renounce his own (3:18-20). The Apostle is not setting up three categories of men. He knows only two classes of men--natural and spiritual. "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor. 2:14). Under the term "natural" the great Apostle includes all those persons who are not partakers of the Spirit of God. If the Spirit of God has not given to them a new and higher nature than they ever possessed by their natural birth, he puts them in one class of natural men. Those who are "spiritual" may be but babes in grace and babes in knowledge. Their faith may be weak. Their love may be in its early bud; their spiritual senses may be little exercised; their faults may be in excess of their virtues, but if the root of the matter is in them they have passed from death unto life--passed out of the region of nature into that which is beyond nature--then Paul puts them in another class--all of them are spiritual men. In 1 Cor. 2:14-16 he does not make THREE categories. The difference is that the spiritual receive the things of the Spirit, embrace them with delight, and feed upon them with intense satisfaction. These Christians were imperfectly sanctified, as are all Christians. Paul is not setting up a third group that is characterized by carnality in every area of their lives, who demonstrate that the bent of their lives is not Christian. The Scripture knows only two places--heaven and hell; two ways--the narrow way that leads to life and the broad way that leads to destruction; two principles of walk--the Spirit principle and the flesh principle. 1 Cor. 3:1-4 is not expounding a general doctrine but reproving a specific out-cropping of carnality in a certain place. Therefore, we must be true to Scripture and not misinterpret and misapply certain texts to accommodate miserable human performance. "Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new" (2 Cor. 5:17). This is a biblical description of a Christian: the essence of a Christian, "in Christ;" the effects of being in Christ, "a new creature;" the evidence of being in Christ, "old things pass away and all things become new." There is no place here for two categories of Christians. 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 We will now consider 1 Cor. 3:10-15. There are a few passages of Scripture to which more numerous and more contradictory explanations have been given than this passage (1 Cor. 3:10-15). In 1 Cor. 2 the great apostle is defending his apostleship; the whole context from 1 Cor. 2:1 to 4:15, however, has to do with ministers and how they are meant to build the church. In 3:7 he makes it very clear that the real cause of gospel success is not the instruments (preachers or teachers) "but God [who] gives the increase." In 3:10 and 4:15 he points out that he did the most important part on the human side--he laid the foundation, but he is quick to warn them not to glory in men (3:21-23). 1 Cor. 3:10-15 is one of the passages that the Roman Catholic Church uses to support their doctrine of purgatory. They make the foundation to be the orthodox doctrines of the gospel (as they understand them). They make the various builders in v.12 to be Christians and the gold, silver and precious stones to be good works, super-added to faith. The wood, hay and stubble are regarded venial sins committed by Christians, and the fire which burns up or purges these sins to be the fiery punishments of purgatory. The Christians who have added these venial sins are represented in v.15 as getting to heaven only after passing through the purgatorial fires. Thus this passage is interpreted to teach purgatory. Now this interpretation is too bald and crude to satisfy all Catholic divines. Thus, men like Cardinal Bellarmine, who was a most learned and able Roman Catholic theologian, refute this ridiculous interpretation. He properly holds that the context of the whole chapter clearly teaches that the builders are the several ministers.  The Scripture knows only two places--heaven and hell; two ways--the narrow way that leads to life and the broad way that leads to destruction; two principles of walk; the Spirit principle and the flesh principle.  The great Cardinal's view is more subtle but leads to the same error of purgatory. He says the foundation consists of the doctrines of Christ. The builders are legitimate ordained church teachers. The gold, silver and precious stones, which are super-added to the foundation are the correct Catholic doctrines. The wood, hay and stubble are incorrect details of doctrine--not totally heretical, (for then they would have sent teachers straight to hell) but just partly perverted, therefore, the teachers must be chastised. If true Catholics, they shall reach heaven eventually after passing through purgatory. Some fine and respected Protestant theologians agree with Bellarmine but disagree on what these foundational doctrines are. They do, however, believe it is the preaching of God's ministers that will be strictly tested by the penetrating and holy judgment of God's fire which represents the Holy Ghost as in Acts 2:3. And by the Holy Ghost the hearts and teaching of the ministers will be searched. But if these ministers have truly embraced and preached Jesus Christ they will be saved in spite of some errors in their teaching and preaching. This explanation avoids the unbiblical and superstitious error of purgatory but is still short of Paul's true intent and the rich instructions found in this passage. Paul's Teaching on 1 Cor. 3:10-15 Paul points out that he is a wise master-builder (v.10). Others coming after him would be inferior to his apostolic rank. There would be no more apostles. The foundation on which all builders (ministers, teachers, and leaders) build is Jesus Christ, that is, the fundamental doctrines which set forth the Christ of the Scriptures--Christ crucified as our salvation (Eph. 2:20; 1 Pet. 2;6; Mt. 21:42). The building built on this foundation by various hands is the Church of Jesus Christ (vv.5-9, 12). "Any man" refers to ministers. Paul is concerned with the work of ministers, teachers and leaders in building the church on the one foundation. What about the material used? There are two kinds: gold, silver and precious stones--all that will stand the final test; and wood, hay and stubble--that which does not stand the test (cf. Mt. 3:12; 7:24-27; 13:24-30). The passage itself expressly asserts that Jesus Christ is the foundation. What is He the foundation of? In Mt. 16:18; 1 Pet. 2:4-6; Eph. 2:20-22. the building that is resting on the foundation is the church and the Christians are the stones united to that sure foundation. The context of the passage should settle the meaning. The strife and contention is over ministers (1:11,12; 3:4-6,21,22). The apostle is rebuking these divisions by showing that the foundation is one. Paul uses two figures--husbandman and builders. In v.9 Paul is saying to the members of the church: "ye are God's husbandry. In v.16, "ye are the temple of God." On this basis alone we can support the interpretation that the different constituents (gold, silver precious stones and wood, hay and stubble) are the different classes of church members. One class does not stand the test of reality and the other passes the test. We see the same principle in the parables of the wheat and the tares (Mt. 13:24-32); the two foundations--one sand, another rock (Mt. 7:24-27); the ten virgins half were real and half were spurious (Mt. 25:1-12). Summary of 1 Cor. 3:10-15 As the "wise master builder" Paul refers to the ministers who are not apostles as those who will come and build after him. The foundation which he laid is that blessed cluster of fundamental doctrines which set forth Christ crucified as our salvation. The building reared on this foundation by various hands is the church of Jesus Christ, and the gold, silver and precious stones, are genuine and regenerate persons introduced into the church by the labors of wise and faithful ministers, while the wood, hay and stubble, represent spurious converts, and unconverted professors of religion, introduced into the church by less judicious laborers. When the day of judgment comes, this church universal, thus variously built, shall be tested by the holy, searching  "Too often modern evangelicalism has substituted a 'decision' in the place of repentance and saving faith. Forgiveness is preached without the equally important truth that the Spirit of God must change the heart. As a result decisions are treated as conversions even though there is no evidence of a supernatural work of God in the life."  and penetrating inquest of God the judge, even as a material building would be by having the torch applied to it. In such a building, the living rock on which it is founded, and the imperishable stones and precious metals, would remain after the conflagration; but the perishable materials would be utterly consumed. So, nominal Christians, spurious converts, whose faith is a dead faith, however connected with a genuine and orthodox church of Christ, will be cast into hell, and forever consumed by God's wrath; while true Christians will remain uninjured. In the judgment day, those ministers who by their soundness, prudence and fidelity have added genuine converts to Christ's church, will receive a reward from the free, undeserved grace of their Lord. These ransomed souls, having stood the test of the judgment day, will shine as stars in their crowns. But this gracious reward will be lost by those injudicious and rash ministers who introduced unsound professors into the church. If the ministers are themselves built on the Rock Christ Jesus, they will indeed be saved; but they will see the unregenerate members whom they have brought into God's house sink to hell under His strict judgment, and will wear in heaven a crown stripped of its jewels. (I strongly recommend Dr. Robert L. Dabney's comments on 1 Cor. 3:10-15; Discussions , Vol. 1, pp. 551ff.) Conclusion The effect of believing the truth set out in this study on the "Carnal Christian" theory ought to be the longing to see more true evangelism. The "Carnal Christian" teaching is, after all, the consequence of a shallow, man-centered evangelism in which decisions are sought at any price and with any methods. When those pronounced to be converts do not act like Christians, do not love what Christians love and hate what Christians hate, and do not willingly serve Christ in his church, some explanation must be found other than calling them carnal Christians and asking them to make yet another decision. They have already done that and have already been pronounced, by the preacher or personal worker, to be "Christians." But when they don't act like Christians something is wrong. What is it? The teaching I have sought to expose says that the trouble is that they are just carnal Christians; they have not made Christ "Lord" of their lives; they have not let Him occupy the throne of their hearts. Once this explanation is seen to be unscriptural it will also be seen to be closely connected with an initial error of evangelism itself. Too often modern evangelism has substituted a "decision" in the place of repentance and saving faith. Forgiveness is preached without the equally important truth that the Spirit of God must change the heart. As a result decisions are treated as conversions even though there is no evidence of a supernatural work of God in the life. Surely the best way to end this evil is to pray and labor for the restoration of New Testament evangelism! Whenever such evangelism exists it is certain that men will learn that it is not enough to profess to be a Christian, and not enough to call Jesus "Lord, Lord" (Luke 6:46). The gospel preached in awakening power will summon men not to rest without biblical evidence that they are born of God. It will disturb those who, without good reason, have believed that they are already Christians. It will arouse backsliders by telling them that as long as they remain in that condition the possibility exists that they never were genuine believers at all. And to understand this will bring new depths of compassion and urgency to the hearts of God's people in this fallen world. One of the greatest hindrances to the recovery of such preaching is the theory we have considered. To reject that theory is to be brought back to a new starting-point in evangelism and in the understanding of the Christian life. It is to bring God's work into the center of our thinking. It is to see afresh that there are only two alternatives--the natural life or the spiritual life, the broad way or the narrow way, the gospel "in word only" or the gospel "in power and in the Holy Ghost" (1 Thess. 1:5), the house on the sand or the house on the rock. There is no surer certainty than the fact that an unchanged heart and a worldly life will bring men to hell. "Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience" (Eph. 5:6). It is not only in the world today that evangelism is needed. It is needed in the church. In this series of studies we have been considering some of the theological differences between the non-lordship and the Lordship teaching on some very, very important Christian doctrines. There are some Christians who are a bit afraid of the word theology and there are others who simply do not like the word. It is not uncommon to hear remarks such as "don't talk theology to me, just tell me about Jesus." That may sound very pious but the truth is that when we teach who Jesus is and what He did and why He did it-His virgin birth, His sinless life, His vicarious death and His victorious resurrection-we are into the deepest kind of theology. Before we get into the study of man's nature it may be well to say a word about theology. The truth is, every Christian has a theology whether he knows it by that name or not. Theology is a compound of two words, basically meaning an account of, or discourse about, gods or God. The word denotes teaching about God and His relation to the world from creation to the consummation. The acid test for all theology was well expressed by Thomas Aquinas: "Theology is taught by God, teaches of God, and leads to God." Charles Hodge in speaking of the necessity of systematic theology said, It may naturally be asked, why not take the truths as God has seen fit to reveal them, and thus save ourselves the trouble of showing their relation and harmony? The answer to this question is, in the first place, that it cannot be done. Such is the constitution of the human mind that it cannot help endeavoring to systematize and reconcile the facts which it admits to be true. In no department of knowledge have men been satisfied with the possession of a mass of undigested facts. And the students of the Bible can as little be expected to be thus satisfied. There is a necessity, therefore, for the construction of systems of theology. Of this the history of the Church affords abundant proof. In all ages and among all denominations, such systems have been produced. It cost the Church centuries of study and controversy to solve the problem concerning the person of Christ; that is, to adjust and bring into harmonious arrangement all the facts which the Bible teaches on that subject. We have no choice in this matter. If we would discharge our duty as teachers and defenders of the truth, we must endeavor to bring all the facts of revelation into systematic order and mutual relationship. In this study we will consider another serious theological error related to the carnal Christian teaching of the non-lordship teachers, that is, the two nature theory, the "new man" and the "old man" teaching. What we shall see in this study in that the old man, new man teaching goes hand in hand with the two classes of Christians-carnal Christians and spiritual Christians. In this study I want to show that the Bible does not teach that when a person becomes a Christian he becomes two persons: the old man and the new man. The old nature as one person and the new nature as another person. What Changes in Regeneration? The non-lordship teaching is that in regeneration (the new birth) nothing in man's nature changes. They teach that the sinner's "standing" which is his legal relationship to God changes; however, his "state", that is, his condition on earth does not necessarily change at the time of regeneration or even after regeneration. The error of this teaching is not in the distinction between "standing" and "state" but rather, in the denial that there is a vital connection or relationship between our standing and our state, that is, between justification and sanctification. This erroneous dualism is evident in the non-lordship teaching of regeneration. The non-lordship teaching is that the "old" fallen nature remains untouched and unchanged. The Spirit regenerates and indwells the person (his body) but the Spirit does not indwell the old nature. The regenerate person is made a partaker of the divine nature but this divine nature is not his nature. The non-lordship teaching is that the "old" sinful nature and the "new" nature are poles apart in the same person at the same time. This is real schizophrenia-it is an absolute and antithetical split between the finite created, sinful, old nature and the divine uncreated, infinite, sinless, new divine nature. The bottom line is the person is not changed at all. This teaching produces an underlying dualism-these two natures never influence one another. They go their separate ways-the old nature will ultimately be destroyed and the new nature will live forever. This underlies the non-lordship teaching of two kinds of Christians-the "spiritual" and the "carnal." The spiritual Christian is one who, for some reason, is controlled by the indwelling divine nature; the carnal Christian is one controlled by the old nature. The two nature theory, like all theology, is interrelated with other theological points; therefore, this study builds on past studies in this series. The two nature theory is vitally related to regeneration (what happens when a sinner is regenerated), sanctification and justification. Justification underlies sanctification. The best way to understand non-lordship justification and sanctification is to understand their view of regeneration (see FJ 13 & 15). The non-lordship teaching is that a new nature is implanted in the soul. This results in two distinct natures in the Christian. Nothing actually happens to the old nature except that it has an entirely different new nature placed along side it-this is a real dualism. The Lordship teaching is that a new foundation for action, a new disposition, is implanted in the old ego, thus the Christian is still one person with two struggling principles, and the new principle is destined to conquer the old. This is quite different from the non-lordship teaching of two utterly distinct natures, that is, two selves. This view has profound implications on the doctrine of sanctification. The old nature continues as it was before regeneration throughout the earthly life only to be annihilated at death. One of the non-lordship teachers put it like this - "Flesh is flesh, nor can it ever be made aught else but flesh. The Holy Ghost did not come down on the day of Pentecost to improve nature or to do away with the fact of incurable evil . . . ." This means that the old nature is not changed. They teach that the new nature is actually the indwelling of the divine nature of God. This new nature really cannot be justified because it is the very nature of God Himself, and, therefore, could not possibly need to be justified. Lewis Sperry Chafer speaks for all the non-lordship teachers when he said "the experience of sanctification is absolutely unrelated to position in Christ" (Systematic Theology, vol. 7, pp. 279-284). It is obvious that Chafer does not believe that there is an inseparable relationship between justification and sanctification, that is just why many of the non-lordship teachers do not believe in progressive sanctification. The non-lordship teaching is: "Regeneration is not a change in the old nature, but is the introduction of a new. . . . Nor does the introduction of this new nature alter in the slightest degree the true, essential character of the old. The old nature continues to be what it was, and is made in no respect better; yea, rather, there is a full display of its evil character in opposition of the new element." Many, if not all, non-lordship teachers teach that progressive sanctification is false, and is not to be expected. The non-lordship teaching is that the evil nature is not at all weakened by grace, but, rather inflamed. The old nature is not changed at all. The old nature remains in all its distinctness, and the new nature is introduced in all its distinctness. The new nature has its own desires, its own habits, its own tendencies, its own affections. All of these are spiritual, heavenly, divine. All the aspirations of the new nature are upward. One antinomian teacher stated it very clearly, "Be warned that the old nature is unchanged. The hope of transforming the old nature into holiness is as vain as the dream of a philosopher's stone, which was to change the dross of earth into gold." This is just why I must emphasize and reemphasize, in this study, that the teaching of the non-lordship teachers is that the old nature is not changed in regeneration or at any time thereafter. There is not one text in the New Testament that teaches that regeneration is the implanting of a "new nature" beside the old, or, that the renewed man has two hostile natures. What he does have is two hostile principles in one nature. But I see another law in my members, warring against my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members (Gal. 5:17). For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish (Rom. 7:23). Here the great apostle teaches that the renewed man (one man and one nature still) is imperfect having two principles of volition mixed in the motives of the same acts. Paul does not teach in these passages, or any other, that the renewed man becomes "two men." The Lordship teaching is that there is one nature, originally wholly sinful and is by regeneration made imperfectly holy, but progressively so. I recommend on this point Thomas Boston's Human Nature in its Fourfold State (Banner of Truth). Boston divides human nature into four states: The State of Innocence, The State of Nature, The State of Grace and The Eternal State. Summary A quote from one of the non-lordship leaders will assist us in summarizing their teaching. "Regeneration is not a change of the old nature, but the introduction of a new. . . . Nor does the introduction of this new nature alter in the slightest degree the true, essential character of the old. This latter continues what it was, and is made in no respect better; yea, rather, there is a full display of its evil character in opposition of the new element." Speaking of the new birth this same non-lordship leader goes on to say: "It is a new birth, the imparting of a new life, the implantation of a new nature, the formation of a new man. The old nature remains in all its distinctness, and the new nature has its own desires, its own habits, its own tendencies, its own affection. All these are spiritual, heavenly, divine." He goes on with these dangerous words: "Be warned that the old nature is unchanged." This is to say that there are two men in the Christian. Robert L. Dabney tells the story of an emperor of Germany who bitterly rebuked a great episcopal feudatory for his violences, so inconsistent with his sacred character. The lord bishop answered that he represented two men in one, being both clergyman and baron, and that the military acts complained of were done in his secular character of a feudal baron. "Well, then," replied the emperor, "bethink thee how the clergyman will fare when the devil is roasting the baron for his rapine and murder." Paul teaches that the renewed man (one man and one nature still) is imperfect, having two principles of volition mixed in the motives even of the same acts; but he does not teach that he has become "two men," or has "two natures" in him. Paul's idea is, that man's one nature, originally wholly sinful, is by regeneration made imperfectly holy, but progressively so. Dr. Dabney makes the following comment on this passage. "Among the texts which seem to favor this dualistic view, none is claimed with more confidence than Eph. 4:22-24, which speaks of "putting off the old man," and "putting on the new man." We note this as a specimen of the manner in which Scripture is over strained, and an example of the way in which it may be cleared of these extravagances. One can hardly deny that, in this well known passage, it is the most natural interpretation to regard the putting off of the old as in order to putting on of the new; then the two are not coexistent, but successive. But more decisively; Who is the old man, and who is the new? The obvious parallel in I Cor. 15:22; 45-49, shows that the "old man" is Adam, and the "new man" is Christ. The statement which we have to expound, then, is substantially this: that believers have "put off" Adam in order to "put on" Christ. That is, they have severed their connection with the first federal head, in order to enter into a connection with the second federal head." John Newton, the great preacher and hymn writer, describes the inward warfare in a poem: The Inward Warfare Galatians 5:17 Strange and mysterious is my life, What opposites I feel within! A stable peace, a constant strife; The rule of grace, the power of sin: Too often I am captive led, Yet daily triumph in my Head. I prize the privilege of prayer, But oh! what backwardness to pray! Though on the Lord I cast my care, I feel its burden every day; I seek His will in all I do, Yet find my own is working too. I call the promises my own, And prize them more than mines of gold. Yet though their sweetness I have known, They leave me unimpressed and cold: One hour upon the truth I feed, The next I knew not what I read. I love the holy day of rest, When Jesus meets His gathered saints: Sweet day, of all the week the best! For its return my spirit pants; Yet often, through my unbelief It proves a day of guilt and grief. While on my Saviour I rely, I know my foes shall lose their aim, And therefore dare their power defy, Assured of conquest through His name; But soon my confidence is slain, And all my fears return again. Thus different powers within me strive, And grace and sin by turns prevail; I grieve, rejoice, decline, revive, And victory hangs in doubtful scale: But Jesus has His promise past, That grace shall overcome at last. Conclusion The foundational error behind the carnal Christian theory and the two nature theory of the non-lordship teaching is in their erroneous view of sanctification. They fail to teach progressive sanctification, in fact, they oppose the teaching of progressive sanctification. If the non-lordship teachers had more respect for what the Holy Spirit taught our Christian fathers they would not embrace and teach their views on the carnal Christian or the two natures. The following three paragraphs are taken from chapter 13 of both the Westminster Confession and the Old Baptist Confession of 1689. They who are united to Christ, effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart and a new spirit created in them through the virtue of Christ's death and resurrection, are also farther sanctified, really and personally, through the same virtue, by his Word and Spirit, dwelling in them; the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified, and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of all true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord. This sanctification is throughout, in the whole man, yet imperfect in this life; there abideth still some remnants of corruption in every part, whence ariseth a continual and irreconcilable war; the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. In which war, although the remaining corruption for a time may much prevail, yet, through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part doth overcome; and so the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God, pressing after an heavenly life, in evangelical obedience to all the commands which Christ, as Head and King, in his Word hath prescribed to them. If these three paragraphs are biblical and true the non-lordship teaching is out of business because the truths expressed in these paragraphs are a million miles from the non-lordship teaching. They do however, represent the Lordship view. The substance of the material in this study is from Dr. Robert L. Dabney's Discussions: Evangelical and Theological. Volume I, p.190ff. Published by Banner of Truth Trust, P.O. Box 621 Carlisle, PA 17013. I would also recommend Dr. John H. Gerstner's book Wrongly Dividing The Word of Truth A Critique of Dispensationalism, published by Wolgemuth & Hyatte, Publishers, Inc., Brentwood, TN. For a more exhaustive study on our subject I recommend John Owen, Vol. 6 Temptation and Sin, Mortification of Sin, Indwelling Sin in Believers. Banner of Truth 12:<=defvw  !"#$%-..000006>E?I?AABB1C3C~CCEESFVFkFmFFF+K.K9K̹0J5jU jU jCJOJQJUhmHnHjCJOJQJUCJOJQJjCJOJQJU0J6j6U0J j0JU5CJOJQJ CJOJQJ:<yP 4 Xt%<x %q"-#h%&($$$$$<yP 4 Xt%<x %q"-#h%&(()D+,-./00 1 11I1J1Y1zuql          ) .=nT\u E uRS>*(()D+,-./00 1 11I1J1Y1111%2&25222Ȅ $$K0 $$K$$$$Y1111%2&252222222222!3"303f3g3x33333334454@4^4_4V66T;¾|xsnjgd_|st          -  ;<  Z  kl              >  HI        '(  y#22222222!3"303f3g3x33333334454@4^4_4V66T;|$$ $$K$$T;>ACEFsJ9KMKN}NPST4VVdWWOXXYYXZxZ\\^$_``caa6bbccXdd¿~vnf  N    d         l 'o9F8 _K/K&~%T;>ACEFsJ9KMKN}NPST4VVdWWOXXYYXZxZ\\^$_`$$$9KGKLMMMKN}N_ZvZ\\^"_oo{|}STa{vwx̫ͫ'2PTs%' ff"+S|*+J/ CJOJQJ6 jUmH5CJOJQJ0JD``caa6bbccXddyeghJiWkkkl.mmoosp8tVucvVw$ $ & F@& $ & F$dyeghJiWkkkl.mmoosp8tVucvVwxU{|}J~_R~ă߅ڇJ¿wog_  )    }  $H          zI*4vf        P  R  #VwxU{|}J~_R~ă߅ڇJF1j0{$ & F $ & F@& $F1j0{}SU>5)a{vx̫Ϋ'2,&P|yvsp p (3f  j|WKB  Jv`FW~  +{}SU>5)a{vx̫Ϋ'2,&$$&PyTs+ae2>r" {f"+$$$PyTs+ae2>r" {f"+uV&0jv¿{tmkk         ( /+i1T</. NGR2") '*uV&0jv./ $ & F@& $$$./+0P/ =!"#$%DyK  F cover.html e_reisingerD  Kppq*Xq*@&q *<r *OWr  *@>r  *!s  * Vs@ *@#s *' t * Ut * t*@D t* [,@,Normal OJQJmH <A@<Default Paragraph Font<o<H2$dd@&5CJ$OJQJhnH <o<H3$dd@&5CJOJQJhnH LoL BlockquotehhddCJOJQJhnH $X`!$Emphasis6(U`1( Hyperlink>*B* W`A Strong5*B`R* Body Text$.P`b. Body Text 2$/9K/(2T;`Vw{&/   Y1T;dP/  <ev!#/XCl,2$0t(Q}DmZ@b(  X  3 (carnal.gifTB  c $Vd~?TB  c $Vd~?TB  c $Vd~?TB  c $Vd~?B S  ?"{Sv̧/4$t$t$t$t AutoZonerXC:\My Documents\reisinger\The Lordship Controversy and The Carnal Christian Teaching.doc*..p.@ .......p.@ .....5(6l6x6 @h OJQJo(@U/`@G:Times New Roman5Symbol3& :Arial7& Verdana"1h&W,W0$Ji$0V;The Lordship Controversy and The Carnal Christian Teaching AutoZoner AutoZoner Oh+'0$ 8D ` l x<The Lordship Controversy and The Carnal Christian Teaching he  AutoZoneriputoutoNormale AutoZonerip1toMicrosoft Word 8.0v@Ik@l11!@"0$J ՜.+,D՜.+,t0 hp  AutoZone Inc.iV1 <The Lordship Controversy and The Carnal Christian Teaching Title (RZ _PID_GUID _PID_HLINKSAN{2753EA2C-7CEA-11D5-9523-00B0D0425864}Ad~ cover.html e_reisinger  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~     !"#$%&')*+,-./4Root EntryG F" L"6Data[H8[HZHXG  01TableFT`H:G G`F``WordDocument:# -SummaryInformationZHF(G$FF::`FG DocumentSummaryInformation8̷F[H8[HZH(CompObjF 0jObjectPool<@GF`` L" L"  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q