Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ Finis Dake on Positive Confession

[Justaned]

Okay I give up I'm using a term that apparently warps everyone's thinking

No this unbiblical theology that you are trying to pitch one here is what is warping every ones thinking
Dake taught that the.... oh why do I even bother lol

If this is so unbiblical how come it is written up very clearly in the universally recognized and accepted by leading Pentecostals in a book on Pentecostal Theology?

[Rocky]

Here is an excellent explanation on sin nature. It is long I know but well worth the read.

There is no promise in the Scripture that a Christian, in this life, will ever reach the place where he will no longer sin: "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us" (1 Jn. 1:8). There are those who teach that it is possible to have an experience of sanctification, which they call a second work of grace. It is described in the following quotation:

The heart is purified, cleansed and made holy. It is purged of that inbred sin nature; and from that time on, temptation comes only from without, not from within a heart that is sanctified. No one ever becomes so completely perfected that he is not subject to temptation. But one has greater and more glorious victory after he is sanctified because he no longer has to contend with the carnal nature. It has been removed.

How wonderful that would be if it were true!

The carnal nature, the flesh, never becomes sanctified: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (Jn. 3:6). God never builds on the old, fleshly, sinful nature. He always begins with something new. That is why Jesus said, "Ye must be born again" (Jn. 3:7). The flesh never becomes spiritual. Do not expect it to do so. The flesh in the most saintly person is the same flesh that is in the worst of sinners.
Paul likens the two sons of Abraham to the two natures of the believer: the fleshly nature and the new spiritual nature that he receives in the new birth. "For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.... But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now" (Gal. 4:22-23, 29). The flesh always opposes the Spirit. What are we to do? "Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman" (v. 30). Ishmael could not be corrected. He had to be cast out (Gen. 21:10). This is the way to deal with the flesh. Thus Paul admonishes, "Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom. 6:11). The flesh cannot be overcome by eradication. It will always be there as long as we are in this earthly body, neither can it be overcome by suppression. Some have earnestly tried to gain victory by the power of their will and the energy of the flesh. The victory is seen to be only through identification with Christ. Paul said, "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" (Gal. 2:20).
Guy P. Duffield and Nathaniel M. Van Cleave, Foundations of Pentecostal Theology, (Los Angeles, CA: Foursquare Media, 2008), WORDsearch CROSS e-book, 245-246.

Hi Ed,

Above you quoted: "This is the way to deal with the flesh. Thus Paul admonishes, "Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom. 6:11)."

How would this work? I mean if we reckon ourselves alive unto God through Jesus Christ... and according to you Jesus also has a sin nature... then how do we overcome sin, since the remedy Jesus Christ also has a sin nature?

Could you help me on this?

Jesus Christ before his death on the cross has mortal body just as man. Man's flesh has a propensity for sin. Jesus flesh could be tempted thus it to had a propensity for sin. After Jesus death and resurrection He was raised in His immortal body, that flesh is not sin taint it has no propensity for sin thus Jesus now can not be tempted as man is able.

Paul is saying crucify the flesh and give life to the spirit man that is not tainted by sin, has not propensity for sin.

Is this all that difficult for you to figure out?

You still haven't answered what do you call part of man that can be tempte? Did Jesus have this or not? Was His temptation real in the fact he could be tempted to sin or not?

This sounds very Gnostic to me..

[Rocky]

Hmm this is wrong on a lot of things.

The carnal nature, the flesh, never becomes sanctified: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (Jn. 3:6). God never builds on the old, fleshly, sinful nature. He always begins with something new. That is why Jesus said, "Ye must be born again" (Jn. 3:7). The flesh never becomes spiritual. Do not expect it to do so. The flesh in the most saintly person is the same flesh that is in the worst of sinners.
Paul likens the two sons of Abraham to the two natures of the believer: the fleshly nature and the new spiritual nature that he receives in the new birth. "For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.... But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now" (Gal. 4:22-23, 29). The flesh always opposes the Spirit. What are we to do? "Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman" (v. 30). Ishmael could not be corrected. He had to be cast out (Gen. 21:10). This is the way to deal with the flesh. Thus Paul admonishes, "Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom. 6:11). The flesh cannot be overcome by eradication. It will always be there as long as we are in this earthly body, neither can it be overcome by suppression. Some have earnestly tried to gain victory by the power of their will and the energy of the flesh. The victory is seen to be only through identification with Christ. Paul said, "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" (Gal. 2:20).
Guy P. Duffield and Nathaniel M. Van Cleave, Foundations of Pentecostal Theology, (Los Angeles, CA: Foursquare Media, 2008), WORDsearch CROSS e-book, 245-246

This sounds Gnostic to me as well, you see the Gnostic taught a duality just like this is teaching. I see a lot of double talk in this who ever wrote it. Example it gives the scripture "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 But then it indicates that we still have a sin nature. But this still is not saying what you are saying Ed, you apeently did not study this before you posted it Now of Course I do not believe that the flesh or the oldman or the sin nature is the adamic nature because Adam and eve were crated sinless they just yielded to the Devil. This sin nature is non other than nature of satin himself . And also the analogy of (Gal. 4:22-23, 29). Is not about the spirit and flesh, but about law and grace so they got that on wrong as well, Go read it for your self Ed, you will see what I am talking about. Christian do not have a sin nature and neither did Jesus because the Sin nature is Satins nature as it says in Eph Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: So when you say Jesus had a sin nature you are essentially saying that Jesus had the nature of satin and we do as well.

[victoryword]

Calvinism (where a lot of this teaching about the so-called "sin nature" originates) has elements of Gnosticism.

[frenchie]

What would be the diference with Jesus since he was conceived of a woman but not from a man but by the Holy Spirit?
Does'nt this fact kept him from inheriting the sin nature from Adam?

[Justaned]

By not answering the question I can conclude that you did NOT hear it taught in Seminary or College as well.

Why should I answer your questions? You constantly ignore mine.
Was Jesus tempted or not? If He was what part of his body was tempted. Perhaps you like the word carnal man better than sin nature. You are such a work!

[brodave]

God did not create Adam and Eve with a sin nature. Yet they were tempted. She was tempted, He was not tempted. He simply took the fruit from Eve knowing what He was doing.
How Could Jesus be very God and have a sinful nature? Why would you think He had to have a sinful nature to be tempted.
Doesn't Romans 5 teach us the sinful nature comes from the man. Jesus Father was God, How could He have a sinful nature?

[branham1965]

ONCE AGAIN....
JESUS WAS VERY GOD AND VERY MAN.THE HYPOSTATIC UNION SOME SAY.
IN HIS HUMANITY HE WAS TEMPTED BUT HE WAS SINLESS HEB 4:15 HE WAS TEMPTED YET WITHOUT SIN...HE OUR PERFECT HIGH PRIEST HE WAS HOLY HARMLESS UNDEFILED AND SEPARATE FROM SINNERS SAYS HEBREWS 7:25-26!!!!!!!!!!!!
GOD MADE HIM SIN WHO KNEW NO SIN WAS MADE SIN FOR US THAT WE MIGHT BE MADE THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD IN HIM.2 COR 5:21.
THE IDEA THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND EVER BIT OF GOD'S WORD ..... MORE THAN WHAT IS PLAINLY WRITTEN HAS SENT MANY A GOOD MAN AND WOMAN INTO APOSTACY AND SOME TO THE NUT HOUSE.

THE LIVING WORD JOHN 1 SPEAKS.BELIEVE HIM!!!!!!!! +pieface +pieface

[Justaned]

God did not create Adam and Eve with a sin nature. Yet they were tempted. She was tempted, He was not tempted. He simply took the fruit from Eve knowing what He was doing.
How Could Jesus be very God and have a sinful nature? Why would you think He had to have a sinful nature to be tempted.
Doesn't Romans 5 teach us the sinful nature comes from the man. Jesus Father was God, How could He have a sinful nature?

This is the crux of the problem, Eve was able to be deceived

Genesis 3:13 (NKJV)
13 And the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."
1 Timothy 2:14 (NKJV)
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

before the fall and Adam could be rebellious before the fall. Whatever in their nature allowed that to happen is the same whatever that is in us and Christ if we believe that Christ could be tempted. What nature changed in Adam and Eve in the garden? That they had the knowledge of good and evil. They were from the garden forward able to know they were naked or not and that there was shame in being seen naked. So the question that must be asked was the propensity for sin (sin nature or carnal man) awakened in the garden or was it added to man?

If it was merely awakened then all men are born with it and since the garden it was awakened.

[cpbeller]

Ed, you are trying to redefine the term, "sin nature". Why YOU don't understand that, is beyond me. That qoute you gave, maybe I just did not see it, but I did not see anywhere in there that said that Jesus had a "Sin Nature". The "Sin Nature" is the natural state of mankind, to be in sin. Jesus had no sin. Adam & Eve had no sin, they were created sinless. They may have had flesh, but that does not mean that they had a sin nature at that time. Once they sinned, their nature was no longer of righteousness, it was no longer sinless, they became warped and wrapped in sin, thus, they then had a sinful nature. Jesus did not come from "man", his father was not a man, His Father was God. Therefore, the essence of man, the sinful nature, the Sin Nature, did not pass onto Him. The Father did not have the nature of sin, the essence of sin, to pass onto Jesus.

Stop trying to redefine terms to fit your own propaganda.

I have never heard anything like this before from a "preacher, especially a Pentacostal one at that. Try preaching Jesus had a sin nature (and using those very terms) from the pulpit with a leader of your church in the pew, and see just how far that gets you. I don't think you would be preaching from that pulpit anymore, at least you wouldn't be if your church leader had any kind of a spine.