Carnal Christianity & Hyper Spirituality: Same sin , different appearance.

[Crossfire]

Week after week numerous threads are started and posts made regarding various controversial issues in the Church. Two of the hottest topics seem to be Carnal Christianity, the idea that one can be saved from son while enslaved by sin, and Hyper Spirituality, when people confuse gifts of the Spirit with fleshly behavior.

Each week people take sides, often times endorsing one of these two behaviors while rejecting the other. The only problem with this is that most fail to realize that both are in fact the same issue albeit manifesting in different ways. Both involve someone who professes to be saved allowing themselves to be dominated by the flesh for whatever reason. Personally, I find it hypocritcal to defend one of these beliefs while criticizing the other.

In order to eliminate this issue we must first locate the root cause, that root being Antinomianism in the church. Over the centuries antinomianism, the belief that one can justified without being regenerated, has infiltrated many doctrines and denominations. The Apostle Paul dealt with this issue in the first century. Martin Luther dealt with this issue during the reformation. The great revivalists dealt with this issue during the 1700 and 1800's. Continuationists dealt with this issue in the 20th century.

As Continuationism grew during the 1900's and began to be widely embraced across denominational lines, many began to adopt the gifts of the Holy Spirit and adapt them to fit into their own preferred doctrines. Unfortunately, many would embrace the gifts of the Holy Spirit yet reject the necessity of the fruits of the Holy Spirit, which the Bible states are the only means in which we can tell the authentic from the counterfeit. Eventually this practice would give birth to the hyper spirituality now known as the modern Charismatic & Prosperity movements.

So often many people from various denominations like to complain about the Charismatic & Prosperity movements however, what most don't realize is that it is quite possible that their beloved doctrines are just as to blame for these movements as Continuationism.

 

[Abiding]

 

[GreenNnice]

C'mon, squirrely, why ya always gotta poo-poo good intelligent thought ? I tire of your subtle slams at people's inventive OP ideas. Subtle yet wickedly presumptuous.

Well said, crossfyre, we need to try and truly understand each other's points better, as sometimes Ibthink I begin to agree--almost--with, say, for instance, abiding, or, eg, and, then I put on my thinker cap and come to my senses

 

[Abiding]

yes im glad i inspire you to put on that thinker cap.
Now ill work on inspiring you to have a sense of humor.
Because that will not go away...
but i know you laughed.

 

[Red33]

Week after week numerous threads are started and posts made regarding various controversial issues in the Church. Two of the hottest topics seem to be Carnal Christianity, the idea that one can be saved from son while enslaved by sin, and Hyper Spirituality, when people confuse gifts of the Spirit with fleshly behavior.

Each week people take sides, often times endorsing one of these two behaviors while rejecting the other. The only problem with this is that most fail to realize that both are in fact the same issue albeit manifesting in different ways. Both involve someone who professes to be saved allowing themselves to be dominated by the flesh for whatever reason. Personally, I find it hypocritcal to defend one of these beliefs while criticizing the other.

In order to eliminate this issue we must first locate the root cause, that root being Antinomianism in the church. Over the centuries antinomianism, the belief that one can justified without being regenerated, has infiltrated many doctrines and denominations. The Apostle Paul dealt with this issue in the first century. Martin Luther dealt with this issue during the reformation. The great revivalists dealt with this issue during the 1700 and 1800's. Continuationists dealt with this issue in the 20th century.

As Continuationism grew during the 1900's and began to be widely embraced across denominational lines, many began to adopt the gifts of the Holy Spirit and adapt them to fit into their own preferred doctrines. Unfortunately, many would embrace the gifts of the Holy Spirit yet reject the necessity of the fruits of the Holy Spirit, which the Bible states are the only means in which we can tell the authentic from the counterfeit. Eventually this practice would give birth to the hyper spirituality now known as the modern Charismatic & Prosperity movements.

So often many people from various denominations like to complain about the Charismatic & Prosperity movements however, what most don't realize is that it is quite possible that their beloved doctrines are just as to blame for these movements as Continuationism.

I am officially (if that is possible) going to nickname you the 'Antinomian Kid'. Hyper-spirituality is one who loses their grip with the living God through a walk of faith and begins to spiritualize everything concerning the life and humanity of other believers. They first take part in this examination of others subjectively through the insecurity of the mind of the flesh by comparing themselves and how they are living to how are others are waling which is unwise and unfruitful. When Peter tried to do this with the Lord concerning John in (Jn 20:21,22), the Lord said this...

20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?
21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

They do not have a good understanding of the grace of God through sound doctrine and do not like it when other believers seem to be getting away with sin and are still being favoured by God. That is their perception of what is going on and it eats away at them like a cancer. But in reality God is dealing with them in His own wisdom through His plan (Mt 11:18,19)...

18 For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a devil.
19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.

Those who are always concerned about the sin or carnal lifestyle of others and their lack of repentance are busy bodies who are looking to validate their own walk by opposing the doctrine of grace and the application of the wisdom of that grace. They never learn how to walk by faith and to look at the things that are nought as though they were in (Heb 11:1) and in (Rom 4:16,17)...

1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.

They have never learned that edification is based upon promises of faith and how God looks upon the believer through the work of His Son. They have never learned to trust the work of God that was begun when that sinner believed upon the Son for the forgiveness and cleansing of sin (Phil 1:6). They have never learned to trust the grace of the living God through the word and the Spirit to transform and renew the mind of those who have believed upon the Son to have life.

 

[Crossfire]

C'mon, squirrely, why ya always gotta poo-poo good intelligent thought ? I tire of your subtle slams at people's inventive OP ideas. Subtle yet wickedly presumptuous.

Well said, crossfyre, we need to try and truly understand each other's points better, as sometimes Ibthink I begin to agree--almost--with, say, for instance, abiding, or, eg, and, then I put on my thinker cap and come to my senses

I can not read Abiding's or Red's posts however, in the past both have disagreed with me heavily on the notion that one's sin can and does reflect one's spiritual position. I have provided not only verses but entire chapters of scripture (in context) which clearly supports my perspective however, all others have brought to the table to dispute my claims are bad doctrine, name calling and people attempting to two twist my words around to confuse others which is why I've simply chosen to ignore those people.

Anyways, there are several threads floating around where some people are defending bad behavior in their denominations while condemning bad behavior in other denominations. In doing so so, all these people have done is expose their own poor doctrine and denominational biases.

 

[marianna]

I can not read Abiding's or Red's posts however, in the past both have disagreed with me heavily on the notion that one's sin can and does reflect one's spiritual position. I have provided not only verses but entire chapters of scripture (in context) which clearly supports my perspective however, all others have brought to the table to dispute my claims are bad doctrine, name calling and people attempting to two twist my words around to confuse others which is why I've simply chosen to ignore those people.

Anyways, there are several threads floating around where some people are defending bad behavior in their denominations while condemning bad behavior in other denominations. In doing so so, all these people have done is expose their own poor doctrine and denominational biases.

If you agree that soaking prayer and meditation can allow satan entry into the Church, aren't you making allowances for sin?
Grave sin?

If I understand you, you're on the one hand defending subjective spirituality, while blaming it on Lutherans and Baptists?
I've seen no evidence Charismatic activity originated in the Lutheran church.
Could you provide a resource for that?

 

[Crossfire]

How many people realize that the Prosperity movement was actually birthed in the Baptist denomination where it was initially rejected in the 40's, thus the leaders jump on the Charismatic bandwagon in the 50's & 60's?

How many folks know that the gemstones falling from heaven, gold dust & gold teeth began with the Lutheran & Anglican branches of the Charismatic movement?

Any child can identify a problem however, it takes maturity to identify & work toward a solution. Sin is sin no matter what you call it or how you attempt to repackage it. For one to make allowances for sin in one belief system yet criticize sin in another belief system is just plain hypocritical and reveals that the true motive of many is nothing more than doctrinal bias.

 

[marianna]

How many people realize that the Prosperity movement was actually birthed in the Baptist denomination where it was initially rejected in the 40's, thus the leaders jump on the Charismatic bandwagon in the 50's & 60's?

How many folks know that the gemstones falling from heaven, gold dust & gold teeth began with the Lutheran & Anglican branches of the Charismatic movement?

Any child can identify a problem however, it takes maturity to identify & work toward a solution. Sin is sin no matter what you call it or how you attempt to repackage it. For one to make allowances for sin in one belief system yet criticize sin in another belief system is just plain hypocritical and reveals that the true motive of many is nothing more than doctrinal bias.

I don't understand where you got your information.

from Wikipedia

The holiness movement refers to a set of beliefs and practices emerging from 19th-century Methodism, and to a number of evangelical Christian denominations who emphasize those beliefs as a central doctrine. The movement is distinguished by its emphasis on John Wesley's "Christian perfection" teaching - the belief that it is possible to live free of voluntary sin, and particularly by the belief that this may be accomplished instantaneously through a second work of grace.

The traditional holiness movement is distinct from the Pentecostal movement, which believes that the baptism in the Holy Spirit involves speaking in tongues. Many of the early Pentecostals were from the holiness movement, and to this day many "classical Pentecostals" maintain much of holiness doctrine and many of its devotional practices. Additionally, the terms Pentecostal and apostolic, now used by adherents to Pentecostal and charismatic doctrine, were once widely used by holiness churches in connection with the consecrated lifestyle described in the New Testament. However, Pentecostals add and emphasize that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is evidenced specifically by speaking in tongues, a position which churches in the traditional holiness movement do not accept.

During the advent of Pentecostalism at Azusa Street, the practice of speaking in tongues was strongly rejected by leaders of the traditional holiness movement. Alma White, the leader of the Pillar of Fire Church, a holiness denomination, wrote a book against the Pentecostal movement that was published in 1936; the work, entitled Demons and Tongues, represented early rejection of the new Pentecostal movement. White called speaking in tongues "satanic gibberish" and Pentecostal services "the climax of demon worship".[2]


The roots of the holiness movement are as follows:

The Reformation itself, with its emphasis on salvation by grace through faith alone.
Puritanism in 17th century England and its transplantation to America with its emphasis on adherence to the Bible and the right to dissent from the established church.
Pietism in 17th century Germany, led by Philipp Jakob Spener and the Moravians, which emphasized the spiritual life of the individual, coupled with a responsibility to live an upright life.
Quietism, as taught by the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), with its emphasis on the individual’s ability to experience God and understand God’s will for himself.
The 1730s Evangelical Revival in England, led by Methodists John Wesley and his brother Charles Wesley, which brought Wesley's distinct take on the Eastern Orthodox concept of Theosis and the teachings of German Pietism to England and eventually to the United States.
The First Great Awakening in the 18th and early 19th centuries in the United States, propagated by George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, and others, with its emphasis on the initial conversion experience of Christians.
The Second Great Awakening in the 19th century in the United States, propagated by Francis Asbury, Charles Finney, Lyman Beecher, and others, which also emphasized the need for personal holiness and is characterized by the rise of evangelistic revival meetings.

 

[Crossfire]

If you agree that soaking prayer and meditation can allow satan entry into the Church, aren't you making allowances for sin?

My position is that I can see how certain activities could make allowances for the evil in the hands of certain people. However, meditation and worship are nothing more than methods or tools (like music or television) and are only dangerous if placed in the wrong hands. That is why I state time and time again that we must evaluate ourselves through the lense of scripture. After all, the only person we can truly regulate or change is ourselves.

If I understand you, you're on the one hand defending subjective spirituality, while blaming it on Lutherans and Baptists?

Again you've misunderstood. I did not place blame on the Lutherans or Baptists. I simply stated simple facts, that certain Charismatic activity was birthed when people attempted to fuse certain beliefs together thus compromises were made in the process. I can no more blame Lutheran or Baptists for this occurring than Lutheran or Baptists can blame Continuationists. See my point now?

I've seen no evidence Charismatic activity originated in the Lutheran church.

Me either. I sure didn't say that so I don't know where you got that idea.

 

[Crossfire]

I don't understand where you got your information.

from Wikipedia

The holiness movement refers to a set of beliefs and practices emerging from 19th-century Methodism, and to a number of evangelical Christian denominations who emphasize those beliefs as a central doctrine. The movement is distinguished by its emphasis on John Wesley's "Christian perfection" teaching - the belief that it is possible to live free of voluntary sin, and particularly by the belief that this may be accomplished instantaneously through a second work of grace.

The traditional holiness movement is distinct from the Pentecostal movement, which believes that the baptism in the Holy Spirit involves speaking in tongues. Many of the early Pentecostals were from the holiness movement, and to this day many "classical Pentecostals" maintain much of holiness doctrine and many of its devotional practices. Additionally, the terms Pentecostal and apostolic, now used by adherents to Pentecostal and charismatic doctrine, were once widely used by holiness churches in connection with the consecrated lifestyle described in the New Testament. However, Pentecostals add and emphasize that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is evidenced specifically by speaking in tongues, a position which churches in the traditional holiness movement do not accept.

During the advent of Pentecostalism at Azusa Street, the practice of speaking in tongues was strongly rejected by leaders of the traditional holiness movement. Alma White, the leader of the Pillar of Fire Church, a holiness denomination, wrote a book against the Pentecostal movement that was published in 1936; the work, entitled Demons and Tongues, represented early rejection of the new Pentecostal movement. White called speaking in tongues "satanic gibberish" and Pentecostal services "the climax of demon worship".[2]


The roots of the holiness movement are as follows:

The Reformation itself, with its emphasis on salvation by grace through faith alone.
Puritanism in 17th century England and its transplantation to America with its emphasis on adherence to the Bible and the right to dissent from the established church.
Pietism in 17th century Germany, led by Philipp Jakob Spener and the Moravians, which emphasized the spiritual life of the individual, coupled with a responsibility to live an upright life.
Quietism, as taught by the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), with its emphasis on the individual’s ability to experience God and understand God’s will for himself.
The 1730s Evangelical Revival in England, led by Methodists John Wesley and his brother Charles Wesley, which brought Wesley's distinct take on the Eastern Orthodox concept of Theosis and the teachings of German Pietism to England and eventually to the United States.
The First Great Awakening in the 18th and early 19th centuries in the United States, propagated by George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, and others, with its emphasis on the initial conversion experience of Christians.
The Second Great Awakening in the 19th century in the United States, propagated by Francis Asbury, Charles Finney, Lyman Beecher, and others, which also emphasized the need for personal holiness and is characterized by the rise of evangelistic revival meetings.

Finally! Someone willing to do their homework! I have spent years studying the great revivals of the 1700 & 1800s as well as birth of the Holiness & Pentecostal movements. I have researched their history and doctrines and am well aware of their strengths and weakness as well both the good and bad fruit that emerged.

I want to encourage you to keep reading Marianna. While I realize that right now you are researching to prove me wrong, there's always hope that you might see the bigger picture.

 

[Red33]

I can not read Abiding's or Red's posts however, in the past both have disagreed with me heavily on the notion that one's sin can and does reflect one's spiritual position. I have provided not only verses but entire chapters of scripture (in context) which clearly supports my perspective however, all others have brought to the table to dispute my claims are bad doctrine, name calling and people attempting to two twist my words around to confuse others which is why I've simply chosen to ignore those people.

Anyways, there are several threads floating around where some people are defending bad behavior in their denominations while condemning bad behavior in other denominations. In doing so so, all these people have done is expose their own poor doctrine and denominational biases.

Come on and tell the truth, you can read anyone's post whether you have them on ignore or not. You only would put one on ignore because of the conviction of truth that you don't want to hear in your ear because it just might convert you and impart to you what you have been missing for a long time. You have missed out much concerning the grace of God and you have done much to misrepresent our Lord Jesus Christ and His cross. You hide yourself in history and rationalize truth away from yourself and you want others to take a bite of your apple. You can offer that apple all you want but some will never take that bite but will reject it and turn away from the one who offered it.

There are dynamics that involve the predispositions, weaknesses and lusts of the flesh that our humanity is derived from the dust of the ground that differs from person to person. It is true that the cross crucified the flesh (sarx - Gal 5:24) with all of its affections and lust but the believer has to learn how to receive grace and allow the cross to work death into his experience to overcome these areas so that they do not have dominion over him. There are areas in your own life that identify with the flesh that have been dominant and other areas that have been dormant until the plan of God brings them out to see how you are going to deal with them through grace and through the cross.

The way of escape that God provides when we are tempted is provided by grace so that we are not tempted above measure (1Cor 10:13). If we fail to receive that grace and give place to the temptation it means that we failed the test and must rebound. The only way we can rebound is not through some method of repentance of our failure, but by exercising faith and receiving God's grace that is now abounding toward us when we failed. This is the grace that many fall short of and get into a hyper-spiritual response and actually do despite to the Spirit of grace and either condemn themselves or atone for their own sin through some abstract understanding that involves asceticism and repentance of the flesh instead of reckoning upon what Christ has done to the flesh and their sin when He crucified the flesh and put away their sin once and forever.

 

[Red33]

C'mon, squirrely, why ya always gotta poo-poo good intelligent thought ? I tire of your subtle slams at people's inventive OP ideas. Subtle yet wickedly presumptuous.

Well said, crossfyre, we need to try and truly understand each other's points better, as sometimes Ibthink I begin to agree--almost--with, say, for instance, abiding, or, eg, and, then I put on my thinker cap and come to my senses

It would be a good thing if you and some select others would come to your senses and get converted by the grace of God and finally be transformed in the spirit of your mind in the things of God that would profit your heart in being established in grace because that is a good thing...

Heb 13:9a Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace;