DEATH TO CARNALITY -- No. 4

     The modern teaching of holiness in substance is this: "Make a full, unconditional surrender, consecrate everything to God for time and eternity, lay all upon the altar and believe the altar sanctifies the gift, and claim the blessing by faith."

     We find nothing in the Scripture to support such a theory. Let us look into it. Under the Jewish dispensation everything was typical of things to come. They sacrificed upon an altar after they had made an atonement. "And it shall be an altar most holy: whatsoever toucheth the altar shall be holy" (Exod. 29:37). This altar represented Christ.

     The altar and the gift are spoken of in Matt. 5:23 and 23:19. By carefully reading these two verses with their contexts you will see that they have not the remotest reference to holiness.

     In Matthew 5:23, Jesus was teaching confession and restitution, preparatory to salvation. He was showing how useless it was for one to bring his gift to the altar, when he had not righted his wrongs. This passage applies to justification rather than sanctification.

     In Matthew 23:19, Jesus was rebuking the Pharisees for teaching it was wrong to swear by the gold of the temple, or the gift on the altar, but all right to swear by the temple or the altar. He told them it was the temple that made the gold sacred, and the altar that made the gift hallowed, otherwise the gold would be no better than other gold, or the gift more acceptable than before it was placed thereon. The temple and altar were set apart for a holy purpose. How consecration or holiness is taught in either of these passages we fail to see.

     Now let us go back and see how they sacrificed. First, the sacrifice must be blameless; no blemishes or defects. Next, the sacrifice must be killed and all the uncleanness separated from it before it dare come nigh the altar. It was then separated into halves and placed upon the altar and God's acceptance was made manifest by consuming it with fire from heaven. The placing of one's self upon the altar does not cleanse and sanctify him.

     If sacrificing teaches anything relative to a second work of grace, it teaches death to carnality, rather than consecration. A man might consent to die for another, but when the death stroke is given he will struggle in spite of his willingness. Death always had to take place before the sacrifice could even touch the altar, or be acceptable to God.

     If consecration is a condition to be met in seeking entire sanctification, then no one can be wholly sanctified who does not meet such a condition. But some have been wholly sanctified who did not consecrate, therefore consecration can not be 8 condition of holiness.

     But "can a person obtain holiness when he is not fully consecrated?" No; neither can he if he is not clearly justified, and yet justification is not a condition to holiness. The question is not "must one be wholly consecrated before he is perfected in holiness," but, "should the work of consecration be brought in as a condition of obtaining holiness."

     One says, "A sinner is dead in trespasses and sins and how can he present his body a living sacrifice? Does not Paul beseech the Roman brethren to present their bodies a living sacrifice, and if so, is not consecration implied here?" This text is found in Rom. 12:1.

     If we must understand from this verse that the bodies of the Roman brethren had not been previously presented to God, then we must believe that they were either not clearly justified, or if so, their bodies were still in bondage and it required holiness to free them. But neither was the case.

     In the very next verse Paul exhorts them not to be "conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind." Hence must we believe that justified souls are conformed to this world and unrenewed in their minds and that it requires holiness to save from worldly conformity and create within them a new mind? No! This is too superficial.

     The fact is that the passage under consideration does not refer to the soul at all. It does not exhort them to present their souls "a living sacrifice holy acceptable to God," but their "bodies." The Word washes the body -- tells us how to live, walk, dress, etc., but it requires the blood to wash and cleanse the soul.

     By carefully examining the entire chapter (Rom. 12) you see that it is "an exhortation on general lines of Christian living such as a faithful minister would give his flock, and bears no evidence whatever that Paul was dealing with the carnal mind, or giving conditions of obtaining holiness."

     Webster says, "Consecration is the setting apart of a person or a thing from a common to a sacred purpose." This is what the priest did when he came to consecrate himself; to him consecration meant "coming with the hands full." This is all it can imply to us, in a spiritual sense -- a giving all we have and all we ever expect to have unconditionally into the hands of God. How can a person do less than this and have His favor? On what point can any one refuse to be submitted or fully given up and yet retain saving grace? Not one.

     Consecration as well as submission has to do with the will and intentions. When a man is truly converted, his will and everything that pertains to the volition is placed on the side of God and righteousness. There can be no rebellion in the will on any point and pardon be retained. As long as there is a question troubling the soul, as to obedience on any point, such a one is in no condition to seek holiness. Those who are justified freely delight to do the will of God. They are consecrated to God, and although carnality exists and clamors at times, it is suppressed by grace and under the supremacy of the already consecrated will.

     "Much of the struggling of soul by those seeking holiness, to submit to the will of God, may be traced to a defective conversion. The will was never thoroughly subdued."