"The individual who truly repents, not only sees sin to be detestable and vile and worthy of abhorrence, but he really abhors it, and hates it in his heart. A person may see sin to be hurtful and abominable, while yet his heart loves it, and desires it, and clings to it. But when he truly repents, he most heartily abhors and renounces it."As far as I am aware I only disagree with Finney’s theology on one point (original sin). However, I am so impressed with his practical understanding and application of personal holiness that this disagreement only came after much reflection and prayer.
I went to sleep on Friday night pondering the passage above with a degree of sadness wondering about the quality of my repentance. I do hate sin in the lives of others and in the world generally but in my own life there are still some elements of sin that I desire (I resist them but I nevertheless still desire them.) I am subject to temptation and temptation, in order to be effective, must work on the premise of desire. How can I possibly desire something that I am supposed to hate? I fell asleep not only doubting my holiness but even doubting my conversion!
Saturday I had to work and at the end of the day dropped a colleague off at her Office in Tower Hamlets. Finding myself only two miles from Abney Park I decided to spend a few moments in the ‘valley of the dry bones’*. (For those who are interested George is 3rd on the left!)
As I sat there a penny dropped (maybe it was ‘the’ penny that I have been waiting for or maybe another – who knows?) As I sat and prayerfully pondered I began to see that there is a distinct difference between ‘desire’ and ‘love’ in much the same way as there is a distinct difference between love’ and ‘lust’.
By way of example, take Jesus in Gethsemane, he loved his Father and he loved doing his Father’s will. “My food," said Jesus "is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.” (John 4:34) Yet in spite of this in Gethsemane Jesus had other ideas, these ideas had to be surrendered in obedience to God’s will. We do not know what those ideas were but we do know that they would not (could not) have resulted in our salvation. Failure to deliver salvation must have been a notion that Jesus would have hated. Therefore even Christ could paradoxically ‘desire’ things which were hateful to him. The other thought that came to me is that the very presence of a struggle where a Christian tries to resist temptation surely proves that whatever he ‘desires’ cooperation with the tempter is something he ‘hates’.
This brought me, logically, to a simple definition of holiness that I hadn’t before considered (there is nothing original in what follows although it came to me in a fresh and comprehensible manner.)
Temptation is a three way dialogue between me, the devil and God. The prize sought via the temptation is the consecration of my will. Nobody can make me do anything against my own free will (the devil can’t and God has restricted himself in such a way that he refuses to). The prize, then, that both good and evil are seeking is the voluntary surrender of my free will. If I surrender it to God that results in righteousness and holiness – to surrender it to the devil results in sin. Now, if I genuinely surrender my will to God then temptation disappears in a metaphorical puff of smoke. Once all three parties understand that my will is quite definitely consecrated to God then any further deployment of demonic resources to the struggle would be wasteful. Thus when the devil is convinced that ‘I must be about my Father’s business” he will very quickly leave me ‘for a season’.
One of the fundamental problems with contemporary Christians is that they try to resist temptation without contributing the surrender of their will. There is no biblical promise that guarantees spiritual victory upon the evidence of resistance alone – however in James 4:7 we do read “Submit yourselves to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.” The order is important, when tempted we must first voluntarily consecrate (submit) our free will to God. Then we must resist the devil (a relatively easy activity if the will has been truly submitted). The result is that the devil, recognising the impossibility of any victory, on this occasion, beats a hasty retreat.
This voluntary consecration of one’s free will to God is the subject of Paul’s message in Roman’s 12 when he says “Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God.” I have always though that Romans 12:1 was probably the best biblical definition of holiness (after Matthew 22:37).
There is nothing complicated about this, it is simply the enactment of our 9th doctrine “We believe that continuance in a state of salvation depends upon continued obedient faith in Christ.” What is “continued obedient faith in Christ” other than a constant consecration of our free will to God?
This is probably old hat to many people but I found the whole revelation very exciting and putting it into practice has been even more so. God is so generous; he follows up my confession of a few days ago with a wonderful and simple exegesis on practical holiness – Hallelujah!
* I do not attach any special spiritual significance to the burial place of Booth, Railton, Cadman et al – but I do find the mere presence of their decayed bodies a visible proof that the glory days of the Army were fact not fiction! This knowledge seems to clarify my thinking and intensify my praying.
Yours set apart, by Christ, for the lost, in the Army.
Andrew
No comments:
Post a Comment