“Death to “Self” Doctrine is Bogus Theology”???
Is It? Jesus has this to say: “ Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he, *[Jesus], laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.”
1 John 3:16 (KJV)
And again here:
“Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? “Matthew 16:24-26 (KJV)
*[Emphasis mine]
Though being more easily understood to mean physical death as Jesus exhibited by His dying, the first passage carries a deeper implication to mean the death to our disposition in situations that clamor for self-satisfaction/gratification. For instance, if I and my friend were both hungry and there was but one meal, what should be my disposition if I say I love my neighbor as myself? Is it to be thought of as some foolishly think that if I gave up my claim to the meal for the sake of my friend that it would be an act of self-righteousness, especially if someone saw me do it; "who does he think he is"? Why that would be a prideful thing to do, some would accuse? What impoverished religious mind would want to believe that? . . Many religious who are indeed prideful and jealous that anyone would dare do what they have been rendered by their conceit incapable of doing! I believe the second passage above clears up the issue quite nicely.
Let’s transfer this over to us giving up our claim to our “Self” insofar as God would have us submit to His leadership, our lives. Do I love Him to do this? Do I even know Him to love Him to do this? Again the fool in his religion would say that will not benefit anyone with regards to salvation and as an excuse, he uses the worn-out, oft mis-interpreted verse of scripture to make fit that says, no one is righteous and God doesn't look for us to do things for Him but for our society. In his fool way he would not have the scriptures be understood to mean we are to love God and desire to be a son who is pleasing to His father and this by self-renunciation. Absence of this understanding is to have no understanding of the acts of Jesus and His teaching us the way of the cross; what it means to take up ours and follow Him.
Is salvation the issue? Again, the religious fool would say, it is the only issue. Beyond that he has concluded and is really saying in his heart, "there is no God". He really doesn’t want to embrace the idea that God has an interest in our lives beyond simply giving us undeserved ‘goodies’ and by his saying of the sinners prayer ‘foolishly’ believes that we qualify to be a ruler and reigner with Christ in the next life. He chooses to believe this because he wants God but wants to retain dominion over his "Self". In this is he not saying, 'I will have no God over me'?
That is the height of presumption from ignorance from poor teaching and short-sightedness in understanding the message of the gospel that says: “And he who overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end, TO HIM I WILL GIVE AUTHORITY OVER THE NATIONS;” (Rev. 2:26). Does that read like Jesus is speaking of anyone whose ambition is just making it to heaven; salvation as being more than a ‘paid up fire insurance policy’ as most in the reform thinking ignorantly believe? I emphasize reform as opposed to orthodox simply because love for another that is a visible act is most always looked upon as self-righteousness and one who does is looked upon as a ‘holier than thou’ while hiding behind their false idea of the grace of God; believing He will let them off the hook for any willful ignorance of what it means to love God and then love your neighbor as yourself. They foolishly believe that success in loving one's next door neighbor is loving God . . . which should cause someone to ask how come they don’t love their neighbor? But that too, is dismissed as being judgmental. The whole thing becomes a convoluted mess.This brings me back to the issue of “Self”.
“Self” is the hindrance to success in Christ. Adam demonstrated this in the garden by refusing to relinquish his to the Love of God that would have accomplished His intention for humanity without the need for redemption. We can thank God that Jesus, by the “work of the cross”, has restored us to that which Adam forfeited; the privilege of becoming a son brought into Glory by the method of self-renunciation; as Oswald Chambers has it: “The giving up of my claim to my rights to myself”. Jesus taught us how it is be accomplished by His example from His earthly life. Our success hinges on our abiding in Him. Our works will be His works. (Gal.2:20) In this, “Self’ has been, of necessity, crucified that the Life of Christ might be revealed in those who love Him and have purified their “Self”. (1 Pet.1:22). This is the reason for “Death to Self Theology. Anyone who denies this theology is a fool of the first order and has a rude awakening in store for him. If he teaches against it, he aids the enemy of our soul and should be avoided as a brother.
I am quite sure the 'Fool' will say I am wrong.
Is It? Jesus has this to say: “ Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he, *[Jesus], laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.”
1 John 3:16 (KJV)
And again here:
“Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? “Matthew 16:24-26 (KJV)
*[Emphasis mine]
Though being more easily understood to mean physical death as Jesus exhibited by His dying, the first passage carries a deeper implication to mean the death to our disposition in situations that clamor for self-satisfaction/gratification. For instance, if I and my friend were both hungry and there was but one meal, what should be my disposition if I say I love my neighbor as myself? Is it to be thought of as some foolishly think that if I gave up my claim to the meal for the sake of my friend that it would be an act of self-righteousness, especially if someone saw me do it; "who does he think he is"? Why that would be a prideful thing to do, some would accuse? What impoverished religious mind would want to believe that? . . Many religious who are indeed prideful and jealous that anyone would dare do what they have been rendered by their conceit incapable of doing! I believe the second passage above clears up the issue quite nicely.
Let’s transfer this over to us giving up our claim to our “Self” insofar as God would have us submit to His leadership, our lives. Do I love Him to do this? Do I even know Him to love Him to do this? Again the fool in his religion would say that will not benefit anyone with regards to salvation and as an excuse, he uses the worn-out, oft mis-interpreted verse of scripture to make fit that says, no one is righteous and God doesn't look for us to do things for Him but for our society. In his fool way he would not have the scriptures be understood to mean we are to love God and desire to be a son who is pleasing to His father and this by self-renunciation. Absence of this understanding is to have no understanding of the acts of Jesus and His teaching us the way of the cross; what it means to take up ours and follow Him.
Is salvation the issue? Again, the religious fool would say, it is the only issue. Beyond that he has concluded and is really saying in his heart, "there is no God". He really doesn’t want to embrace the idea that God has an interest in our lives beyond simply giving us undeserved ‘goodies’ and by his saying of the sinners prayer ‘foolishly’ believes that we qualify to be a ruler and reigner with Christ in the next life. He chooses to believe this because he wants God but wants to retain dominion over his "Self". In this is he not saying, 'I will have no God over me'?
That is the height of presumption from ignorance from poor teaching and short-sightedness in understanding the message of the gospel that says: “And he who overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end, TO HIM I WILL GIVE AUTHORITY OVER THE NATIONS;” (Rev. 2:26). Does that read like Jesus is speaking of anyone whose ambition is just making it to heaven; salvation as being more than a ‘paid up fire insurance policy’ as most in the reform thinking ignorantly believe? I emphasize reform as opposed to orthodox simply because love for another that is a visible act is most always looked upon as self-righteousness and one who does is looked upon as a ‘holier than thou’ while hiding behind their false idea of the grace of God; believing He will let them off the hook for any willful ignorance of what it means to love God and then love your neighbor as yourself. They foolishly believe that success in loving one's next door neighbor is loving God . . . which should cause someone to ask how come they don’t love their neighbor? But that too, is dismissed as being judgmental. The whole thing becomes a convoluted mess.This brings me back to the issue of “Self”.
“Self” is the hindrance to success in Christ. Adam demonstrated this in the garden by refusing to relinquish his to the Love of God that would have accomplished His intention for humanity without the need for redemption. We can thank God that Jesus, by the “work of the cross”, has restored us to that which Adam forfeited; the privilege of becoming a son brought into Glory by the method of self-renunciation; as Oswald Chambers has it: “The giving up of my claim to my rights to myself”. Jesus taught us how it is be accomplished by His example from His earthly life. Our success hinges on our abiding in Him. Our works will be His works. (Gal.2:20) In this, “Self’ has been, of necessity, crucified that the Life of Christ might be revealed in those who love Him and have purified their “Self”. (1 Pet.1:22). This is the reason for “Death to Self Theology. Anyone who denies this theology is a fool of the first order and has a rude awakening in store for him. If he teaches against it, he aids the enemy of our soul and should be avoided as a brother.
I am quite sure the 'Fool' will say I am wrong.
