Q…I can’t understand what it means that Christ learned obedience by the things the suffered. Can you help me?

Answer... I can try, but it will take more than a few words to answer. The words you are referring to are found in the epistle to the Hebrews. The word he learned obedience are the words which trouble you. If he learned obedience does that mean he was previously disobedient. The notion of Christ learning obedience is not a problem. The concept is not one of progression from disobedience to obedience: it is a progression from innocence to experimental virtue. What he learned from his sufferings was that which he could not have known apart from them: the costliness of practical obedience to the will of God in an hostile environment. He did not learn how to obey; he learned what obedience means in terms of the pain of self-denial and self-sacrifice. In his pursuit of the doing of the will of God he learned what it is to have a broken heart by having been broken hearted himself. He learnt what it is to be anguished and distressed by having been anguished and distressed himself. He learnt what it is to be mocked, scorned and rejected by having been mocked, scorned and rejected himself. All that God’s people suffer for God’s sake he learned through his own resolute pursuance of doing the will of his Father in heaven. This is why the scriptures are able to say, “that this high priest is touched with “the feelings of our infirmities” He has learned, by the things which he suffered in obeying, what it is to obey. As noted above, these sufferings must not be restricted to Gethsemane or Calvary: he was, throughout his ministry, the man of sorrows, acquainted with grief. He has learned, in his days of flesh, in doing the will of God, what it is to seek succour and support at the throne of God and to be heard and upheld in his deepest distresses. For Jesus above all, delight in doing the will of God was often mingled with pain: his meat and drink was often laced with bitter herbs.

Nevertheless, not my will but thine be done” was the spirit in which he breathed his every word to his “Holy Father”. His whole being was a sacrifice of praise; a sweet smelling savor unto God. In his deepest distresses he sought only to glorify Him whom He loved and who in love had sent him. He was, to his, Father the lily of the valley, the Rose of Sharon, the fairest of ten thousand, the altogether lovely one. He was the one with whom “no mortal can compare, among the sons of men”: beyond praise. He was he with whom God was “well pleased”. And when he cried unto him in such an harmony of love, of mind, of will, he was heard because of his devoutness. Had it have been otherwise, then surely, God would have been ashamed to have been called his God.

Q…Was the sufferings and trials of Christ easier to bear than that of other Christians because he was God.

Answer... No. Jesus suffered not in his divine nature, but in his Human nature. His suffering trials and pains were exquisitely painful, far beyond that of other men. During Jesus’ life of earthly weakness and tribulations, he constantly called upon God for help and protection, thus indicating not only those needs which implied his own weakness, but also his own example of calling upon God.

If we listen to his prayers in scripture, we find they are highlighting the extreme tribulations and the crisis experiences of Jesus. His life was marked by a constant calling upon God for help during the many trials and difficulties attendant upon his mission. How often he went aside to pray; and who can doubt that the burden of his prayer was so often for the strength and help needed to accomplish the many tasks that were laid upon him. And who can doubt the assured confidence and peaceful spirit in which he called upon his Father. Even in that which is recorded in the Gospels, there is to be seen a calm, patient, confident tranquility in the midst of a burden-bearing that would have crushed all but the Son of God incarnate. The Gospels do not tell all. What they do, record portrays, so often, a Jesus whose tranquil spirit is nourished by his constant communion with God during the many trials and difficulties attendant upon his mission. How often he went aside to pray; and who can doubt that the burden of his prayer was so often for the strength and help needed to accomplish the many tasks that were laid upon him. And who can doubt the assured confidence and peaceful spirit in which he called upon his Father. Even in that which is recorded in the Gospels, there is to be seen a calm, patient, confident tranquility in the midst of a burden-bearing that would have crushed all but the Son of God incarnate. The Gospels do not tell all, but what they do record portrays, so often, a Jesus whose tranquil spirit is nourished by his constant communion with God.

But that is not the whole story. There were times of extreme crisis and trauma: times when he was all but crushed by the immensity of those burdens his humanity was called upon to carry; times when he could say with the Psalmist: “All thy billows are gone over me”; times when he was all but overwhelmed by the intensity of the soul-suffering he was called upon to bear. Times when he doubted his own ability to bear his own burdens. Times when his soul was desperate. Times when he doubted and feared. To suppose otherwise, is to suppose that he was less than the truly human. It was in the midst of such crisis experiences that he cried to God with strong cryings; cryings that were often loud, and usually articulate, cries, and with those cryings there were often tears. Gethsemane and Calvary illustrate such occasions, but neither is to be exclusively understood.

We know to that he was dependent upon the Holy Spirit of God. He was not ready to face such great trials, until the Spirit of God came upon him at the river Jordan.

We see from the manner of his life that was his, as the suffering servant how truly human he was. But note this; there is nothing else, no other means to face trials as Jesus faced them. He was full of the Holy Spirit, cried to God for help; how he cried to God with all his being; seeking nothing but the will of His Father in Heaven; and the strong resolve to resist all temptation.

Have you noticed. We, true Christians, were equipped with nothing less than Jesus. So the answer is to live as Jesus lived and you will become like him more like him.

Q…What is meant by propitiation?

Answer: Propitiate. Here is a word that many Christians don’t understand. Yet the meaning of the word is simple. In the scriptures it means to turn away wrath. God’s wrath. Hence in the language of scholars Christ is called a propitiation sacrifice, meaning a sacrifice that turns aside God’s wrath.

Q…. If Jesus was truly man, how is that he was able not to sin

Answer… The question is easily answered, but there is a flaw in the question. It assumes that Jesus may have sinned, but that he had the moral strength not to sin. The real answer is not that he was able not to sin, but rather Jesus was not able to sin.

Q….Why was he not able to sin?

Answer... Because of who he is. He was God incarnate. One person but two natures, the divine nature as he is Son of God, and the human nature which he took to himself without any diminution of his deity, i.e. Jesus. Hence he could not sin because though he had two natures, he was only one person. He was God. Not for one moment did he cease to be God. Not for one moment can we think of God as sinning.

Q….Is it true that Christians have two natures; the old one and the new one, the old man and the new man, struggling against each other?

Answer….No it is not true. Not only is it not true it is a dangerous mistruth which can have serious consequences for believers. The most important thing in a Christian’s life is the pursuit of holiness. Many who hold this doctrine blame their continuing sin on the Old Man. Hence they feel no guilt when they sin. It’s not their responsibility; it’s the old nature. It is a profound question that needs an answer. It is best answered step by step so that the folly of such a doctrine is disposed of.

(1) In the first place salvation has nothing to do with your state; it has to do with your status. It puts you in a right relationship with God. In other words it is a legal transaction

(2) Then God plants new dispositions at the new birth; or putting it more clearly, The seed of holiness is put within you, which is nourished by you with aid of the Holy Spirit. This is what is meant by the new birth. The old man is being renewed day by day, your so called new man is nature with which you were born.

(3) The aid of the Holy Spirit is not a substitute for your seeking Holiness of Life. The apostle Paul bids us to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of His own good pleasure. You are led by God, but it is you who must pant for breath, you who must tread the treacherous path. It is your heart that must breath with exertion, your hands and knees that must be scarred by the battle. When you fall, when you trip up, when you sin. it is you who sins; the same you that existed before you were converted Nothing else; not one nature overcoming another. It is nonsense to believe so. It is you, who must put to death the sins of the body, it is you who must mortify your sin as that seed of new life that has been put within develops and grows. You only have one nature.

Q….Why are there so many different translations of the bible?

Answer…. If one wishes to be cynical they might say for commercial profit. There is no doubt that some publishing house earn good profits from selling Bibles. But that’s not the answer you were looking for!

The real answer is this.
The English Bible is a translation of the Hebrew and Greek texts. You will sometimes read on the back cover of a bible that this a translation of the original languages of scripture. You mustn’t believe that. The truth of the matter is, that there is no such thing as the bible complete in its original language. The original autographs have been lost in the midst of time. What is available are copies of the originals, and copies of the copies of the originals. The work of men and women working with these copies is known as textual criticism. Limitless hours are spent by these dedicated people working with all the bits and pieces that have been discovered as if they were doing a gigantic jigsaw puzzle. Often they find discrepancies in the same passage in different manuscripts, and tiny pieces of another. Their job is then to sift every piece of the jigsaw by comparing piece with piece. In doing so they get nearer and nearer to original documents. Every so often new pieces of manuscripts are discovered, which bring them nearer still to the original. Examining, translating and evaluating can take years. And so every few years the Greek text is updated. Then the publishers get to work offering new versions. Each one purporting to be the best translations available. However the reality is this: the changes to the Greek text are often so limited that they do not warrant new translations. They make absolutely no difference to the true meaning of scripture; an ‘and’ for a ‘but’. A single for a plural; simple things like that. It must be said however that these differences have never altered any doctrine taught in the bible.

Q….Which is the best translation available?

Answer….In my opinion, without a shadow of doubt the King James version is the best. To others it makes me old fashioned; a sentimental; a stick in the mud. I know it’s a translation of an inferior (sic) text compared with modern Greek texts, but it cannot be overstated that the differences are of so little as to change not one doctrine or truth; nor must it be overlooked that the complexity of textual criticism is such, that there is no consensus of opinion among textual scholars as to what to change. It is called a science, but it is not really so because in the end all opinions are subjective, and the rules are for ever changing. A far greater objection is that many modern translations paraphrase and use different guidelines for translating. The translators of the AV were determined to say exactly what God was saying, going so far as to indicate, by italics, words they put in to make it more understandable. The great excuse for ditching the King James version is its Elizabethan Language; its use of thee and thou, and eth on the end of words. It's too difficult for this present generation they say. It makes me wonder how anybody was ever converted.

Q.1 would you please explain more clearly what is to be understood by the two words Status and State?

Ans. You are not on your own in not being sure of the difference intended in the use of these two concepts. It’s a question I have been asked many times. It really is important to grasp what they mean, because they are often used in theology and sermons, and because people aren’t clear about this, they often miss the point of what they are reading or listening to.

Let me answer in this way; when we use the word status we are referring to a persons position with regard to others. For a simple example, we may think of the army. One is a Private, another a Corporal, another a Sergeant, and lastly the General. Each one of these ranks is the status of each person concerned, and each one is treated accordingly. Now then; what is meant by a person’s state? Continuing our illustration; if any one of them is promoted, he now has a higher status, his status is changed. . Now the thing that has to be grasped is this; although their status changes their state remains the same. One has a bald head, and when he gets promoted he is still bald-headed. In a word state refers to what we are: our condition. Status denotes our place in life. The idea behind the words are of a vital distinction, and the question well worth answering.

Q.2  Why is it so vital to properly understand these two notions?

Ans. Apart from their theological use, the measure of the individual Christians understanding of this distinction is of immeasurable importance. It will effect his peace, his assurance, etc. I cannot overestimate the importance attached to what seemed like a very simple question.

Q.3  Can you give some examples for the reason you attribute so much importance to this distinction?

Answer: Time and time again the question is asked, can a Christian loose his salvation. Those who believe so will wheel out barrow loads of texts, purporting to prove it. Nevertheless the answer is an emphatic NO. How does the poor doubting tender-hearted Christian stand up to all these texts that seem to suggest that he or she can still be lost. They have perhaps sinned; perhaps sinned grievously. They are heart broken, full of grief , unable to pray, weeping night and day and with the Psalmist cry out. “All thy billows have gone over me.” They have lost all the sense of God that they once enjoyed. How can they possibly stand up to all those bible texts that seem to teach other wise. Especially when men intimidate them with their PhD’s, and press these texts in favor of the yes camp: yes, you can lose your salvation, you can fall away. I am taking it for granted that the person we are talking about is a true child of God. If so, then this person has been adopted unto son ship by the heavenly Father. That is your spiritual status. What ever has brought about this despair, nothing can alter your status. I am my mothers son; I may be a good son; I may be a rotten son; I may treat her with love remembering the loving kindness she has shown to me throughout my life. I may just neglect her in her old age. So be it. Nothing, nothing I say, can alter my status. Whatever our relationship: I AM HER SON. It is no less true concerning our status as sons of God.. Whatever we do, I am still His child. I may be a good son or a bad son: that’s my state. Now, let that grieving, doubting, broken-hearted, repentant child of God face the world, the flesh and the devil. Let him stand before God confessing “Father my life is in a dreadful state, but because I am your child, I know, you will never cast me off.” That poor doubting Christian has taken the first step back to a renewed, practical relationship with God his Heavenly Father. Never let shame keep you from the throne of grace. Yes Father I have sinned, sinned grievously. But always remember this: God is far more willing to forgive than you are to repent.

There’s the answer to why is it so important to recognize the difference between status and state. Read the story of the prodigal son. What a terrible state his life was in. But when his father saw him he said: this is my son, bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and out a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet and so it continues; but note how his state had become so dreadful; but his status was what it was. He was his father’s son regardless of the dreadful state his life was in. Nothing could alter his status in relationship to his father.

Q.4 The second example may well be answered by this next question : what is meant by sanctification?

The confusion between sanctification and justification has been the cause of much theological debate and the root of a great deal of heresy throughout church history. You will find George Whitefield and John Wesley mentioned in the previous puritan pulpit. It was Wesley’s misunderstanding on this matter that created all the confusion that caused him to go off on tangents that have no biblical basis, resulting in the second blessing, instant perfection and many odd ideas that he quietly had second thoughts about. It caused him to forsake orthodox Calvinism for the increasingly popular Arminianism and theoretical antinomianism. He was leading the church towards the brink, but it was too late, he had laid the ground for an ever increasing decline from which the Church at large still suffers. Much of the false teaching in the church is the result of failing to recognize the difference between sanctification and justification.

Answer: In its simplest form we may define sanctification as the continuation of the work done in regeneration whereby, having been regenerated by the Holy Spirit, with the Spirits aid, he grows more and more like Christ. Justification is the pardoning of his sins and his adoption by the Father. Sanctification is subjective, meaning that it is a work done within us. Justification is objective, meaning it is something that takes place out side of us. Our state is effected by sanctification; our status by justification.

Note how the triune God is involved in our salvation. God the Holy Spirit regenerates, The pardoning of sin is facilitated through the death on the cross by God the Son, and it is God the Father who adopts us.

Q.5 If what is said above is true then is it not an invitation for a professing Christians to live anyway they like.

Answer: It does sounds like it. Paul asked a very similar question of professing Christians (see Roms. 5,6,7. After extolling the grace of God in salvation, he says in effect: “shall we live more and more in sin, since it will more and more display God’ grace?”) His answer is emphatic: God forbid; how shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein. This is another one of those occasions where heresy has been developed by the misunderstanding and misuse of scripture passages.

Has Paul got himself into a confusion in working these things out? Of course not! The problem is that people have not recognized the difference between state and status. Being dead to sin refers to our status. Christians are not bound to the law as a way of salvation; as far as the law is concerned before the judgment throne of God, we are already dead and buried. We are dead to sin; that is our status. Our state is different: if legally we are dead to sin, how then shall we live unto sin. How shall we continue to seek salvation by law keeping, when the law has no judicial hold over us. We sum up like this: as far as the law is concerned with all its judicial powers we are dead and buried. That same law is a law to live by; to guide us, to direct our feet. Sin is still the transgression of the law (We will consider together paradox another time) For anyone to find an excuse for sinning, what ever else is true about that man, it is abundantly clear that he has never been a Christian, only an unregenerate sinner.

It is worth noting that this pattern was all part of the position that Wesley had led himself into, and which we have commented on. In fairness to that great man of God, in spite of all, he is to be numbered among Britain’s greatest saints and preachers. Spurgeon said words to the effect: when you have been converted under Wesley, go to Whitefield to be taught.

A further comment. One of the greatest troubles to trouble the church today, making it little different to the world and leading multitudes into a false sense of Christian security, is, without any doubt at all, the failure to see this difference between state and status.

Why can I be so confident of this? Because I see the lives of so called Christians and their leaders which are a constant disgrace. How can we account for this?  Here is the answer: it is not till their state has been changed, from having wicked hearts of unbelief, from living their lives in all the fruits of its sinful, godless corruption, that their status is changed. I would say to any preachers reading these words: it is to deceive the souls of sincere men and women into continuing to walk the broad way to destruction, by proclaiming the deadly heresy that they can do anything pleasing to God before the Spirit of God has done the work of regeneration within. It is when they have been made alive unto God by the Holy Spirit, When the new disposition tending to holiness of life, has been planted within. It is then, and not before, that the Father adopts them as his children, State first, then Status.

Let me add one more word of caution. Although we employ such words as first and next, the time element is logical, not actual. There is no way that this idea can justify the notion of a second blessings.