Two Natures — Ernest C. Reisinger

If you have your Bible tonight, or you could use the one in the pew, I think it would be helpful if you follow along because I want to be dealing with some things in Romans chapter 7. I wouldn't call this a sermon tonight, but just a little discussion for I trust your prophet.

Romans chapter 7. Before we look to God's book, let's bow our heads in our hearts and look to the God of the book. Let us pray. Our Father, we thank you for thy words, but without thy spirit it will be a dead letter.

Therefore in the name of Christ, we plead for that spirit that gives light and life to thy words in the hearts of those that hear. We thank you that you've given us this word for conviction, for correction, for instruction, for comfort, for growth and grace.

And tonight we plead that as we meditate on almost a single thought, that thou would grant to us that which we need for another week to serve thee. Hear our prayers tonight, for Christ's sake, amen. I think we'll read this whole chapter tonight.

Paul's Testimony and the Christian's Battle in Romans 7

The first 13 verses is a picture, I believe, of part of Paul's testimony of coming to Christ. He lets us know in those verses what it was, particularly what portion, what part of God's word was. It was that convicted him of his sin.

But beginning with the 14th verse, you'll notice from then on the personal pronoun I. And therefore I believe he's talking about his own experience. In every case you'll see I. And I believe it represents the most mature Christian.

Not a weak Christian, not one who has a problem with stumbling and falling and inconsistencies. But I believe it represents the strongest Christian, the strongest type of a Christian. And it's a picture of the battle of that Christian.

So let's read it together tonight. He uses an illustration, you'll remember, as we, as the book of Romans opens up. He shows us in the first three chapters the need of justification to the people without the church.

They need justification, that's chapter one. To the people who are in the church of his day, to the Jews who were the custodians of true religion. They needed to be, they needed to be justified before God.

And when he gets to chapter three, he says there's no difference. For all the sins that come short of the glory of God, therefore they need to be justified. Then in chapter four he gives us an illustration of how we're justified.

He uses that great character of the Old Testament, Abraham. In chapter five he teaches us that it's justification by faith. In chapter six then we have what always follows true justification, that is sanctification.

That is a death to self and sin and being made alive unto God. And this is a continuation of that to show the battle. And here in particularly he brings out that fact that we're justified before God apart from the law.

And he uses an illustration in the first part about marriage. This is no place to turn to find a treatise on divorce. There are other passages for that. He just uses an illustration. Many people have been hung up on this passage, trying to wrestle with the whole problem of divorce from this passage.

And I think it's clear that he's using an illustration. Know ye not, brethren, for I speak to them that know the law, how the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth. For the woman which hath a husband, for as long as he liveth, for the husband is dead, she is loose from the law of her husband.

So then if while her husband liveth she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress. But if her husband be dead, she is freed from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that you should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sin which were by the law did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. That is, the law aroused those sinful passions that already existed. But now we are delivered from the law, being dead wherein we were held, that we should serve in newness of spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

What shall we say then? The tendency is to say, well, let's do away with the law then, if it's done all this to us. What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid! Nay, I had not known sin, and here's where he gives a little of his personal testimony, and we might ask, how did he find out sin?

And it's right here in the next three verses. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law. For I had not known lust, except the law said, Thou shalt not covet. That's the tenth commandment, and that's the one that discovered to Paul his great need of justification.

I had not known sin, he said. I had not known lust, except the law said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taken in occasion by the commandment, and I think it's referring to that particular commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence.

That is, inordinate desire or corrupt inclinations, coveting those things which God has forbidden. And it's sometimes translated lust, that big word, concupiscence. For without the law, sin was dead. It was there, sin is there, but men are quite comfortable with sinners without the law.

For I was alive without the law once, but when the commandment, and I think again it's that particular commandment, when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

For sin, taking in occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. Wherefore, the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. The problem was not with the commandment, the problem was with me, and sin.

Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid, sin was the problem. But sin, that it might appear sin. It was the law that made sin to be sin, and made it appear as sin. But sin, that it might appear sin, working in me by that which is good, that sin by the commandment might become exceedingly sinful.

Now I think you'll see the pronouns change. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do, I allow not. For what I would, that I do not. But what I hate, that I do.

If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing.

For to will is present with me. His will was set right, but he had another problem. He didn't have the power to do what he knew was right. But how to perform that which is good, I find not. For the good which I would, I do not.

But the evil which I, which I would not, that I do. Now, if I do that, I would not. It is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that when I would do good, evil is present with me.

For I delight in the law of God after the inward man. But I see another law, another principle, in my members. Warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin, which is in my members.

Deliverance Through Jesus Christ and Freedom from Condemnation

As the law shines upon the most mature Christian, as he sees it's holy, and he sees it's good, and he sees it's perfect, and he sees it's just. The natural thing for him to do, as that law shines upon him, is to cry out, O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of death?

And he said, I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. That's how he's been delivered from death. So then with the mind I serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin. There is therefore, this is not a good chapter division, I don't think.

There is therefore, in the light of this, there is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit. For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit.

Knowing Ourselves and the Doctrine of Two Natures

Now, tonight I want to talk about a subject, because of the young converts, and because of Christians, you know the Bible tells us in 1st Timothy chapter 4 verse 16, to know thyself. And you've heard it from this pulpit more than once, and I hope you'll hear it many more times.

That there are two knowledges necessary for salvation. No one will ever be saved who does not know himself. And no one will ever be saved that doesn't know God. Both knowledges are necessary for salvation.

But it's also true that it's good for Christians to know themselves. Because they ought to understand what goes on inside. They ought to understand this awful battle that we have with inward sins as well as outward temptation.

I want to talk tonight about a statement that we hear a lot of times. And that is, and I think the picture of it here is in Romans 7, probably the most, the most, the chapter that deals with it the most.

And that is this idea of two natures. Christians have two natures. We hear it all the time. And the way some people use it, it's alright. There's a teaching and it comes from Romans 7. Now what do we mean by these statements?

If they're accurate, are they accurate? Is that the best way to express it? The thing that goes on and the problems that Christians have with themselves. I, I think and I'd like to show tonight, try to show that this is not the best way to express it.

In fact it is not true in one sense of that word. Now the error of the Gnostics, Gnosticism. Gnosticism was a very dangerous heresy that came into the church like a flood in the second century. And by the third century, the beginning of the third century even, nearly all the more intellectual Christian congregations in the whole Roman Empire was affected by what we call Gnosticism.

Its errors are clearly referred to in the first epistle of John, where he talks about, where the references are made that Christ had come in the flesh. They were fighting, the Gnostics didn't believe in the two natures of Christ.

In fact there were many schools of thought among the Gnostics. They and their teaching cannot be really successfully classified under one kind of Gnostic. There were a number of schools of philosophy then that were described as Gnostics or Gnosticism.

One of their errors was that they thought that all matter was irretrievable evil. That is even my flesh, that my flesh was evil, all matter was evil. Another one of their errors was that they thought that the historical Christ, and that's what the epistle of John is fighting against, they thought that the historical Christ was a mere man and was just taken possession of by a heavenly Christ.

That is he was two people, he wasn't. That is that the heavenly Christ acted upon the man Jesus but was never incarnate. And he could not, he couldn't be incarnate they would say because matter and flesh were evil.

Gnosticism, Dualism, and the Unity of the Christian Person

Now the reason I say that is because this error of the general teaching of the two natures is a form of Gnosticism. It's a dualism, it's a dualism in this sense. It is generally taught that there are two people, that the Christian is two people.

And it has grave dangers, especially in the understanding of it, that the Christian, he's two natures, he's two people, he has two wills. And some ramifications of that is nothing more than the old doctrine of the, the heretical doctrine of the second century of Gnosticism.

Now I do not mean to be fighting language such as the evil in itself that we use to convey these thoughts. But I do mean to fight all that I can, this vicious dualism. And I want to point out some dangers and they're very practical for you, you young people in school and it's very practical in knowing yourself.

So I not only want to try to make some statements tonight about it in this little study, but I also want to say why that I'm speaking on such a subject, because of this vicious dualism and many of its dangers.

Now let me say at the outset, nowhere in the New Testament do we find that regeneration is the implanting of a new nature beside the old nature, or that the renewed man has two hostile natures. There isn't a passage in the New Testament that teaches that.

This is not what Romans 7 .21 is saying, I spoke on that the other week. I find in the law that when I would do good, evil is present with me. That's not two people, that's Saint Paul. And Saint Paul, when Saint Paul would do good, he didn't have somebody else that was doing the evil.

But there was a principle in Saint Paul that let him know that evil was present with him. Now close examination and comparing Scripture with Scripture, you will find that the Bible teaches that the renewed man is one man, one nature still, and though he is imperfectly new, he is new.

Having two principles mixed in his motive, even at the same time and in the same act. But not two men, or not two natures in that sense. Just two principles in all of his actions. Now it may appear like two wills.

It may, maybe we can express it by two, by saying two natures. But it's not, he does not have two natures. Sometimes Scripture expresses it in ways that would lead us to believe it. But we must take all the single passages of Scripture and interpret it in the light of the whole.

I say sometimes there are a few passages of Scripture that talk about, that makes it sound like two men, the old man and the new man, the inward man and the body of death. The two natures are not as natural faculties, but moral principles of operation.

There are two moral principles of operation in the Christian. This keeps all the Christian's moral actions from being perfect and absolute. That's why even when the Christian prays, he can't pray perfectly.

Or when he preaches, it's always a possibility of mixing with pride or selfishness or some other thing. Any of the Christian's actions, this fact, this fact that there are two principles, moral principles operating in the Christian, this is what keeps all of his moral actions from being perfect or absolute.

He does good with his whole heart as far as sincerity is concerned, but he does not do good with his whole heart as far as perfection is concerned. It's not perfect. I say his prayer, his witnessing, his worship.

Likewise, when he does evil, when the Christian does evil, there's still the non-submitting. There is that part of him that doesn't submit to it. There's that part of him that's not consenting to the principle of evil.

That's what we have in Romans 7, 19 to 22. We have it in these words, and I'll read it again. The good that I would, I do not. But the evil which I would, that I do. Not two people, not two natures. Paul's talking about one person, me, I.

He's not talking about two. Not two natures, but one Paul with two conflicting principles within. Now if I do that, I would not. It is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. That remaining sin, sin that dwelleth in me.

I find in a law that when I would do good, evil is present with me. Notice, there is an I and an opposition. If you study this passage carefully, you'll see this. That there is a willing and a not willing.

There is a doing and a not doing. There is a delighting and there is a not delighting. But get this, all in the same person. All in the same person, not two people. Now, and I suppose here is one of the basic differences between the sins of believers and the sins of others.

Though the principle of sinning is the same. Sin is sin, whether it's a believer or whether it's an unbeliever. All sin is sin, in either case. And in both cases, it's the being tempted by his own lust.

Sin in the Unregenerate and the Regenerate

Now in the unregenerate man, that is, those of you who are not Christians, you won't know much about what I'm talking about tonight. But in the unregenerate man, lust possesses the whole soul. Despite some, maybe possibly, checks by the conscience or maybe some checks by the light of his judgment, which may restrain the unregenerate in some ways.

He's not as bad as he could be, unless he's already reprobate. And I think that we don't say enough about that today. I believe there are lots of people who are already reprobate. Now if you want to see what that's like, you read Romans 1 and read verse 24 and 26 and 28.

You'll find statements like this. This is a picture of people who are not dead and gone to hell. This is a picture of people who are living. But they've turned from God. They've turned from the truth to the place where we have language like this.

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, to the lusts of their own heart, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves. That's a person who is alive, quite alive, but he's reprobate, he's gone.

There's no hope that he'll ever be saved. Because God gave them up. You have it in verse 26, this kind of language. For this cause God gave them up to vile affections. Even their women did change the natural youth.

And this goes into the sexual immorality and homosexuality. You have it in verse 28. Even if they did not like to retain God in their knowledge. And you have this words again. God gave them over. To me if I were an unchristian who was raised in a Christian environment and sat under the crown of a Christian ministry week after week and month after month and year after year and had godly Christian parents.

These passages of scripture would certainly bother me. Because I see it so plainly. That there's a time when you can be comfortable let go by God. And I believe there's a lot of people reprobate already.

Now I say the unregenerate. His lust, the possessed, the despite. There may be some checks in his lust. By virtue of his judgment or something like that. Unless he's already reprobate. But the regenerate.

But in the Christian there is a restraining. An unconsenting principle. And that's the man. That's the man himself. That unconsenting principle. This is the man himself. And this man himself does not concur with sin.

This descent and sin will not reign ultimately in the truly Christian man. Because Romans 6 .14. He is not under the dominion of sin. But he's under the dominion of grace. You read Romans 6 .14. Don't ever fail to see the great promise there.

To me that's one of the best promises in the Bible. We usually don't think of Romans 6 .14 as being a promise. It's one of the greatest promises in the Bible for the Christian. That sin will not have dominion over him.

Because he is not under law but under grace. The Christian does not sin with the whole and full consent in anything that he does. Now consent. I think I ought to qualify a little bit. When I say the Christian does not sin with the whole or full consent of his will.

Consent may be used and is used at least two ways in the Bible. Morally and physically. Morally and physically. In Romans if you look at chapter 7 verse 16 you see the inward man. It talks about the inward man.

He consented to the law of God that it is good. In other words he approved it is good. He delighted in it. This part of him that said the law is good. It is the part of him that does not never consent to sin.

The regenerate man or the Christian if we want to use that language. Is so far from consenting to sin. That before he sins. When he's sinning. After he sins. In all three cases. He condemns it. He disallows it.

He hates it in a moral sense. Although in a physical sense. He may consent to it and enjoy it. That's what I mean by there's two consents. Two ways that we think of consent. Morally he'll say it was wrong.

I did it. It was wrong. God is right. And so he never consents morally. Though he may consent physically and enjoy it. Now the unregenerate man sins with the full consent of his will. There may be in a person as he's tempted.

Something that seems like this. I used to see those little boys and girls. You know when they get somebody that they think loves them. They'll take one of these flowers. And they'll say he loves me. He loves me not.

He loves me. He loves me not. Probably evolved on that. Well there's something like that. Goes on with the person who's tempted sometimes. He says I will. I will not. I should. I should not. Now that's a battle that goes on within.

But it's not a plurality in will. In a physical sense. Not two wills. It's not two persons. A principle of good and a principle of evil. Seeming maybe like two natures. Seeming maybe like two wills. But it's one man.

One Person with Conflicting Principles

Example. The same person here tonight. I mean a vivid example I think would be. From the same person here tonight. He may love God. And hate the devil. He may love good. And hate evil. But it's not this little man in me.

One little man in me. That loves good. And another little man in me. That hates evil. It's all the same. It's the principle within. Now the point I'm laboring to get across is this. You're not two people.

And this dualism that some people. And we'll come to the dangers of it in a little while. So the same persons may love God. And he may hate evil. But it's not two little people inside. You see. Well another example would be.

The man that had to throw his goods into the sea to save his life. Now here's a man with all his goods and possessions. And it may be because of a storm that is necessary for him. To depart with all his goods.

Now there's something in him that wants to keep the goods. But there's something that wants to save his life. So here's one act. When he throws it overboard. There's two, two wheels as it were operating inside.

But they're not two wheels. It's all this man. But one he says oh I want to save my goods. And the other says oh I want to save my life. So the one act. He throws it overboard. One act. But two principles going on the inside.

And that's exactly the way it is. The actions are mixed in the Christian. And in every good act that the Christian does. As we learn in verse 21. Evil is present with him. That's what we talked about.

I say present in the Christian. But not prevalent. That's the difference. It's present with him. But not prevalent. The flesh intermixes with good. Sometimes even to the point to defile the good action.

Preaching could be a good action. But it could be ruined by the presence of sin. Or any Christian service could be a wonderful action. But it could be ruined by the presence of sin. So even to the defilement of good actions.

So the spirit mixes with the evil actions. The spirit mixes with the evil actions. As well as the evil mixing with the good actions. The spirit, the Bible tells us, lusteth against the flesh. And sometimes it prevails.

But it does not always prevail. You see what I'm trying to say is this. There are not two thrones within the heart of a Christian man. Where Jesus is on one throne and the devil is on the other. There are not two thrones.

There are not two dominions in the same man at the same time. There is not the dominion of Satan and the dominion of grace. The dominion of Satan and sin may struggle for the throne. But it's not on the throne.

There are not two thrones. Sin and Satan, and that's where the warfare comes. It really is that struggling for the throne place in your life. Two principles, not two persons. If it were two persons, then which one sins when we do sin?

You see, we have quite a problem. Which one does the sinning? Or which one's here tonight worshipping? If there are two people, which one's worshipping? Which one goes to heaven? Where's the other man?

When the one's gone to heaven, where's the other one? Where's the other man? So you take the old man out tonight and you live like the devil. What did you do with the new man? Park him at home or put him to bed?

No, no, there's one man. The story's told of an old ungodly bishop who lived a very licentious life. And this is supposed to be a true story. He was very cruel with crime, and even murder got involved with him.

And when he was caught, he was being charged, how inconsistent he just was with his sacred office. And so he said to the judge, the government representative, he said, you see, I represent two men in one.

He said, I represent two men in one, both being a clergyman and a baron, he said. He said, I'm two men. He said, I'm a clergyman and a baron. So the judge said to him, well then, said the judge, how will the clergyman fare when the devil is roasting the baron for his wicked, adulterous life?

He's not two, it's one. And I say, what will the new man be doing when the old man is going to hell? There are not two, one going to heaven and one going to hell. No, that's not it. There's one. And this is what we see in Romans 7.

Look at verse 23 again. But I see another law in my members. Just me, Paul, warring against the law of my mind. That's the battle. The renewed man is one man, one nature still. Imperfectly having two principles mixed in his motives, even in the same act.

But not two men. Now, man's one nature, originally it was holy, sinful, is by regeneration made imperfectly holy. Though it's imperfectly holy, it's progressively so. That's why you have a verse like Galatians 5 .17.

And I give you this, that you may understand yourself. Some people are too hard on themselves. With this old man battling, they first thing you know, they think, well, I'm not a Christian. Because of this warfare.

We have this. Galatians 5 .17. For the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh. These are contrary, the one to the other, so that ye cannot do the things that you would. You have that battle.

Well, what is it that the spirit in Galatians 5 .17 lusts against? What does the spirit lust against? Another person? No. The spirit does not lust against another person or the other. It lusteth against the flesh.

That's that principle. That's Romans 7 .21. That's that law. In fact, it could be translated flesh. Now, if you hold the two nature theory, that's very widely taught, and what usually the teachers believe is not so bad as what the people believe that receive the teaching, and that's what I'm going after, not fighting about words.

Regeneration, Sanctification, and the Renewed Nature

But if you hold to the two nature theories, then you must say, the old nature is unchanged in regeneration and sanctification. That's what you have to say. If you hold to the old nature, if nothing happens to it, I just get a new nature.

And now I got these two natures. What you're really saying is that if you hold to the two natures, that nothing happens in regeneration or sanctification to the old nature. It's unchanged. If the old nature is not changed, then what is changed in regeneration?

What is changed? Colossians chapter 1, verse 21 and 22, we have this. And you that were sometimes alienated as enemies in your minds by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death to present you holy, unblameable, unreprovable.

You see, the point is this. The nature that was changed had been alienated. It was the old nature that was changed. The old nature didn't stay unchanged. It's the old nature that was changed. The nature that was, that he's referring to in that passage, was now changed.

It was the old nature that was now made holy. You have it in Ephesians 4, 23 like this. But ye renewed in the spirit of your mind. Turn with me quickly. Just take a couple verses in Ephesians chapter 2, verses 1 to 5.

Ephesians chapter 2, verses 1 to 5. And tell me this. We want to ask this question before we begin. What is quickened in these five verses? What is it that's quickened? Well, I'll tell you the answer because I want you to see it, but I want you to see it.

The thing that is quickened in these five verses is that which is dead, spiritually. That's the old man. That's the old nature. Ephesians 2. And you hath he quickened. He, regeneration, is doing something to that which is.

Not bringing in something new that never existed and having it alongside of that which is already there. It was the quickening of something that was there. And you hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins, 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, among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lust of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of our flesh and of the mind, and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

But God, who is rich in mercy, did something for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses and sins, hath quickened us. Now my point is just simply this in that, that he quickened that which was dead in trespasses and sins.

So in speaking of the two nature theory, I want to be sure to state it generally as it's generally understood. And it's generally understood that you're two people. And I have to bow my head and say, I taught people this or tried to teach people this myself.

So I have to bow my head and say, I thank God I'm delivered from that error. So I don't want to just be stating this to quibble about words. There may be some who use this expression properly. I wouldn't get upset if somebody talked about the old nature.

It wouldn't upset me. Or somebody talked about the new nature. There's a sense in which we could use that. But in the strictest sense, if you study what nature is, and if you want to know where to study it, and you'll know where I got some of the things I'm sharing with you tonight.

If you want to, you ought to study what nature is. That's not included in my study. But if you want to do it tonight, I suggest you read Robert Dabney, Volume 1, page 196. And there you'll find out what nature is.

And you'll never believe in two natures after you read that page or two. You'll never believe in it again, I don't think. So I'm saying this so that we know ourselves, that we don't think there's some little man down in there doing all the bad things, and another little man down in there that does all the good things, and we got these.

Oh, I used to have some fancy illustrations to illustrate this. Again, I say the renewed man does not have two natures in that sense. For if he did, he would be two men. And if he were two men, this is what he would be.

It would be one, perfectly holy, and another one, completely sinful. Now that's the way the two natures, maybe that's not what the teachers mean, but that's the way it comes through to many people. That there's one man that's perfectly holy, that's the new man.

And then there's another man that's completely sinful, that's the old man. It's not that way. And I ask you a question. If it were that way, if there were two natures, one completely holy, and one completely, or perfectly holy, and one completely sinful, where would sanctification come into that picture?

How would you fit sanctification into somebody that's perfectly holy? He doesn't need sanctified. And if somebody is completely sinful, he needs regeneration. And so there's no place for sanctification in that sort of a system.