Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Philippians 3:9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Philippians 3:9 and may be found in Him [believing and relying on Him], not having any righteousness of my own derived from [my obedience to] the Law and its rituals, but [possessing] that [genuine righteousness] which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith. |
Subject: ?self effort 2 B holy now vs befor saved |
Bible Note: Dear Joe My response to you has to be posted in two parts because it is too long. Part I: First, I appologize for typing the question in wrong. You were correct in the assumption that you made of what the question was. I should have typed: “Whats the difference between my self effort to be holy now that I am saved and my self effort to be good when I was unsaved?" But I would like to give you some additional background in why I asked that question. My original question that led to the above question was “What is My role in my practical / experiential sanctification?” I was caught up in the Keswick understanding of sanctification. I think that by some of Kens statements in the discussion you were having, he is caught up in a Keswick understanding of sanctification, too. I could not seem to figure out how to make the Keswick model of sanctification work. The reason why is because the Keswick understanding of experiential sanctification seems to be unbiblical, as an article on bible.org pointed out to me. To see the article go to the bible.org website, select "Advanced Studies" on the left. Scroll down to pheumatology (the Holy Spirit). Then select "Wesleyan and Keswick models of sanctification". (I highly recommend that you read the article for a full understanding of what I am talking about.) Points from this article that really jumped out at me that I had falsely believed to be true were: 1. Keswick wrongly teaches sanctification comes by faith, and not in any other way! 2. Keswick explicitly disavows eradication of the sin nature. If one walks in the Spirit, the Spirit carries the burden of Sin. If one sins, the Spirit no longer counteracts the tencency to sin and the believer is caught in a spiral of sin. He has no more help in overcoming sin than the unbeliever. 3. Keswick sees the old nature as something which is not subject to transformation, but retains its full force throughout ones life. This contradicts Paul which speaks of the progressive transformation of the believer into the likeness of Jesus (2Cor 3:18; Rom 12:2). 4. Keswick redefines sin by limiting it to volitional acts of rebellion (at least with reference to ones ongoing fellowship with God), which leaves the result that they believe that an individual may at any point in time be described as sinless. 5. Keswick believes it is the believers duty to take leave of his own personality so that Jesus can make all the decisions. The Keswick concept of the filling of the Spirit is akin to demon possession. The New Testament never uses the terminology of control (uses leading) to describe believers relationship to the Spirit. The truth is that a result of the Spirits ministry on our lives is self-control. This would hardly seem posssible if the regenerate self were still totally evil as Keswick claims. 6. Keswick offers spiritual victory through the means of a formula. The Truth is, the test of ones spirituality is not whether one has by faith fulfilled the conditions of a formula, but rather the fruit of the spirit in ones life. 7. Keswick says holiness is freedom from sin, not conformity to Gods character. 8. Instead of a relationship with God producing holiness, Keswick demands holiness before communion. 9. Christ is our Sanctification. If we wish to make any progress in holiness, we have to give up belief in the value of self-effort in holiness. For the rest of my response to this information, Go to part II |