Reproclaiming the Everlasting Gospel
George Fox and Romans 7
Following a lengthy discussion, Brenda Redshaw (of this site), asked me to look into what Fox had to say concerning Romans chapter 7. In searching for “Rom. vi” or “Rom. 7” I turned up very few references. So I turned to searches for the concepts or phrases Fox used when he identified Romans 7 in his writing. There may be a better approach, or I perhaps could have used better phrases. I hope all readers will do their own searches and contribute what they find of significance. Here is what I found.
Fox does not deal with Romans 7 exclusively but brings together concepts from chap. 6 (“newness of life”), chapter 7 (“oldness of the letter”), chapter 8 (“the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death”), chapter 10 (“Christ is the end of the law for righteousness’ sake.”), and many other parts of the Bible. Fox’s associations of scripture passages range the full gamut of the scriptures. See for example:
And as Moses in the old covenant sprinkled the people with the blood, the life of beasts; so Christ our high priest sprinkles the hearts and consciences of his people in the new covenant with his blood, his life, from their dead works, that they may serve the living God in newness of life:' and as the blood of the old covenant was the life of the beasts, so the blood of the everlasting covenant is the life of Christ the Lamb, ordained before the foundation of the world, who is the great shepherd of his sheep, through the blood of his everlasting covenant he makes his saints perfect in every good work to do his will, working in them that which is well pleasing in his sight.' (Works, Vol. V, pp.362-363)
Here we have the Pentateuch, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Hebrews, and Romans all rolled together to form the picture of the distinction between the newness of life and the oldness of the letter. Fox used this distinction over and over, portraying the contrast between those who live by the law of life in Christ Jesus and those who live by some other law. See his comment in Vol. 7 (pp. 88-89 )
For ye may see, how far many may go, and did go, and were led out of many things; yet did turn again into the world. So mind your present guide, and your present condition, and your call, what ye are called from, and what ye are called to; for whom the Lord hath called and chosen, are the Lord's freemen. And so, abide every one in your calling with God, where God hath called you, and there walk in newness of life, and not in the oldness of the letter; for he that turneth from him that calleth, walks not in the life of God. Therefore, all Friends, walk in the truth and in the love of it up to God; and every one in particular mind your guide, that ye may grow up in wisdom, and improve your own talents, and the gift which God hath given you. And take heed of words without life, for they tend to draw you out of the power to live above the truth, and out of your conditions; which nature will not have peace, except it have words. But every particular submit to that which is of God in you, to guide you to God.
Paul contrasted life under the law (portrayed in Romans 7) with life under Christ who is the end of the law for Righteousness sake (Romans 8 and 10). His rhetorical question and answer, which many quote as proof that man can’t live righteously before God, that sin will be taken care of finally at some future time, is:
O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. (Rom. 7:24-25)
But for Fox, Romans 7 is not the end of the story. Like Edward Burrough, Fox could say, “But of that birth are we which hath no crown, no glory, nor rest under the sun: a birth is brought forth amongst us which is heir of another kingdom, and possessor of another crown, whose glorying is in the Lord all the day long; and he is our refuge, our rock, and our fortress against all our enemies.” (Vol. III, p. 6) In epistle CIV, Fox exhorts Friends to dwell in the power of God and to know (that is experience) the power of God to keep you. In epistle CV, he spells out how this is to be done.
CV.—Concerning the Light. (To be read amongst Friends.) All Friends every where, keep your meetings waiting in the light which comes from the Lord Jesus Christ; so will ye receive power from him, and have the refreshing springs of life opened to your souls, and be kept sensible of the tender mercies of the Lord. And know one another in the life, (ye that be turned to the light,) and in the power, which comes from the Lord Jesus Christ, who is your light, who is your life; that ye may all in the life see Christ to reign in you, who is the truth, from whence ye have light. Here the old serpent is chained, and put into the bottomless pit, and Christ is known to reign, and ye to reign with him; heirs with him, joint-heirs, and heirs of God. Here is the dominion received and witnessed of the world that is without end, and the promise of life from the Father of life to you, who are turned to the son, who to the Father is the way, who is the mediator between the Father and you. All wait to receive the everlasting priest, the everlasting covenant of God, of light, life, and peace; into which covenant no sin, no darkness, nor death comes, but the blessing of the only wise God, the Father of life, here is known, where no earthly man can approach. But he that is of God knows God's truth; and he that is of the devil, doth his lusts, who was a murderer from the beginning, in whom is no truth, who in it abode not. So he it is that speaks a lie, and speaks of himself, and not God's word; for he is out of the truth. But ye that are turned to the light walk in the light, walk in the truth, where no darkness is; with which light, that never changeth, ye may come to see that which was in the beginning, before the world was, where there is no shadow nor darkness. In which light as ye wait, ye will come to receive into your hearts the word of faith, which reconciles to God, and is as a hammer, to beat down all that is contrary; and as a sword, to divide the precious from the vile; and as a fire, to burn up that which is contrary to the precious: which word is pure, and endureth for ever; which was in the beginning, and is now again witnessed and made manifest. Therefore wait in the light, that ye may all receive it, the same word that ever was, which the scriptures were given forth from.
Thus, with Fox’s admonition, we do not find ourselves in a state of impotency having to wait for some future time when Christ will take away sin. Neither are we consigned to struggle and failure until some further work of grace descends upon us. Fox wrote in Vol. III:
Every man that cometh into the world, though they be in the first Adam, have a light from Christ the second Adam, the bishop of their souls. So every one being turned to the light which Christ the second Adam hath enlightened them withal, they shall see the bishop of their souls, Christ the power of God, which is immortal, and brings the immortal soul into the immortal God. Christ is their sanctification, who sanctifies their spirits, and bodies, and brings the soul up into God, from whom it came, whereby they come to be one soul. For in the lusts of the world, and the affections of it, is the war against it, and there are the powers of wickedness. The soul must be in the higher power, higher than the flesh, which stains the man, spirit and body, and the powers of wickedness. So the light being turned to, man receiveth the spirit of God, which sanctifies him, the spirit of sanctification in Christ Jesus the sanctification and redemption. So every man that cometh into the world has a light from Christ Jesus, the way out of the fall, the second Adam, and receiving the light he receives his redemption and sanctification, whereby his spirit, body, and soul are sanctified. (p.168)
Views: 1256
-
Comment by Brenda Redshaw on 2ndMo. 13, 2018 at 13:22
-
Hello Patricia
So it is clear, that though Paul excelled in qualities of the flesh, he no longer considered himself to be, as you say, the "type of Jew [that] assumes that rigid obeyance is all that is required to make a man right with God," and furthermore, he strove to convince other Jews that they too must come to the same conclusion as had he.
Indeed, Paul speaks of the before and after, and if it is a Jew then it is a Jew before grace on Romans 7 and one who does not understand grace or the need for purity. A Jew who depended on the flesh will also never say that he delights in the law in his inward parts. His understanding is that it is outward actions that matter to God, obeying the old covenant.
Your last point was the following: "in 1st century Judaism, the idea of sin was concerning the failures of a nation not an individual." Paul was moving people beyond the faith of first-century Judaism, as had been other prophets, even in the Old Testament. One passage that was important to the 17th c. Quaker prophets was Jeremiah 31:31-34. I'll not render the full passage, but it is worth looking up. The passage distinguishes the old covenant "made with their fathers" (that is to say with the tribe/nation/collective) and the new covenant, which is one in which God's law is put in our "inward parts" and written in our hearts. The movement from collective to individual is also underscored in the preceding verses 29-30 of Jeremiah 31:
Indeed again and I was speaking on the behalf of how the man in Romans 7 would be understanding what sin was according to your interpretation. If it were a Jew he would not be saying that he struggled with inner sin.
No, the man in Romans 7 was a man indeed who knew the law, but as a carnal believer. It is the only logical deduction.
I did quote Barclay previously to show that he did indeed think the carnal were believers:
§I. It is very probable, that many carnal and natural Christians will oppose this proposition.
He also says:
and all the several sorts of Christians 10th Prop
and mentions in too many places to quote, that there are true Christians as opposed to 'untrue' ones, those who are not walking in the Spirit.
In fact the scripturers are full of the types of God's people who are deaf and blind because they do not have the Spirit yet you and Ellis are insisting that here is only one type of Christian - and I do not dispute the qualifications of such, as having the Spirit within, but take it a step further to where Fox took it when he described his experience of the cleansing of Fire, whilst he was already a believer and henceforth told everyone that he did not sin. He had reached Romans 8 from his struggles in Romans 7.
I cannot judge where Quakers are standing today merely by reading the ancient writings. I already know that the eQuakers were completely in line with scripture, I do not have to seek that any further. I am not a detractor of Quakerism, I would like to establish the consistency of Quaker theology today with the early years.
I have heard however, that Quakers are exclusive apart from where they gladly include atheists and non theists and to be honest, from the responses I have been getting to my genuine questions, you make the NFF seem like a cult.
-
-
Greetings Friends
I see that my last contribution was posted a year ago, about the time when my 46 year old daughter was found dead in bed, so you will understand why I have not been around.
The discussion had reached a stale-mate, and a lot of it I feel was due to some misunderstandings and I consider another attempt may be beneficial, that is, if you are willing to have your position challenged by a sympathetic follower of the early Quakers, who does not belong to any of the other Quaker divisions and not a detractor by any means. I will approach futher discussion from another standpoint so hopefully there might be a better understanding, that is, if you have any desire to understand the position of the person you have been having this dicussion with. I do wonder though as you failed to answer some of my questions.
The NFF has been actively publishing and preaching, what they understand to be the true gospel taught by George Fox, since 1974 (?). We have now entered into 2019 so it is approximately 45 years that the organisation has been preaching the message that 'Christ has come to teach His people Himself', with the aim of bringing about a reformation of Quaker thought, and a return to the power and true teachings of Fox, generally using the literature of Lewis Benson, and to turn back the centuries of darkness and disunity and once again, witness the power of God at work as in the days of George Fox and before that, the days of the apostles and the early church.
So what has been the fruit of this endeavor? Is it as Benson had predicted?
"He believed that those who received this gospel would experience the power of God as it had been experienced in apostolic times. He argued that Christians were not experiencing the power of the gospel because they were putting their faith in an attenuated gospel. He claimed to have recovered the gospel of power that had been lost. Francis Howgill says, "We are come to the everlasting gospel again, and have received it, and it's the power of God, which . . . is to be preached to the nations again after the Apostasy."(24)(Italics mine) (A New Foundation To Build On: a series of 5 lectures: The Power of the Gospel Benson p04)"
Has the world witnessed this same display of the power of God through the teraching of the NFF? I say that no, it has not occured and the reason is because it is not the same gospel as the one Fox taught and in order to back this up, instead of arguing scripture, which is not the Quaker way after all, this time I will go back to the time of Augustine and his dispute with Pelagius, which explains how the various interpretations of Romans 7 were called into question and the interpretation I have met so far in the previous dicussions, was the held at large in the church, whilst the one I am espousing and see in the writings of the early Quakers, was subject to great persecution which it has always been from the start, but can still be found amongst various writers and was the one held by Pelagius who is only a heretic from the standpoint of the evengelical. In my next post I will explain further.
-
-
Interpreting Romans 7.
There have been two interpretations of Romans 7 which have dominated church history and which are sometimes known as the Primitive and the Post-Primitive. Augustine held to the Primitive in his early years, as did nearly all of the Church Fathers and writers before Augustine, but changed his stance later. The reason that he changed was due to his heated discourses with Pelagius. There have been two interpretations widely held since Augustine, the original and the one from Augustine called the Post Primitive which did not exist before he adopted and popularised it. The third, was held by Pelagius and claims that sinlessness is possible in this life.
We must conclude that the man depicted in Romans 7 is a) a man who has only just come to Christ for forgiveness and has attempted previously to be righteous through obeying the law, (or as commonly known as an unbeliever) and the Primitive view, b) the normal state of a Christian which is held by Calvinists in the main and brought in by Augustine and c) the believer who has come to the crisis in his faith and inability to keep God’s law in the manner that he knows he must, whereby he will be delivered from the body of sin to the state where there is no more condemnation, the view which became widespread during the ‘Celtic period’, and Holiness Movement of the 19th C. There is no other viable interpretation of these texts that I can see.
The Primitive view and the one which is widely held today for example by many Arminians, is that Romans 7 describes the salvation experience and Paul is writing as an unregenerate soul. Augustine said: “It is understood that man here described who was never under grace” (Homilies). This is the view that Augustine held until Pelagius challenged him over his view that man is totally depraved.
“In his argument, Pelagius referred to the passage under consideration, saying that this was a palpable case in which, by the universal assent of the church, the state and character of the unregenerate man is described. He then asked, if approving the right, and hating the wrong, and 'delighting in the law of God' did not imply that there was something good even in such a man? Augustine could not deny the fact, the case being so palable, of the universal agreement of the church in the deduction that it was the unregenerate man referred to in the passage; nor did he perceive how, admitting the correctness of the universally received exposition, he could meet the argument of his opponent. Under such perplexity, Augustine denied the validity of his own and the universal, and adopted the few and before, unheard of, exposition, a most needless resort and a most calamitous one for the spiritual good of the church” (J Schmidz Romans 7)
Augustine did not accept Pelagius’ argument and agree with his interpretation. Pelagius was trying to show Augustine that Romans 7 was not to be understood as the so called Primitive view but the Apostolic view. Augustine realised his first view was untenable that Paul described the unregenerate but the second view was untenable for Augustine because it says that man can stop sinning.
Pelagius taught the Apostolic view which is that Paul is speaking about the Christian in Romans 7 but not in what should be his normal condition. Those who do not accept the view that it is a Christian speaking point to the fact that there is no mention of grace or of the work of the Holy Spirit in the chapter. But this is not because there is no Holy Spirit or grace. Far from it. The opposite is true actually. However, the person describing it is not aware of it. It seems as though God has deserted actually, as the person comes to an extreme point because God has convicted the man of his sinfulness. Paul is discussing experience here not doctrine. He came to a point of time when he saw himself as God saw him as he sought acceptance through the works of the law. And all Christians seek to do this unless they adopt Augustine’s position and excuse their sin. and until they come to the point whereby they admit their powerlessness.
The misunderstanding of the early writers teachings in saying that Romans 7 is the unregenerate person could be that some meant an unregenerate person as a believer who has not arrived at the sanctification experience, which was what Wesley meant by the 'Almost Christian' In the Bible, salvation sanctification and justification are all one event but describing the differing aspects of it. This could means that one is not really saved until they are entirely sanctified. Jesus came to save us from our sins and until this is done, then we are still in them and not saved even though we have been given 'The power to become the son's of God' as a possibility but not yet an actuality until the provision of sanctification through the cross, is appropriated by man and he is delivered from not just the penalty from sin but also the power and the presence.
This Apostolic view has been rejected by most of the church through the ages and the reason why Pelagius has had such bad press. By his dispute with Augustine and his understanding of Romans 7, he did not teach that the Christian could stop sinning on his own accord. Far from it. It needed the divine interaction of God to bring about the change or deliverance needed to get Paul from Romans7 to Romans 8.
-
Comment by Ellis Hein on 2ndMo. 28, 2019 at 0:08
-
Brenda, there has never been any contention regarding God's requirement that we live without sin. Our discussion has been about how that comes about and whether or not we are stuck in the "Oh wretched man that I am" state until some further work of grace. If anyone wishes to see those discussions, there is plenty of material in this thread and in the post that led up to this one.
Now, as to your statement:
So what has been the fruit of this endeavor? Is it as Benson had predicted?
"He believed that those who received this gospel would experience the power of God as it had been experienced in apostolic times.
I can say that the fruit of this endeavor is as Lewis predicted. Those who receive this gospel do experience the power of God to bring them up into the measure of the stature of Christ.
-
-
Hello Elias. I trust that you are well in the Lord.
I published my article on interpreting Romans 7 because of the importance of seeing which stream of the three possibilities we subscribe to and what the history of this interpretation is. A lot of people do not know this but it is vital as it concerns what makes us right with God, or sanctification.
It seems that your view is the Arminian view, held by many Wesleyans, and that is, when we first come to Christ , we have the ability to experience the power of God, but I am pressuming this please correct me if wrong, most do not experience it because of poor teaching and cannot live the lives that the Apostles led or what we read about the lives of the early Quakers, and pressumably, the New Foundation Fellowship and everyone else has been in darkness.
The problem is Elias, that the early Quakers differed more profoundly than you are asserting. They did not only teach that a man has the ability to avoid conscious sin. Fox was not discussing that this is what he had gained freedom from, but sin that he was unable to resist. And it is not a man who has yet to find Christ has this struggle inside of him and indeed it was not the struggle that Paul had with his sins and he says clearly that as a Jew, he was perfect in his keeping of the law.
The question have have failed throughout to answer, and I request that you do so now, is Romans 722 'For I delight in the law of God after the inward man.' No unsaved man or Jew can do this. The Jew knew his outward man had to obey the law, but here was no teaching on how to get the inward man to conform. They cannot delight in something that condems them at every turn. Jesus said that lust is the same as adultery.
So I ask you, what is your definition of being without sin? Or do you say you are not there yet? If not why? You have had enough time following Benson. Is your heart pure and are all of your actions in accordance with the will of God and holy? I think I have asked you before and you confessed that you are not in Romans 7 and crying out to be delivered from unconcious sin. This is not where Fox was. He overcame these sins and then led others to do the same and hence Quakerism started.
But moving on, you claim 'I can say that the fruit of this endeavor is as Lewis predicted. Those who receive this gospel do experience the power of God to bring them up into the measure of the stature of Christ.'
This is subjective, and the marks of a true release of the power of God in a man whi has come under the rulership of Jesus Christ, is that it does not only affect him but the whole of the society he finds himself in aka revival. If you read of the revivals of 1859 and the Hebrides and Wales revivals in the UK you will see what it means. Children falling on their knees in playgrouds praying, miners down the mines holding prayer meetings in their dinner breaks, crime rates going right down and pubs closing.
The same sort of things we can read about in Fox's Journal of how he was attacked and left for dead yet could stand up and walk away. These things happen when the power of God is released. Many believers will say the same as you, that they experienced the power of God to 'bring them up to the stature of Christ' because of the change in their lives, but it is mincemeat compared to the real thing.
Where is the NFF revival? Where are the discussion forums absolutely filled with People telling others of the same miracles that are happening around them? Even this forum is barely surviving.
-
-
So I ask you, what is your definition of being without sin? Or do you say you are not there yet? If not why? You have had enough time following Benson. Is your heart pure and are all of your actions in accordance with the will of God and holy? I think I have asked you before and you confessed that you are not in Romans 7 and crying out to be delivered from unconcious sin. This is not where Fox was. He overcame these sins and then led others to do the same and hence Quakerism started.
Living without sin is to live in the light of Christ we are enlightened with, to put our whole trust in his teaching. "If you would be my disciples, abide in my word, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." This was Jesus' teaching during the feast of tabernacles where it was the custom to make temporary dwellings for the week of the celebration. Jesus' call, "abide in my word," is a call to take our permanent dwelling in his teaching. To run after something that Christ does not teach us inwardly, no matter how alluring it may sound, is to take the serpent as our teacher rather than Christ. To run after something Christ does not teach us inwardly is to run without being sent, to speak when not commanded, to counsel when you have not stood in the council of God. "Did we not do many miracles in your name?" ask the many. Jesus' response is "Depart from me you workers of iniquity." Why workers of iniquity? because their first concern was not to abide in Christ's teaching wherein alone we do the will of the Father.
-
-
Jesus laid out just what He meant by sin in the following discourse:
Matt 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
21 Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;
24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.
25 Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.
26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.
27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
So we can see that it means complete obedience to His commands not just saying we agree with them ie putting our trust in them. We can like them and try to obey them, this is well within the human means, but to obey them completely, even to the extent of being more righteous than the Pharisees, is superhuman and requires the power of God and it was this that distinguished the early Quakers, the apostles, and a small amount of others, which the early Quakers would probably not have access to their writings like Pelagius'.
I am afraid that you have not presented any case at all as to why the power of God descending on a group of people, which you claim for the NFF, does not make any impression on those around or the world as it did in the periods I have mentioned. The power of God is not kept under bushels - people see it and are convicted of their unholiness because they are face to face with holy people and this is the litmus test. Goerge Fox had the reputation of being a holy man as did others who were living the true gospel, and they were severely persecuted.
So we need these two things to show the fruit of the Spirit: a purity in all of ones actions, words and spirit, and persecution. Were these the distinguishing marks of Lewis Benson and the members of the NFF?
It is all about the holy fire that falls when men believe the true gospel. I am not talking about seeking a second blessing, what was obtained for us was done on the cross, and it is a matter of stepping into the whole benefit of the various offices of Christ, that man can be entirely free from sin. That is what freedom means. Many religions can give man a sense of happiness, but none but the true religion of Christ can deliver him from sin and return him to the state he was in, and which Fox taught so much about and confessed for himself, in Adam before he fell.
-
-
Brenda, when I stated that we are to live by the light of Christ we are enlightened with and to put our whole trust in his teaching, I am not talking about a body of literature, such as the bible. I am referring to a present-tense relationship wherein you hear and obey his voice speaking to you now. This is where our trust must lie. Here we know the law written on the heart. This is what it means to abide in his teaching, to know the truth that makes free from slavery to the serpent. This is obtained for us by Christ's life, not his death. For had the cross been the end, the serpent would have won. But because Christ lives, his life can now come to all who will hear his voice and follow.
-
-
The Bible is not the primal source of guidance for the believer. It is the fountain but not the source. The primal source of guidance for the believer is the Word within that speaks to us, Is 30: 21And thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it, when ye turn to the right hand, and when ye turn to the left.
This is where Quakers differed from Protestants' sola scriptura. It is life in the Spirit, where we are untited with Christ and not merely followers, which was for the earlier stage that the disciples were in prior to pentecost. I don't know how you cannot see that this is what Fox taught, and none were clearer.
The Holy Spirit cannot dwell in a temple that is not perfectly clean.
-
-
The bible speaks of God and Christ as the fountain. The scriptures are a testimony to Christ who tells us, as he told his disciples, "The flesh profits nothing, it is the breath that gives life. The words I have spoken/am speaking to you, these are breath, these are life." It is by hearing and living by "the words I am speaking to you" that we have the breath of life, for it is not by measure that he speaks to us.
There is no such state as being a follower of Christ while not being united with him.
I do not find any evidence that you have read or understood what I have written in these long discussions. There is sufficient material there to be digested without me saying further.
© 2024 Created by Allistair Lomax.
Powered by
You need to be a member of New Foundation Fellowship to add comments!
Join New Foundation Fellowship