A Christian More than a Conqueror and Yet in This Life Still a Beggar 3 (finish)

The error that a real Christian can be a carnal Christian

Quite often - though not always – connected with the teaching of victorious living is the view that it is possible to be a real born-again Christian and still be a carnal Christian. On the one hand “Victorious living” exagge-rates what can be achieved in the life of sanctification here on earth due to its superficial view on sin.
On the other side – and that is connected with the same superficial view of sin – it is defended that you can be a true Christian without living a godly and holy life. Here you see the theory of the so-called carnal Christian. A carnal Christian is a Christian who has received by faith Christ’s forgiveness but is not a disciple of Christ yet.
The theory of the carnal Christian is a complete mis-understanding of 1 Corinthians 3. In 1 Corinthians 3:1-2 Paul states: ‘And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.’
The problem with the people in Corinth was that they thought they were very spiritual. The result, among others was a party spirit. They were adherents of what you can call a form of “Victorious living”. That is preci-sely the reason that Paul makes clear to them that they are carnal. A truly spiritual Christian realizes his own weaknesses and only glories in the cross of Christ.
Jesus said in the sermon on the mount: ‘Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven’ (Matthew 7:21). At the one side we must say the a true believer only can glory in the cross of Christ and not in what he did, does or hopes to do for Christ. At the other side the mark of a true believer is that he bears fruit.
It is not possible to be a believer in Christ and not a disciple or follower of Christ. In the New Testament the mark of a nominal Christian is that he professes faith in Christ without following him. Although paying lip service to Christ as Saviour he disobeys the command of Christ: ‘If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.’ (Matthew 16:24-25).
It is true that a real believer can decay in grace. But when a person defends his decay in grace with the theory of the carnal Christian, we must be afraid that he has no grace at all. One of the primary characteristics of the Christian faith, if it is a living faith, is that it is accom-panied by a heartfelt repentance. Repentance without faith is nothing more than legalism and faith without repentance is nothing more than presumption.
We can say that according to the defenders of the victorious in the first stage of Christian life there is faith without repentance or justification without sanctification and in the second stage newness of life and sancti-fication without faith in the forgiveness of sins and justification. But here on earth justification and sancti-fication, faith and newness of life always accompany each other.
I add now another observation. More than once I have noticed that adherents of victorious living who present themselves as believers that live a life of completely victory over all known sin, lack even quite fundamental elements of practical godliness. They see no signi-ficance in sanctifying the Lord’s Day. They watch all kind of dvd’s.
Mentioning this last thing I call to your attention that in the Early Church a Christian was expected not to visit the theatre any longer because every kind of stage performance was considered irreconcilable with the professing of being a believer. That living Christianity is also expressed in the way you dress yourselves seems not to come into the minds of most of the adherents of victorious living.
So only be neglecting the law the claim can be made that it is possible a life of completely victory. When we follow the path of Reformers and Puritans we always will complain in this about ourselves (not about the Lord!) but at the same time live a life of practical holiness; a holiness that far surpasses the so called holiness of victorious believers.
O that this may be true in our lives and that we living a holy live remain humble. For the greatest mark of holiness is humbleness. And even to know that you are humble is a danger. For the moment you begin to realise you humbleness you already have become proud.
 

The teaching of Romans 6

Paul the apostle who so clearly taught that we are saved by grace alone, at the same time made it clear that anyone united by faith to Christ is a new creature or new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). A born again Chris-tian is fundamentally different, and not only in degree, from a person who is not born again. A Christian is a man who is no longer who he once was. A very important chapter in Paul’s letters, in this connection, is Romans 6.
In Romans 5 Paul has argued that we are righteous in the sight of God without any works. We are justified or accounted righteous in the sight of God by faith and faith alone. May we then draw from this the conclusion that we can continue in sin that grace may abound? The apostle rejects this conclusion vehemently. ‘By no means’ he says. This is a typical expression of Paul.
In Romans 3:8 the apostle already condemned this view: ‘Let us do evil that good may come?”—as some people slanderously charge us with saying - whose damnation is just.” When we are saved from sin and when our sins are freely forgiven we have also died to sin. It is impossible to receive grace and not have the desire to honour and glorify God. A Christian has died to sin and therefore he cannot live in sin. True faith that Christ died for you is always connected to being crucified with Christ.
In order to make plain that it is impossible to live in sin when one has died to sin the apostle points in Romans 6:3 to the ordinance of baptism; the ordinance that seals our incorporation into Christ and into his church. When we are baptized we are baptized in the death of Christ.
Baptism is not only a seal of forgiveness of sin, but also of the renewal of life. When we are incorporated into Christ we are a new creation. Our old man is symbolically buried with Christ in baptism. Christ is resurrected from the dead.
Therefore, they who belong to Christ and have died in Christ, walk in newness of life. In Romans 6:5 he makes it clear that when we walk here on earth in newness of life we will at once, when Christ comes back, be resurrected with him. Just as we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection. (Romans 6:5). The one cannot be without the other.
It is impossible to have been planted together in the likeness of Christ’s death and not to have a share in his glory. But the reverse is also true. When we have not been planted together in the likeness of Christ’s death it is impossible to have a share in his glory. Holiness is essential for the Christian life.
In Romans 6:6-10 Paul writes that our old man, our sinful self, has been crucified with Christ in order that the body of sin should be destroyed. The foundation of the crucifixion of the old man was laid on Calvary.
In a certain sense we can say that all who belong to Christ were crucified there. But at the same time we must say that the work of Christ only becomes a personal reality for us when we are called from darkness to light. When the love of God is poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit we are actually delivered from the bondage of sin.
We are no longer what we were until that moment. From now on not sin but Christ is our Master. We want to serve him. Having died with Christ and serving him, we may be sure that on the last day we will be resurrected with him in glory. Christ has already been resurrected from the dead. Death has no more dominion over him. As the representative of all who belong to him, he has conquered death and now lives unto God.
In verse 11 the emphasis shifts from the indicative (what God has done) to the imperative (what God commands). The apostle reminds the Romans of the great things done in their lives. The fact that they have died with Christ must characterize their lives.
The fact that sin is not the master of Christians anymore does not mean that sin is no longer a present reality in their lives. As long as we live we must fight against the presence of sin in our lives. Here on earth there will never come a moment that we can stop with this fight and struggle. We must present the members of our body as instruments for righteousness.
Although sin is a present reality in the life of believers while they live, they ought not obey sin. Sin ought not to be obeyed as a master. We must realise that the law cannot give power to fight against sin but that grace is our master. Grace gives us strength to obey God’s commands; a strength the law itself can never give us since the fall of man.
When I summarize the teaching of Romans 6, I must say that a Christian is a person who belongs to Christ. He has died with Christ who died for him and that is the reason that he cannot live in sin. Christ is his master. He wants to obey him and so he fights against sin as a present reality in his life. He knows that this present reality is not a lawful reality, but that by abiding in Christ he wants to bear fruit for him.
 

The error that a Christian can be free from temptations about his own imperfections

The teach of “Victorious living” is wrong in its sug-gestion that it is possible to be a living Christian and not lead a holy life. A person who does not want to lead a holy life is on the broad road to hell. “Victorious living” is also wrong in its view that when you still complain about your sin it is a sign that your faith is weak and imperfect. But that is not true. Look at the Psalms.
I will just quote a few of them. ‘If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?’ (Psalm 130:3). ‘And enter not into judgment with thy servant: for in thy sight shall no man living be justified.’ (Psalm 143:2). Psalm 119:16 "I have gone astray like a lost sheep; seek thy servant; for I do not forget thy commandments." (Psalm 119:176).
The New Testament believer knows of the coming of Christ in the flesh but just as the Old Testament believer he lives a life of faith and of hope. He is still in the flesh. So the complaints of the Psalmist are also his complaints. And finally Psalm 19:12 ‘Who can discern his errors? Forgive my hidden faults’ (Psalm 19:12). There are faults that are hidden from others. But there are also faults we do not realise ourselves. By growing in grace we see faults that were once hidden from us. For example selfishness in our most holy acts and desires.
A famous argument from the side of the defenders of “Victorious living” is that this applies to the Old Testament. But that argument is totally invalid. When we are filled with the Holy Spirit we are ‘speaking to ourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in our heart to the Lord; Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ’ (Ephesians 5:19-20).
It is not impossible and even quite likely that psalms and hymns and spiritual songs are three terms to characterize the Old Testament Psalms. In the Hebrew Bible the book of Psalms is called the book of hymns and the Psalms are the songs given by the Holy Spirit. In any case it is sure that the New Testament believer, although knowing of the coming of Christ in the flesh and his sitting at the right hand of God, like the Old Testament believer, lives a life of faith and of hope. He is still in the flesh. So the complaints of the Psalmist are also his complaints. We must emphasise the spiritual unity between the Old Testament and New Testament.
 

How do we understand Romans 7:14-25?

In this connection we return to Paul’s letter to the Romans and now the second half of Romans 7 versus 14-26, which is a very fundamental passage. Mis-understanding the teaching revealed in this passage leads to a serious misunderstanding of the nature of the Christian faith.
The question is, does Paul speak here as a believer or as unbeliever? And when we are sure that Paul speaks here as a believer, does he then speak as an inexperienced believer or a mature believer? Is this the language of a believer decaying in grace or of a believer full of the Holy Spirit?
Augustine, the greatest church father, as a young believer thought that Paul was speaking as an unbeliever in Romans 7. He thought that the struggle described by Paul was the struggle between the conscience that advises us to live a civil life, and the flesh that tells us that we can follow our passions. But Augustine more and more began to realise that Paul speaks here about his struggle as a believer.
That is the only way to explain the present tense he uses here. Look again at answer 60 of the Heidelberg Catechism: ‘my conscience accuses me, that I have grossly transgressed against all the commandments of God, and kept none of them, and am still inclined to all evil.’
When Paul speaks of the fact that he is carnal, sold, under sin, he means that he has to struggle with all kinds of fleshly desires. Even our most holy works are stained with sin; in glorifying God we seek also our own glory, our own name. At least there is a desire to do that. It can be that a young and inexperienced believer does not realize this, but when we grow in knowledge of the spiritual nature of the law and in self knowledge we begin to understand these things.
Paul speaks in the second half of Romans 7 as a believer and not as a believer decaying in grace as is clear from Romans 7:22. An unbeliever can never say, what Paul said there: ‘For I delight in the law of God after the inward man.’ The natural man can try to fulfill the law as the rich young ruler did. (Luke 18:18v), but a genuine delight in the law of God is a fruit of the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. See Psalm 1 and 119. And even more clear is the fact that only a believer can say: ‘I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.’ (Romans 7:25).
How can a believer say that he is carnal, sold under sin? In Romans 7:15 Paul gives the answer. As a believer he has a deep desire to live according to God’s law, but he sees and feels that he does things which he does not allow. In fact he cannot understand what he does. His actions are frequently in contradiction with his deepest desires as a believer. More than once he does what he hates. He does not condemn the law, but he condemns himself. So he says in Romans 7:16: ‘If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.’
In Romans 7:17 Paul makes a distinction between his own person and the sin that lives in him. As a born again believer Paul’s deepest desire is to glorify God, but Paul feels and sees that although he is born again sin, still lives in him. That gives him heartfelt sorrow.
As a born again believer he is daily confronted with an inward struggle: the struggle between his own sinful flesh and the Holy Spirit who has regenerated him. Romans 7:14-25 is in fact an elaboration of what Paul wrote to the Galatians in chapter 5:17: ‘For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.’
The struggle between the Holy Spirit who renews us and our own sinful flesh is characteristic of a the life of the believer here on earth. It is not only the portion of a beginning believer or a believer decaying in grace. This latter view has been defended more than once. According to this position the sorrow and struggle described in Romans 7:14v. is the struggle of the believer only when he does not live the life of faith and does not in faith look unto Jesus.
But what must we do then with the statements in Romans 7:22 and 25? ‘For I delight in the law of God after the inward man’ (Romans 7:22). ‘I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind, I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.’ (Romans 7:25). This is not the language of a believer decaying in grace.
 

Romans 7:14-5 and the structure of Paul’s message

Romans 7:14-25 understood as the struggle of a believer, and I emphasize the believer who really lives the life of faith, is in accordance with the structure of the whole message of Paul. That structure we can describe with the words ‘already’ and ‘not yet’. A believer is united to Christ. He is buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so he also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:4).
A believer is risen with Christ and therefore seeks those things which are above, where Christ sits on the right hand of God. (Colossians 3:1). At the same time the believer must fight against not only the world and the devil, but also against his own sinful desires. He must mortify his members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry. (Colossians 3:5). As long as we are on earth, until Christ returns we have to fight the fight of faith and that fight includes a battle against one own sinful self.
Again, when we are born again, we receive a new nature, but our former sinful nature is not completely eradicated. Upon regeneration, our sinful nature receives a deadly blow, but it will only exhale its last breath when we die. Then we are finally delivered from our body of sin.
 

The connection between Romans 7 and 8

There is a deep connection between the teaching of Paul in Romans 7 and Romans 8. In Romans 8 we find the same struggle as in Romans 7. In Romans 8:23 Paul says: ‘And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.’ It is a sign of the first-fruits of the Spirit that we groan in ourselves.
But what about the view that the struggle of Romans 7:14-25 is the struggle of an inexperienced and immature believer? The defenders of “Victorious living” see a great difference between Romans 7 and Romans 8. According to this view in Romans 7:14-25 we hear the inexperienced believer crying: ‘O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?’ (Romans 7:24).
In Romans 8 we have the language of faith that does not know of this struggle: ‘There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.’ (Romans 8:1). I already pointed out that Romans 8 also speaks about the struggle of the believer and conversely in Romans 7 the triumph of the believer is stated: ‘I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.’ (Romans 7:25).
In Romans 7 Paul speaks about the struggle of the believer from the viewpoint of the law and in Romans 8 from the viewpoint of the Holy Spirit and the first-fruits of the Spirit. It is true that a believer has been delivered from the curse of the law. He is not under the dominion of the law but under the dominion of grace (Romans 6:14).
Although a believer is delivered from the law as a way of life, the law remains for him a standard of his conduct. Christ came not to destroy but to fulfil the law. The standard of the gospel is not in contradiction to the standard of the law. A Christian knows the law as the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2). In 1 Corinthians 9:21 Paul states: ‘To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.’
Confronted with what God does demand of him, a Christian must acknowledge that he has only a small beginning of what God actually wants to see in him. That explains the struggle and sorrow formulated in both Romans 7 and Romans 8. That is also one of the main reasons that a Christian longs for the second coming of Christ. Then and only then he will be delivered of the body of death.
 

Complaint and joy connected together

In this life a heartfelt sorrow over sin and a heartfelt joy in God through Christ (Heidelberg Catechism questions and answers 89 and 90) are the essential components of the life of repentance that starts when we are united to Christ in our effectual calling. “Victorious living” in most cases creates superficial Christians glorying in what they themselves have attained.
In some cases it makes men depressed, when you realise that although you have close fellowship with God you are still a sinner, even in your most holy acts and desires. O, what is the biblical message then comforting and liberating!
I again quote the Heidelberg Catechism and now in what it says about the forgiveness of sins. In answer 56 we read: That God, for the sake of Christ's satisfaction will no more remember my sins, neither my corrupt nature, against which I have to struggle all my life long; but will graciously impute to me the righteousness of Christ, that I may never be condemned before the tribunal of God.
On his deathbed Kohlbrugge said to some young people who came to him to say farewell before he died: ‘My children hold fast to the plain teaching of the Heidelberg Catechism.’ I give everyone of you the same advice.
 

A Christian More than a Conqueror and Yet in This Life Still a Beggar 2

The remaining consolation of justification

Calvin said that a Christian is not in a different way right with God on his deathbed after a life in the service of God, than the hour he first believed. In the writings of Calvin you do not find that smell of activism and triumphalism we see in the writings of some of his followers. 

Although stressing that the Word of God has significance for all the domains of our life, Calvin emphasised that the Christian is in the first place a pilgrim and that his most important duty is to meditate on the life to come. Meditating on the life to come also means for Calvin meditating on the work of Christ as the only ground of our justification. 

In this context I call also your attention to what the Heidelberg Cate-chism teaches with regard to justification. Question 60 of the Heidelberg Catechism is stated in the following way: ‘How are you righteous before God?’ the important thing is the present tense.

The question is not: ‘How did you become righteous before God?’ No, for sake of clarity we could add: ‘How are you now righteous before God?’ Then the most exercised and sanctified Christian must give the same answer as a weak, beginning believer. There is not any difference. 

That answer is: ‘Only by a true faith in Jesus Christ: so that though my conscience accuse me, that I have grossly transgressed all the commandments of God, and kept none of them, and am still inclined to all evil; notwithstanding God, without any merit of mine, but only of mere grace, grants and imputes to me the perfect satisfaction, righteousness and holiness of Christ, even so, as if I had never committed any sins, yea as if I had fully accomplished all that obedience which Christ has accomplished for me; inasmuch as I embrace such benefit with a believing heart.’ Again, note that in both the question and answer the present tense is used. 
Until the end of his life the Christian, however much he may be assured of his interest in Christ, still remains a beggar. How deeply Luther realised this. His last written words - written four days before his death – were: ‘We are nothing but beggars. That is true’ (Wir sind nur Betler. Hoc est verum). 

The original title of the most famous hymn of August Montague Toplady (1740-1778) Rock of Ages was: ‘A Living and Dying Prayer of the Holiest Believer in the World’. And what is his prayer? Well let us hear:                                                    

Rock of Ages, cleft for me

Let me hide myself in thee;

Let the water and the blood,

From thy riven side which flowed,

Be of sin the double cure,

Cleanse me from its guilt and power.

Nothing in my hand I bring;

Simply to thy cross I cling;

Naked, come to thee for dress;

Helpless, look to thee for grace;

Foul, I to the fountain fly;

Wash me, Saviour, or I die.

The deviation of the “Victorious living” teachings

I now come to victorious living as a serious devia-tion of the biblical and reformed doctrine of justification by faith alone. Victorious living also known as Keswick teaching (after the village Keswick in the Lake district in England where since the second half of the nineteenth century conferences of victorious living or higher life were organised) is a form of perfectionism; a form of teaching that states that it is possible to become so completely perfect in this life that there is no place left for the complaint about your imper-fections. The South African, Andrew Murray, is one of its most famous representatives. 

According the victorious living teaching true believers must be divided into two classes: the believers who are still beggar and the believers who are conquerors. To reach the last stage it is necessary to live a live of complete surrender. This life is seen as a fruit as the baptism of the holy Spirit. A baptism that is seen as a second blessing that chronologically separated from regenerating. 

In regeneration according to this view we come a believer, but only after being baptised with the Holy Spirit we became a victorious believer. It is not difficult to notice that the holiness movement or movement of victorious living was one of the roots of Pente-costalism and other types of charismatic teaching.

Victorious living differs from Wesleyan perfectionism. Wesleyan perfectionism states that you can completely eradicate your sinful nature in this life. Victorious living states that this is not possible. Although it is not possible to completely eradicate your sinful nature, adherents of victorious living teach that when you live a life of complete surrender, your sinful self is no longer active. It cannot develop itself. I must agree there is a measure of truth in this statement. 

When a Christian lives a life in close fellowship with God, the Lord will preserve you in this way from sinful deeds, words and thoughts. But even then we cannot say that we are completely perfect in sanctification and do not have reasons to complain. Even when our sinful nature is totally inactive – although I think that this is never the case- we still possess a sinful nature and in the light of our being originally created perfect in the image of God, we ought not to have even one sin. 

So just the fact that you have a sinful nature is a reason to complain and confess with the psalmist: ‘If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?’ (Psalm 130:2-3). That is also the glory in God’s way of salvation: But there is forgive-ness with thee, that thou mayest be feared." (Psalm 130:4) 
We have a sinful nature, and when can we say that it is not active? Well say the adherents of victorious living: ‘When sinful thoughts arise in us against our will and we immediately resist them.’ That view is shared by the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic believes that original sin is completely washed away in baptism and that what remains is only the remnants of sin. 

The Church of the Reformation denies that original sin is completely taken away in baptism, meaning baptism received by a living faith. Even thoughts that arise in us against our own will are sin. The view that we can be perfect in sanctification is always connected with a superficial view of sin. Sin is then restricted to sinful acts or only to sinful thoughts we do not resist, but every act, word or thought not according to God’s will is sin. 

The highest phase we can arrive at in the life of sanctification is the deepest awareness of our remaining sinfulness. For the most important thing in sanctification is to be humble, and in this connection even knowing that you are humble is dangerous. For the moment you think that you are humble, my friend, you are in fact becoming proud. 

Adherents of victorious living say that the Refor-mers and the Puritans concentrated too much on justification and did not appreciate what can be realised by the help of God in the life of sanctification. They make a distinction between two types of true believers. The believer that leads the life of a beggar and the believer, that has by an act of faith, completely surrendered himself to Christ and now lives from moment to moment in depen-dence on Christ and for that reason no longer needs to complain about his sinful nature. 

The adherents of “Victorious living” argue that incipient anti-nomianism is inherent to the reformed message of justification; an accusation also made by the Roman Catholic Church. We reply that it is an unjust accusation. Complaint about one’s sinful self accompanied with a continual struggle against sin belongs to a healthy spiritual life. I now wish to highlight the second part of answer 114 of the Heidelberg Catechism ‘yet so, that with a sincere resolution they begin to live, not only according to some, but all the commandments of God.’

The Anglican bishop Ryle wrote his classic book called Holiness as an answer and refutation of the Keswick teaching. A believer has a deep desire to be holy and still feels himself a sinner and that is the reason he remains a beggar. He feels that even his most holy acts are stained with sin. That is the reason that Paul wrote in Philippians 3:13: ‘Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehen-ded: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before.’ 

What Paul did not want to forget was that he was once an enemy of Christ and persecutor of the saints. But in approaching God he did want to forget all that he did and had done in the service of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. Paul knew that he laboured more abundantly than the other apostles (2 Corinthians 11:23). He had received marvellous revelations.

‘I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.’ (2 Corinthians 12:2-4).

These were the things that Paul wanted to forget. He did not glory in what he did for Christ and had received from Christ but only in the cross of Christ. See Gal. 6:14: ‘But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.’ The Lord had said to Paul: ‘My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness’ (2 Corinthians 12:9). 

Accusing Reformers and Puritans of incipient anti-nomianism the adherent of victorious living think that teaching the possibility of life of known victory over all known sins is the real antidote for that. But in fact this teaching is in a certain sense antinomian. It does not take really serious the spiritual nature and spiritual all compassing claims of God’s law. Even unknown sins and our sinful nature also when it is not active is sin. 

The most holy saint still stands in himself as a condemned ungodly before a righteous God. The adherent of victorious living teaching do not only restrict the spiritual significance of justification to the beginning or to what they call the first stage of the Christian living they also have their misgivings about some element the Reformed doctrine of justification as such.

Against the Church of Rome that confuses justification and sanc-tification and states that justification means that we are actually made just by the power of the Holy Spirit given to us in the sacraments, the Reformers taught that we are only just on account of the perfect righteousness and holiness of Christ that is imputed to us. What Christ did once and for all is imputed to us. 

In answer 60 of the Heidelberg Catechism the believer confesses that the Father ‘grants and imputes to me the perfect satisfaction, righteousness and holiness of Christ, as if I had never committed nor had any sins, and had myself accomplished all the obedience which Christ has fulfilled for me.’ 

Classical Reformed theology in this connection the distinction was made between the passive and active obedience of Christ. The passive obedience of Christ means that he paid for the guilt of all his own by suffering an dying for them. So he paid their debts.

The active obedience of Christ means that Christ being on earth fulfilled the law for all his people. By becoming man and dying at the cross he fulfilled for them to claims of God’s holy law from the beginnings of their existence in the womb to their last breath. 

The adherents of victorious living explicitly reject this last element of the imputation of the righteous-ness of Christ. For in their view a believer really filled with the Holy Spirit, does completely obey the law and does not need until the end of his life the imputation of the active obedience of Christ. But the righteousness of him that is justified by faith is never even not in the smallest part an inherent but always an imputed righteousness. Otherwise we could never meet the Lord. Because of it rich content I quote in full a hymn written by E. Mote (1797-1874):

My hope is built on nothing less

Than Jesus’ blood and righteousness;

I dare not trust the sweetest frame,

But wholly lean on Jesus’ name.

  

When darkness veils his lovely face,

I rest on his unchanging grace;

In every rough and stormy gale,

My anchor holds within the veil.

His oath, his covenant, and his blood,

Support me in the whelming flood,

When all around my soul gives way,

He then is all my hope and stay.

I trust his righteous character,

His counsel, promise, and his power.

His honour and his name’s at stake,

To save me from the burning lake.

When I shall launch in worlds unseen,

O may I then be found in him,

Dressed in his righteousness alone,
Faultless to stand before the throne.

A Christian More than a Conqueror and Yet in This Life Still a Beggar 1

The distinction between justification and sanctification

The great discovery, or we can better say rediscovery, of the Reformation was the message of justification by faith alone. Clearer than even the church father St. Augustine to whom the Reformers owed so much, they taught that not our own works, even not the works done in the power of the Holy Spirit, have any place in our justification before God. The only ground of the justification of the believer is the imputed righteousness of Christ.

Clearer than was done in the centuries before them, the Reformers distinguished (without separating them) the doctrines of justification and sanctification. Justification and sancti­fi­cation must not be confused. Justification is not a medical process by which the sinner is gradually healed as Augustine taught, but justification is the verdict that although a sinner, yea ungodly in himself, the believer is completely righteous in the sight of God.

In justification there are no degrees. The weakest believer is as much righteous in the sight of God as Abraham, the apostle Paul, Luther, Calvin, Bunyan or whatever saint you name. Let me give you a quotation of that good Protestant bishop J.C. Ryle: ‘I hold firmly that the justifi­cation of a believer is a finished, perfect and complete work; and the weakest saint though he may not know and feel it, is as completely justified as the strongest (…) I would go to the stake, God helping me, for the glorious truth, that in the matter of justification before God every believer is complete in Christ. Nothing can be added to his justification from the moment he believes and nothing taken away.’

Justification must be distinguished from sanctification. Justification brings us in the sphere of jurisprudence or law. Although in ourselves completely guilty, the Father pronounces us not guilty and graciously grants the right of eternal life on account of the merits of Christ. From the Father’s viewpoint we performed what Christ did for us, and in our place when the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us.

Justification is perfect. There are no degrees in justification, but there certainly are in sanctification. Sanctification means that we belong to Christ and live for Him. We can say that a Christian completely belongs to Christ. In that sense sanctification is no less perfect and definite than justification, but practically speaking we only live very imperfectly to the glory of God. Even our best and most godly works are stained with sin.

So in practical sanctification there are degrees. See the parable of the sewer. ‘But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.’ (Matthew 13:8), It is a fact then that the one Christian is more conformed to the image of Christ than another.

But even the believer who is as much conformed to Christ as is possible in this life, still remains a sinner. It is so aptly stated in answer 114 of the Heidelberg Catechism that ‘even the holiest men, while in this life, have only a small beginning of this obedience, yet so that with a sincere resolution they begin to live, not only according to some, but all the commandments of God.’ Both elements of the answer are important. I shall now expand on the first part.

A Christian realizes again and again that his walk is imperfect, yea very imperfect. Therefore the ultimate consolation of the Christian is not what he has done, does and hopes to do for Christ but what Christ did once and for all for him and in his place. The great puritan John Owen wrote two days before his death to his friend Charles Fleetwood: ‘I am going to Him whom my soul hath loved, or rather who hath loved me with an everlasting love; which is the whole ground of all my consolation.’ We hear in this sentence the words of the apostle Paul in Gal. 2:20: ‘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.’

When a Christian is in soul anguish seeing all the imperfections of his faith and of his living for God, he can still be triumphant. For he can say with Paul: ‘What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.’ (Romans 8:31-34)

 

The essence of the biblical and reformed message is that a Christian in this life is both a saint and a sinner

The essence of biblical and Reformed teaching is that a Christian is both a sinner and a saint; in Latin ‘simul justus ac peccator’ (an expression that Luther was fond to use). The imputation of the righteousness of Christ is a definite and all decisive fact. We are either completely just in the sight of God or completely unjust. Only those are just in the sight of God, who believe in Christ for life and salvation.

When we behave as the rich young ruler and have never come as a poor beggar to Christ, we are as much in a state of condemnation as anyone who lives a complete immoral life. By nature the whole world is in a state of condemnation. See Romans 3:19: ‘Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.’

In the light of eternity there are only two states: the state of justification and condemnation. Being once justified it is impossible to fall from the state of justification. Justification by faith alone and the final perseverance of the saints are closely connected.

See Canons of Dort, V, 6: ‘But God, who is rich in mercy, according to His unchangeable purpose of election, does not wholly withdraw the Holy Spirit from His own people even in their grievous falls; nor suffers them to proceed so far as to lose the grace of adoption and forfeit the state of justification, or to commit the sin unto death or against the Holy Spirit; nor does He permit them to be totally deserted, and to plunge themselves into everlasting destruction.’

I again quote Romans 8. Having said that Christ died for us and intercedes for us, Paul finally says: ‘Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. 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.’ (Romans 8:35-39)

Although justification is a one-time definite act, the power and consolation of the message of justification accompanies the Christian his whole life. When I come to speak on the teaching of “Victorious living” we will see that this aspect is neglected and even denied in this form of teaching. We must say that even certain forms of Post Reformation reformed teaching did not emphasize this element enough. There are forms of Calvinism in which we can detect an unhealthy form of triumphalism without denying that we are saved by grace alone with the only ground of our justification being the imputed righteousness of Christ. But, in practice the relevance of justification is more or less restricted to the beginning of the Christian life. All emphasis is put on what we must do for Christ. In practice, the bond between justification and sanctification is made too loose.

In the nineteenth century there was published a correspondence between dr. H.F. Kohlbrugge and mr. I. da Costa. Da Costa, a Christian Jew, accused Kohlbrugge of antinomian tendencies after Kohlbrugge preached he so called comma sermon in 1833 in the German town Elberfeld. This was the most famous sermon Kohlbrugge ever preached. The text of this sermon was Romans 7:l4: ‘For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.’ Preparing this sermon Kohlbrugge realized the function of the comma in our translation. Paul did not say. So far as I am fleshly I am sold under sin. No Paul said, I a believer, in myself am in all aspects of my life carnal, sold under sin. And it was this element that was stressed in the so called comma sermon.

Da Costa wrote Kohlbrugge that after having spoken about man’s sinfulness and the redemption through the blood of Christ he again went back to speaking about man’s sinfulness instead of emphasizing the life of thankfulness the Christian ought to live. Kohlbrugge replied in a somewhat bitter way, but we must say that the content of what he stated was write, namely that in the life of thankfulness we realise more and more our remaining sinfulness.

We find this clearly stated in answer 115 of the Heidelberg Catechism where we read that hat as long as we live we have to learn more and more to know our sinful nature, and so the more earnestly seek forgiveness of sins and righteousness in Christ; second, that without ceasing we diligently ask God for the grace of the Holy Spirit, that we be renewed more and more after the image of God, until we attain the goal of perfection after this life. Kohlbrugge could not agree with Da Costa that the life of thankfulness could but for one moment separated from the realisation of our remaining sinfulness and of the blood of Christ as our only resting place.

Much more than in the writings of Da Costa we find an unhealthy triumphalism and activism in neocalvinism. It is certainly not a matter of coincidence that Kuyper who visited in 1874 in Brighton in England a conference of the holiness movement or movement of victorious living was deeply impressed. It is true: doctrinally Kuyper finally did not go along with this movement, but just as in this movement in neocalvinism the emphasis is laid on what a Christian does for Christ and not what Christ did for whom on Calvary and on what Christ sitting at the right hand sight of God still does for him.

Although doctrinally not agreeing with the doctrines of the movement of victorious living we are in practice not for removed from it when we take for granted that everyone in the congregation is saved unless he lives an disorderly life. Although faith is still acknowledge to be a gift of God, all emphasise fall on the fact that we have to show in our works that we are believers. When taken more or less for granted that everyone who comes to church and has confessed his faith is a true believer, the only thing that remains to be said is that you have to behave as Christian and so the gospel becomes a new law.

Neither the preaching of the law - not as rule of thankfulness but as a taskmaster to Christ to make us aware of our sin and misery - nor the element of self examination is given the place is ought to have in preaching when there such an attitude as I described. Although everyone who hears the Word must be called to repent and believe, we must never forget that the consolation of the gospel only belongs to sinners who again and again flee to Christ with the prayer: ‘have mercy upon me’. Isolating the life of thankfulness from the awareness of our remaining sinfulness and of the need we always have of the blood of Christ leads to legalism and transforms the gospel into a new law. A law that Christian full of self righteousness think they can fulfil, but also a law that depresses to true believer who can only be comforted with the gospel message: ‘Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world’ (John 1:29)

Let me recommend to you, in this context, the works of Kohlbrugge, the theologian I already mentioned. It is a pity that English translations of his work are rare and can be found only with great difficulty. You will find them in certain libraries. I can also recommend the works of Luther and especially his commentary on the Galatians. Luther is more clear in these things than certain Calvinists. I have noticed again and again that Calvi-nists with have that smell of activism and triumphalism do not see Luther as one of our spiritual fathers. But classical Calvinists although disagreeing with Luther on several points, still considered him especially in his view on the relationship between law and gospel as a guide to be trusted.

In the writings of several of the English Puritans of and also of the Scottish Marrow-men Luther is quoted more than once. I just point to the influence of Luther on John Bunyan. That is also a man whose writing I can recommend especially with respect to these things. I call your attention just for the title of one of his works A Defence of the Doctrine of Justifi­cation by Faith in Jesus Christ; Showing True Gospel Holiness Flows from Thence.