Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 41

A BRIEF HISTORY OF REPENTANCE

OR ‘ANOTHER FINE MESS WE HAVE GOT OURSELVES INTO’

A BRIEF HISTORY OF REPENTANCE OR ‘ANOTHER FINE MESS WE HAVE GOT OURSELVES INTO’ By SDP

By SDP MASON CORKERY

Published By Word Central LTD UK Copyright Word Central UK LTD All material held and owned by Word Central LTD UK

First Published 2011

This book is not to be sold without prior consent of the author and is used solely as a tool for evangelisation. It is Copyrighted to Word Central LTD and in turn is used through that ministry and ministries that agree with the scriptural remit there of.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF REPENTANCE

OR ‘ANOTHER FINE MESS WE HAVE GOT OURSELVES INTO’

INTRODUCTION

FOREWORD This little book is not about condemnation or that we are lousy sinners that need to repent, it is not about putting people down or indeed making people feel low and depressed and overburdened, It is not about the fact that People feel God‟s abandoned them. Indeed this is Not about me telling you need to Repent.

It is not a complete history or treatise on „Repentance‟ nor should it be used as an academic resource. But with so many people saying that we need to constantly Repent , or that as a nation we need to Repent I now believe that many have , for whatever reason caught ‟The Wrong End Of The Stick‟, as they say in the UK and refuse to let go because that is what their tradition has taught them. Though Scripture makes it clear, they misconstrue it and do not understand the necessity of „Dividing the Word‟ (2 Timothy 2:

15) .

This is in effect „A Brief History Of Repentance‟. Or as I prefer to call it, because I‟m into films/ movies, „That‟s another fine mess we have got ourselves into„.

Repentance is mentioned in Hebrews Chapter 6 verses 1-6 and the writer has this to say about it:

Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this will we do, if God permit. For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and

the powers of the world to come,

again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God

afresh, and put him to an open shame.

If they shall fall away, to renew them

(Hebrews 6: 1-6)

I shall return to this again later. However the key here is that today in the whole Church (Not just in certain denominations, but the whole body) we have a problem where people are seeing repentance as to key to all problems, faults to do with sin, rather than the solution we got 2000 years ago on the Cross of Jesus.

Many People, in the Body (the Church), are going around, often those in leadership who should know better, or in ignorance of the Word telling us that we are sinners, and that we are in need of that sackcloth and ashes approach. We are told that God will not move without our daily repentance. Yes we are being told that if we deal with sin, if we do sin, if we commit sin, if we are driven by sin : Then we have to REPENT .

Not much about Healing here, those scriptural claims are ignored (again a teaching for

another day).

We are basically told to remain „Sin Conscious‟ Rather than „Jesus

Conscious‟. We have our eyes drawn off of Jesus and his righteousness down into the mire of self, that should be dead to sin but alive in Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 1: 30; 2

Corinthians 5:21; Galatians 2:20-21; Philippians 3:9).

We are told to keep looking at the

problem rather than the solution; we are told we have to get down on our knees and do

the „sack-cloth‟ and ashes thing‟.

That is not however what we are told under the New Covenant. The New Testament does not teach this. In fact the Hebrews reading that I just gave (Hebrews 6: 1-6) makes it very clear that: Repentance; along with Baptism; Laying on of Hands as well as The Resur-

rection of the Dead: and Eternal Judgment are all basic teaching that we, as believers,

should already understand. Paul is in effect saying, “It is basic stuff” and we need to move onto more important issues”.

So how and why has it gone so wrong?

I, along with the fellowship I attend, can be accused (Have been accused) of preaching one Message and that will always centre on the Cross Of Jesus. If you read Romans, or Galatians, or Hebrews, or the Gospels themselves, they all centre on the Cross of Christ and how Jesus is the centre of all. The Cross is the very centre of History and when it comes to Repentance and the difference between the Old and The New Testaments then, in a way, “The Cross Truly Does Mark the Spot.”

QUESTIONS

1. What is your understanding of Repentance as tradition teaches it?

2. We are called to righteousness ; so what do the scripture tell us as opposed to tradition

3. Repentance should be taught as basic teaching. Do you understand it as such or is it large and complex

HOW WE SHOULD READ SCRIPTURE TO GAIN THE BEST FROM IT Scripture as it stands, and as many have come to believe, says very little about repentance itself. In fact if you take all the different words used and what they mean, and break them

down into their individual components of meaning (Which I shall attempt to do later), then

you will see that all the words used by the translators of the Bible for fact all have a totally different meaning.

‟Repentance ‟ in

So here today we will look at each of these key words so that when you come across Repentance , as used in scripture in the future, you will be able to say: „Does it mean such

and such?‟ Or: „Is it about this?„

Or „Is it to be understood in this way?‟ and so on.

Getting that knowledge of the original words found in the scriptures is very important to us because we are going to find that each word used in scripture, and translated as Repentance, Repent, or Repented, and so forth means completely different things. Completely , Totally, Different things thus having different meanings attached to them. Scripture has at least 6 or seven meanings when it comes to The word we use as „Repentance„. In fact I would say more because if you take a Hebrew word like „Shoob‟ (Which we will look up later) we see 20-30 different meanings in that one Word.

Again before we move on here I would like to recommend that if you want to get into scripture and into the original languages, culture and what words actually mean: Get yourself the Following tools:

A Good translation of the Bible (that goes without saying)

A Strongs Concordance

Good Greek Interlinear (makes you look intelligent , has Greek above the English…)

A Vines Dictionary (Goes into more detail than Strongs)

E-Sword (Download From Internet of Scriptures and helps, Includes a Strongs- for free)

Theophilus (Download From Internet of Scriptures and helps -for free)

BlueletterBible.org Internet sight for help with scripture (free)

It goes without saying that we must:

Read the word (Rhema) for ourselves,

Listen to teachers grounded in ‘The Word‘ and not ‘Traditions of Men‘.

Ask questions, be Disciples (Mathetis) and

Let the Word (Logos) be opened to you through ‘Revelation Knowledge’ (Epinosis) gained through Christ (Christos/ Messiach) within you by the ‘Power (Dynamis) of the Holy Spirit‘ (Hagios Pnuema).

This all centres on Jesus (Yoshua) and the Love that God the Father (Theos Patros) has for the World (Cosmos/ Ghey).

So there are sources out there that can help you and I would strongly recommend that you get those sources because they will really help you to understand what the writers, and the

Holy Spirit, was saying to God‟s people in their day, in their culture and languages; thus ultimately how God is speaking to you now.

1. In the Bible as a whole is much time spent on Repentance in Scripture?

2. What is the Best way to read the Word?

3. Can the Bible speak to us today?

CONFUSION ON REPENTANCE Did you know that in the Word for example and if you go to the old Testament God Repents not once, or twice but several times. We know that God is not evil he cannot do wrong, he is love so why should he have to repent.

And the LORD repented of the evil (Wrath, Stress- a message for another day)

which he thought to dounto his people.

And again:

(Exodus 32: 14)

And when the angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed the people, It is enough: stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD was by the threshing-place of Araunah the Jebusite.

(2 Samuel 24: 16)

So at least 7 times we have the Lord repenting in scripture (Genesis 6:6 ,Exodus 32:14,

Judges 2:18 , 2 Samuel 24:16 , 1 Chronicles 21:15 , Jeremiah 26:19 , Jonah 3:10 ).

Repentance , sad to say , is one of those issues that has clogged up the system of what God wants to do, and how we are told we have to respond to God. I say this in love. This is said to and about organizations primarily and Not the people. In the church we have systems in place that are stopping the „Body Of Christ‟ moving forward. Thus we are told things like we cannot have revival because we need to have a time of Repentance and until then we cannot move in God‟s will. In Lamentations 3:24-26 it states that we have to wait on salvation:

The LORD is my portion, saith my soul; therefore will I hope in him. The LORD is good unto them that wait for him, to the soul that seeketh him. It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the LORD.

Note again 2 Chronicles 7: 14-22 and such like.

(Lamentations 3:24-26)

These are talking of the Cross , of

Jesus‟ and his work of Salvation. They are not giving a message (other than prophetic) for us today, for as stated earlier „The Work of Salvation took place over 2000 years ago‟, and thus any waiting that has to be done is now obsolete. Today we are not called to „Wait Upon the Lord‟. No! we are called to be disciples and that involves doing and going out. Yes we pray, yes we respond to God in prayer But there is a New Testament way and an Old Testament way and those two should never meet.

People are not following what the Lord wants but are „Doing‟ whole programmes where they believe they have to get right with the Lord. Repent! Repent! Repent? We have a system in place therefore that is teaching people how to approach God in the wrong way. This sad to say, in this case is mainly to do with those who translated , or this case mistranslated the scriptures.

1. Does God Repent in Scripture

2. They waited on God in the Old Testament so are we called to wait now?

PART I TRADITION & REPENTANCE

REPENTANCE OVER THE LAST 2000 YEARS: THE EARLY CHURCH Repentance, as used by many in the church today, so often, is not a word that belongs in the Scriptures at all. We have labelled the Word , as many did the Word ‟Penance that has gone before it. It has been labelled in so many diverse ways that along the way the true meanings (yes I use the Plural) have been lost.

I shall look at the history of the word Repentance in a sort of reverse chronology as such. Thus the post Church era will be looked at first , then the Gospel era and then finally Old Testament times. This is because when I first broached this subject for myself, so I could give a message on it, this was how the Lord revealed it to me, and wanted me to do it. Thus if this is what the Lord wanted this is what the Lord gets. In other words Ill talk about how it is now and go back to the Hebrew Old Testament (Is there any other).

Today I would argue that repentance has its roots in two sources . The first is a man called Tertullian ( Or rather Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus (c. 160 c. 220 AD) 2 nd -3 rd century AD he wrote two key treatise, two books if you will, best sellers of their day called (believe it or not) ‟On Repentance‟ and „On Purity„. The book was on Repentance, and titled „0n Repentance‟ sounds like a comic routine about to happen. However what follows is Not funny. Here Tertullian spoke of Repentance and said:

Seize the opportunity of unexpected felicity: that you, who sometime were in

God's

sight nothing but a drop of a bucket… …repent of errors; repent loved what God loves not.’

(continually) of having

(Chapter 4. On Repentance)

And again when discussing the work ‟The Shepard of Hermes‟ Tertullian states :

For if any wavering of the flesh, any distraction of spirit, any wandering glance, causes you to lose your equilibriumremember God is good! It is to His own and not to the heathen that He opens His arms. A second penance will receive you and, after you have been an adulterer, you will again be a Christian. Thus would you s peak to me, Oh kindliest of God’s exegetes. And I would assent, if the book of the Shepard which alone is favourable to adulterers deserved to be included within the sacred canon, and if it had not been judged apocryphal and false by all the councils of the churches, even your own! It is adulterous itself and therefore favours its associates… And surely the epistle of Barnabas has found wider acceptance among the churches than has that apocryphal Shepherd of adulterers.

(On Purity 10 & 20: 36)

In ‟On Repentance‟ and ‟On Purity‟ he stated that one must repent for sins gain and again and again an again etc.

From those times, referred to as the time of the Church fathers (150 AD), until the Reformers (1400AD onwards), there was only really one view of repentance that held out. Sadly this concept knew little or nothing of the Grace of God. A system based on man‟s works of Salvation prevailed and what emerged in that very early Church was a mish mash of ideas that had true little grounding in the Scriptures. It is Amazing, how quickly, and that a little beyond the first generation after the Apostles, there was this distorted view and acceptance as what came to be known as ‟The Good News‟ (Gospel) which the Apostles themselves had entrusted to the care of this Church.

There can be no doubt the early Church, and what it felt and indeed believed, was willing to have martyrs for the cause, that made Jesus, and the Work of the Cross key. However it refused to see a work that was finished. The finished work of the cross . Rather it became very quickly about an ongoing tyrannical rule of obedience, under fear to a system, rather that about a relationship with Jesus directly. Repentance was a tool that kept people in check and made them answerable to others rather than God.

Firstly relationship was to the Church, and the Church in turn provided the few that were allowed (If meeting a certain criteria) to have a relationship with Jesus for you. You had to go through a sacramental system based more on a mixture of Paganism and Old Testament ideas and concepts rather than what Jesus, and his followers originally taught. The idea of Grace was lost and any true relationship with Jesus was seen very little to be obtainable by the common folk.

The church fathers, and those who came after them, believed that salvation began at one's baptism. It was believed that when someone was baptized their sins, committed until that point in life, were forgiven.

The church fathers had faith that a person would begin the „Christian Life‟ with a pure heart and clean slate. But then that heart would not be clean for very long. Since everyone would continue to be weighed down by sin after baptism because of a crucial misunderstanding of what scripture was saying:

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

(1 John 1:8-10)

A part of scripture written to unbelievers, within a church system was misconstrued as

being about believers, and as they say the rest was history. The Church, because of this,

had to develop, to paraphrase Baldric in Black Adder: ‟A Cunning Plan‟ whereby sins that happened Post Baptism would have be atoned and dealt with.

So many people began putting off any idea of baptism until they were near death so that they could have the Churches (Thus God‟s) utter total forgiveness. The church fathers and those who followed successively dealt with this problem by coming up with penance as the cure for post-baptismal sins. Thus trying to alleviate one problem another was caused.

The Fathers debated all this as to whether any major post-baptismal sins could be forgiven at all. It was agreed that even serious ("mortal") sins could have forgiveness. There was how-ever some disagreement at various councils (Church Meetings by those ‟Ruling ‟ the whole Church) as to how many times anyone could repent then be forgiven.

A few of these leaders, notably Hermas, stated categorically that there was only one

chance for repentance after baptism and thus holding the scriptural remit of „Repent and

However that concept did not win through. I am not stating here

Believe„ (Mark 1: 15).

that Hermas was right in all his teachings, but I am saying that here he seems to have got

it right.

The triumphant view point with those early fathers was that a person could repent and be forgiven on some occasions if warranted. However they did not say exactly the times one had to repent and why this was believed. So because someone could repent for fear

of giving churchmen (Priests, Bishops and other religious), and not lay people note here,

an absolute license to sin. This, of course was why many put off penance/ repentance until their deathbeds.

In the late 4 th and early to mid fifth centuries, in spite of the fear of giving people a

license to sin, the Church uniformly specified that a person might repent and be forgiven an unlimited number of times.

Then came others , like Augustine, and in and around those centuries Councils were

Held, and it came to common agreement that this „Repent and be forgiven an unlimited number of times‟ was what penance / repentance was and everyone in the Church leadership applauded and so it came to be. No questions asked (Except the wrong ones). No looking at the scriptures, and what they actually held to. And so the idea that was formed about Repentance / Penance was, like many half truths and lies that grow out of all proportion, accepted. So that by the 4 th -6 th centuries this was a key teaching in the Catholic church. But hey do not condemn it because at this time this was the Christian Church , The Body of Christ, for there was no other. So if you want to put a label on it understand this that this was Christianity.

By the 4 th century onwards we refer to the leaders of the church historically as „The Latin Fathers‟. The Latin Fathers translated, or rather mistranslated, and agreed to, New Testament Greek words like „Metanoia’ even when not translated as such (more on this later) to reflect their misguided and scripturally uninformed theology.

These so called apostolic fathers taught that for anyone to retain salvation from eternal Hell and Judgment a person had to feel remorseful for, and confess sins to a man called

a „Priest‟ and then do „Acts Of Penance‟ as prescribed by the priest. That was to do

works or to give money to the church or say set prayers; usually a mixture of all three.

The word chosen in the Latin (the central language of its day in the known World of the West) for Repentance was the Word Penitentia. Thus a group of my favourite people „Theologians„, came along and started writing ideas about this word and created meanings that did not exist in the word ‟Penance‟ to begin with. Thus Penance came to mean a doing of stuff like getting down on our knees and begging God, or giving taxes, or farm produce to the Church, or crawling miles on pilgrimage, or whipping yourself until your flesh was subdued (Until the next time). There was quite a list. Thus a procedure started to happen within the Church that became accepted and was seen as the norm.

Also Jerome [Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus] (c.347 420 AD) translated scripture into Latin and used this word „Penitentia’ (Penance). So the Word was now in the Bible as well as official Church teaching. (Thus the Latin Vulgate Bible). The Vulgate took centre stage and became the translation accepted by the Christian world.

So Jerome translated the original Greek Bible into Latin (No Hebrew at this point , another story for another day). This was in the late 4th-century it was called the Vulgate. and was

commissioned by Pope Damasus I in 382 AD . By the 13th century this revision had come to be called the versio vulgata, that is, the "commonly used translation",and ultimately it became the definitive and officially promulgated Latin version of the Bible in the Roman Catholic Church.

In the fifth century under such a system people in the Church (and in the West that was seen as the only place to be- so virtually everyone) believed these things. Then was when it came to be that people were baptized as infants, and as young children. Children were

taught until they knew off by rote what penance was and what their role was in it.

People confessed to their priest (Confessor). As teenagers they were taught and utterly believed that any salvation was in the Church alone. Jesus was reverenced, but to attain any relationship with him was seen as the Churches role only (The Church being the

„Leadership„).

glorified and it was understood and in general known that Jesus died so that those within the Body of the Church Catholic (Universal) could continue to take part in that ongoing death, and that they could only do this through „The Church„ (Not Through Jesus Alone).

The Cross was to be reverenced and the Work of it done by Jesus

It was believed that people had to strive hard in that wicked flesh, as perceived wrongly, to fight sin with all the physical might a person had. Fight hard and prevail, that was the only way to get to Heaven and Penance was the tool that was there for you if you were going to get into heaven.

How people hoped that they would not die right after committing a mortal sin (adultery, idolatry, murder, or denying the faith while being tortured). At least it should be a venal one (One less important not even worthy of Hell):

‘By and large, it was far easier to gain admission to the Church than to re-enter it, once its ideals had in any way been renounced by its adherents. The initiated, through baptism, were given a clean sheet. Whatever evils had previously stained a man's life, it was forgiven and forgotten, as a new adventure in Christ began. It was when the Church had to deal with those who had soiled the sheet after their admission, that difficulties arose. Light offenders were met by different forms of censure, such as temporary exclusion from Holy Communion or varying degrees of penance. In dealing with the mortal sins of idolatry, murder, and adultery, not to mention apostasy, Church leaders differed concerning the form of punishment’

(Robert Williams, P142).

Again a misunderstanding to long to go into here based on 1 John and also the concept in scripture of Sins that Led to Death and Sins that do Not (Romans 7:5; James 5:20; 1 John

5:

16). Thus a whole Theology came about that by the middle of the 13 th century it had engulfed the church and was a way of life. So the Church was teaching that this was ‟Penance‟ or as we call it today „Repentance„. Penance came to mean doing things or giving things to get right with God.

1. How did the Early Church Define Repentance and did it comply with the Scriptural View?

2. How did early Christians Repent and why?

REPENTANCE OVER THE LAST 2000 YEARS: THE REFORMATION YEARS Thus the Reformation was to come about in the 16 th century and introduce a new view of

repentance.

Grace will be disappointed that Luther , and others, held to a view of salvation that held

within it the possibility of relinquishing it by departing from the faith of Christ.

.

The power of the Roman church (now one of many denominations), had been broken to some degree and would no longer be the key proponent of Grace thus being limited and becoming more so as time wore on. The Reformers looked back to Jesus Christ and the Apostles rather than the church fathers but they looked through angry spectacles of rebellion and anger, rather than Grace, took hold as a new tradition was formed

wrongly.

said in the Bible, much was lost rather than gained. A anti view of Catholicism became

common place.

scripture truly said in context and how it was said a pious religious attitude returned particularly when it came to looking at a view of repentance as found purely in the Gospel. Protestantism may have left Catholicism behind in theory but in much of the practice and understanding it remained the same.

Those who are were burdened about, and for, the purity of the Gospel of

For in going against the old, and not holding on to the Word and what was

When it came to looking at scripture, rather than looking at what

This is the idea of Repentance, found more in tradition than in the word, that we still have with us today.

Erasmus and the Reformation (1517AD ff) happened at around the same time but he never felt the need, or want, to Leave the Roman Catholic Church. Now I am not knocking all Catholic teaching here there has been some good teachings and the „Counter Reformation‟ (Or The Catholic Reformation) achieved some move forward (Particularly „The Council of Trent‟ and more recently „Vatican II (2)‟.

Erasmus (Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus) (1466 1536) however in the 15 th to 16 th

centuries decided to write a New Testament translation into the Late Latin (Mixture of

Latin and French) of the Bible and replaced the word ‟Penitentia‟ with

(become reasonable again; recover, come to the senses) derived from the Vulgar Latin word sapere (taste of; understand; have sense) derived from the Proto-Indo-European root

‘Resipiscere’

It is this Word translated as:

‘Resipiscere’ [re-sip-ee-see-air]: Resipiscence \Res`i*pis"cence\ , n. [L. resipiscentia, from resipiscere to recover one's senses: cf. F. r['e] sipiscence.] Wisdom derived from severe experience; hence, repentance. [R.] --. Bp. Montagu

However because of the Reformation and what lay beyond it other denominations came about, came up, appeared (Take-Your-Pick). These grouping thus formed their own traditions. These traditions are mostly the traditions that we have in place today.

Let us be clear about this, and I say this with some knowledge as the Reformation is something I have studied and read about until it literally comes out my ears, politics, as

well as theology, were key motivating factors. For many of the German princes it now meant wealth could be kept by them rather than giving it to Rome (the Pope). It was all about money and power, and the like. These princes knew that if they went along with the „Reformation‟ good things would happen, most notably no more money and political kowtowing to Rome but money and power that would stay and stop with them. So yea they became supporters and Reformers too. But let us say some theology took hold.

Both Calvin, and Luther (Chief Reformers were to teach that all of a persons sins were forgiven when a person was to become a Christian (Note here this refers to Baptism and Post Baptism and not directly to the Born Again experience). Such was radically different to what The Roman Catholic Church had said before. Thus logically penance, and the system it had created, would stop in those churches that would break away from Catholicism and be adopted the thinking of what came to be known as the Reformation.

The reformers view therefore, on forgiveness of sin, is a crucial step here. It is important that we know exactly what happened and why it got even more convoluted as the idea of repentance jumped across a notch but not necessarily in the right direction.

Luther stated that the Roman Catholic idea of Penance itself was unnecessary, and said that anyone who discarded their faith, in Christ, and then fell into sin could, indeed would, perish unless they returned to Christ again through renewed faith. It was now about Christ alone and Not the Church. Luther referred to Jerome's ( a church Father„s)

view, and the established position of the Church, that any penance/ repentance was about

faith and returning to the Church through Christ.

Indeed Luther was to write:

You will likewise see how perilous, indeed, how false it is to suppose that penance is the "the second plank after shipwreck," and how pernicious an error it is to believe that the power of baptism is broken, and the ship dashed to pieces, because of sin. The ship remains one, solid, and invincible) it will never be broken up into separate "planks. In it are carried all those who are brought to the harbour of salvation, for it is the truth of God giving us its promise in the sacraments. Of course, it often happens that many rashly leap overboard into the sea and perish; these are those who abandon faith in the promise and plunge into sin. But the ship itself remains intact and holds its course unimpaired. If anyone is able somehow by grace to return to the ship, it is not on any plank, but in the solid ship itself that he is borne to life. Such a person is the one who returns through faith to the abiding and enduring promise of God.

(Luther's Works, vol. 36, P61) So Luther rejected penance/ repentance as understood by Catholicism. He believed and conceived that penance

"Torture [d] poor consciences to death.

(Ibid P89)

However Luther still held on to the requirement of something that was in fact not that much different to penance. He stated that in order to be saved from eternal judgment a person must, must make an effort in continuing in the Christian faith, on a moral and doctrinal basis.

Calvin, on the other hand, rejected any idea of the performance of what was known as „Acts of Penance‟ to atone for sins so that a person could maintain salvation. He actually started to teach that Jesus Christ's death, once finished and completed, finally and completely atoned for all the sins a person would or ever could commit in the past, present or future.

Both Calvin and Luther came to the conclusion that continued to carry on and development and thus retained a neo classical sense of "a change of mind." (Metanoia-see notes below). Repentance, they, and their other adherence stated, was a change of mind where anyone who had recognized their sinfulness, and need of forgiveness for those sins, turned, in faith, to God who would then provide forgiveness in Christ.

Because of the idea of Penance and the ideas that had developed in the older Church the newer denominations decided to rebel against that. Thus the newer movements in the Church decided that it was „Faith Alone‟ (Sola Fide) when it came to Repentance that was crucial. There should be nothing about „Doing‟ when it came to Repentance.

Martin Luther was a keen reader of Romans. I would dare to say that it was probably his favourite book of the Bible. It was from Romans that he got his ideas regarding „Reformation‟. As he read the Book and let it seep into his very being he realised that what the church taught regarding Repentance was totally wrong. God does not continually want people to „do‟ to get to heaven. We are called to Love and not put money into grand building but in helping and feeding the poor.

Thus it came about that now, instead of the ideas and conceptual doctrines of the Church Fathers, it was Luther‟s and Calvin‟s view of repentance (as an essential part of Salvation), that the „Protestant„ (The Churches that broke away from Roman Catholicism), were to move forward and adhere to.

These Reformers, and those that claim to follow in the tradition, retain a high but faulty view of repentance and grace. They have indeed never really totally found a proper understanding of grace and repentance they so depart into a man-made, legalistic traditional " Anti-Gospel". Based on a faulty premise, but with shades of truth they revert often to a more Catholic form of theology and do not even see it

The Roman Catholic concept and praxis (theory put into practice) regarding repentance continues beyond the Reformation. Indeed the Catholics a wee bit later (but not by much) had a Reformation of their own called the „Counter Reformation (1600-1700AD ) and this and it‟s affects have continued to the present with modifications.

The Roman Catholic Church had decided that There was No scriptural qualification under the New Covenant for any of this Reformist theology so the „Church Authorities‟ decided that tradition too needed a part to play. Tradition, it was stated, should have equal

validation to the ‟Word Of God‟.

appear a s the official Catholic bible in the 1880‟s and beyond.

And thus the „Duary Rhemes Bible‟ that was to

Now take your standard Bible, that‟s what we call the Word (That is scripture). And

times

the thickness of the book 40-100 times that is What has happened within churches (Both Catholic and Protestant as tradition took on equal and then more validation within these

set

ups (systems of „Faith‟) as the Word of God took less. Interestingly enough what The

Pharisees did with the Law and what Jesus had been against. Do we ever learn? But here

I

digress.

When Luther established himself A man called John Melechothan came along (Another Theologian - Note if I ever refer to anyone as a theologian it is an insult tantamount to Pharisee[?])) and added more to what Luther had said. There also came along people like Zwingli and Calvin who also wrote tomes and added traditions, still in place today, that only, like what Catholicism did earlier, added to what scripture stated and thus formed their own traditions. Thus it goes on and on and on.

1. How did the Reformers make a mistake when it came to Repentance

2. Why did the Reformers make that mistake ?

THE WRONG VIEW PERSISTS TODAY The views of Calvin and Luther continue also. Their views have, in some ways been modified as well so that today there are basically three Protestant views regarding repentance

Turning away from Sin (One must do first. Stop being a drunk, or stop fighting)

Have the want/ resolution to stop sinning (The want resolution to stop)

Change of Mind (Recognition of a persons sin, their need for Jesus’ work of salvation)

It was at what is referred to Reformation that those mistranslations of Latin scripture were indeed challenged.

The first two ideas are talking about a need to be sorry about sin then accept that Lordship of Jesus Christ. The final view puts more enthuses on the Grace of Jesus and looks to Jesus before one looks to sin.

Some people the three Protestant views of repentance mentioned above do not however,

it would seem,

Some Protestants even state that salvation is lost when unfaithfulness sets in (and regarding) one's conversion and turning away (Back sliding) takes place; all of which have no place within a Post New Testament setting. On top of which such teaching is

inconsistent with any Reformers' view of sin, repentance and Jesus'.

believe that salvation once obtained is a safe and untouchable state.

Some Protestants, as stated, have gained a Roman Catholic view of repentance (one in which confession to a person as representing the Church and a formal praxis of penance are exchanged with confession directly to God and an informal system of penance where one claims works so as to earn God„s love and Grace). But As stated by Robert N Wilkin there are even more Protestant views here

In reality, then, there are actually six Protestant views of salvific repentance: 1) turn from sins and keep on doing so to obtain and keep a salvation which can be lost. 2) turn from sins to obtain an eternally secure salvation, 3) be willing to turn from sins and then, after conversion, actually turn from sins as a manner of life to gain and keep one's salvation, 4) be willing to turn from sins to obtain an eternally secure salvation, 5) change your mind about yourself and Christ to gain initial salvation and then turn from your sins as a manner of life thereafter to keep that salvation, and 6) change your mind about yourself and Christ to gain an inviolable salvation.

(Study By: Robert N. Wilkin)

When it comes to God and Repentance It is not a matter of balancing scales (As in the Islamic Tradition) or following rules and regulations (As in the Jewish Tradition). A combination of these ideas that had crept into the Catholic mindset as the world of theology and philosophy had grown and a great deal of cross fertilisation had taken place as academic culture was saturated with these ideas. If you read for instance Thomas Aquinas in the 11 th century and his philosophical discourses you will see ideas discussed and expounded particulary with Islamic scholars.

Take this recent quote:

have

high

the

times

‘The first step on the path of affinity to God is repentance, which is the topic of my talk tonight. What does repentance mean and what is its nature psychologically and what is its consequence spiritually? For many of us, it seems a simple matter but we ever thought of analysing it psychologically? Repentance is a characteristic of the human being that sets it apart from animals. The human being possesses certain aptitudes and distinctive qualities which are not found in animals. One of these is ability to repent. It does not mean only uttering the phrase, "I seek forgiveness from God, the Most High and I repent to Him." It is not something verbal. It is a psychological and spiritual state, a revolution of the mind and the above phrase describes that state but it is not the state itself. So if we utter this phrase several a day, it does not mean we are penitent. True repentance once a day brings us stage by stage nearer to God. ‘

several a day, it does not mean we are penitent. True repentance once a day brings
several a day, it does not mean we are penitent. True repentance once a day brings
several a day, it does not mean we are penitent. True repentance once a day brings

([Islamic] Discourse Eight from Spiritual Discourses by Ayatollah Mortaza Motahhari)

If not for the tag you could see many Christian traditions talking like this today. But I digress.

Protestants thus should know that any ideas that centred around „Penance‟ were not part of the New Covenant way. By Repenting they are chiefly meaning Metanoia (More on that in a minute). Metanoia : that one time event of coming to the Lord, admitting who I am both before, then in Christ, as my old way has gone and I accept Jesus‟ finished work on the Cross. Thus now I become a new creation in Christ‟ (My own definition). So let me break it down. Repentance is where:

I am sorry for my past life,

I die to that

I am Born Again

I accept Jesus (and it is done).

In response, out of love (Grace), I live the new life

I know that this is very simplified and is only there as a pointer and is not intended to be a theology. So that is Repenting and Believing‟ in a nut shell.

Though the theologians in these traditions will say they follow what is in scripture it is still about us having to „Wait‟ or „Do‟ to be right with God. This is done all the time with the post Reformation ideas of repentance. Thus we still, in the Church systems, show how we repent by:

Doing ‘good works’ (Rather than a response of Love to the God who loved me first).

We show how we repent for the people (again an Old Testament Idea, nothing in the New Testament- In fact Jesus was the repentance sacrifice ‘For the people’ 2000 years ago on the Cross).

Thus we have our ideas of Repentance. The response of the reformation and what came after was a response to something not

true and not totally scriptural to begin with, thus we have this mixture that is not wholly based in the dividing of the Word and keeping people trapped in the Law rather than Grace and truth. We have „Old Wine in New Skins / Bottles‟ ; we have „Old Cloth put on New‟ (Mathew

9:16-17; Mark 2: 21-22; Luke 5:36-39; 1 Corinthians 5:7-8; Hebrew 8:13;)

This idea has saturated our churches (Small „c‟ for denominations big ‟C‟ for the Church) so much that today we have churches, not to far away from here, all over Britain, all over Europe and all over the World that teach stuff like:

‘We cannot have revival in our Land because we have not had a time of repentance, because God is angry with us, we need to be right with God’

It would seem that God must have had a memory lapse regarding the Cross. Thus we are constantly told that we need to ask God to come down and forgive us for our sins so we can move forward. It is as if we are asking him to come down from the Cross only to have to get back on it again and again and again [sic].

‘…to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. ‘

(Hebrews 6: 6)

But somewhere in the World every minute of everyday this goes on all over the World.

Again Going back to Lamentations 3: 25-26 where there are calls for God‟s Old Testament people to wait on the ‟Salvation‟ of the Lord.

The LORD is good unto them that wait for him, to the soul that seeketh him. It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the LORD.

This was not about ‘us’ waiting to get God to move, no not at all. That was then and this is now and Salvation came 2000 years ago and this was the Hope and waiting going on here. We Do Not Have to wait on the Lord anymore.

There is then a major misunderstanding on the meaning of Repentance our body of Christ. As we have seen this due to wrong mistaken teaching and the misconceptions handed down over the generations. Most people, as we have seen, would say repenting is sincerely asking forgiveness for a person‟s sin. We are told that God will not move for us as individuals and Nations because of „Our Sin‟. But we miss the point God did move 2000 years ago and that movement was Jesus and that is the central issue here. It is about our relationship to God as it is Now not s it was in the Old Testament days. Repentance is not weeping and wailing over sin or some emotional experience of confession. This is remorse or regret (Meatmelomai).

PART II SCRIPTURE & REPENTANCE

REPENTANCE: GREEK STYLE What I am going to do here is give you the meaning of a word and then show several scriptures regarding the Word as translated Repentance so that you will understand the words in their original form and how they fit into scripture.

I used Strongs and E-sword here, along with other material, to help me with this. I have also added some ideas myself but will let you know the „Seanisms‟ when we get to them. So here we go:

REPENTANCE = METANOIA

The first word to study here is:

/ metanoia/ (pronounced-met-an'-oy-ah). This Is:

‘To change ones’ mind, emotion, (by implication

we are changed from spiritually dead to spiritually alive and made a new creation) from

one aspect to another/(subjectively); compunction (for guilt, including reformation) by implication reversal (of [anothers] decision): - repentance (?)’

spiritual state (Seanism- as

(Strongs)

Note the idea of compunction forward is a Strongs addition and I would argue that it comes out of the tradition of the translators.

Metanoia, I would argue, means a change from one aspect to another. Thus our minds, emotion and spiritual state are changed from one aspect to another. Thus it is that moment and that time when we were Born Again and make that stand declaring the need for Jesus in our lives that It is done. It starts in our spirit and from then on we work it out from our mind

The readings here could be many but let us take just a few:

2 Timothy 2: 25-26 [metanoia]:

In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

Metanoia about acknowledging the truth and taking people out of the snare of the World and the Devil. Again to emphasise this Hebrews 6: 1-3 & 6 [metanoia]:

Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this will we do, if God permit.……If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

This is not about coming again and again and again but a one off change that takes affect in our spirit and then starts to work it‟s way out to our mind and body.

And just once more so the point and truth shall sink in; 2 Peter 3: 3-12 [metanoia]. Read this whole section because it really does put Repentance/ Metanoia into perspective and can leave no doubt.

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

This is where we get the Anglo-Saxon (English) word metamorphosis.

Metamorphosis is made up of two Greek words:

Meta With/ Alongside/ After/ Along With/ Beyond/ Among / Behind,”

And

Morph (asis):

That is to transform from one state to another/ To Shape/ To Mould/ To take from one state and move another

So we see that God comes alongside with us, He shapes us and moulds and he transforms us from one state (that of Sin) has moved among us to bring us into righteousness. Repentance is how we change. We are transformed and renewed to become new creations and we are made into God‟s own righteousness in Jesus Christ. Transformation and moulding happens right away. That is in our spirit but it still has to come out and be

worked out from our mind to our body (Romans 6: 1-23; Philippians 2:12)

1. What is the meaning of Metanoia?

2. What does Repentance mean now we now this truth?

REPENTANCE = METAMELOMAI

The 2 nd word used for Repentance and the word in Greek here is:

(metamellomai) (pronounced: Met-am-el'-lom-ahee)

This has the shortest explanation of all the Words here which can mean:

To Care Afterwards, that is, regret: -repent (self) (?).

Thus to „Take care‟ after an event, To be sorry, T0 REGRET.

We are allowed to feel sorry. That is fine. We are allowed to feel sorry for our sins. In fact if you read 2 Corinthians 7:8-11:

For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent [metamellomai],

though I did repent [metamellomai]:

hath made you sorry, though it were but for a season (short time).

for I perceive that the same epistle

Now I

rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to

[Metanoia]:

receive damage by us in nothing. For godly sorrow worketh [Metanoia] to salvation not to be repented of [Ametameletos]:

the world worketh death. For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of

yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear,

yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge! In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter.

Note both Metamelomai and Metanoia are both mentioned here. If you go on to read chapter 8 you see that these were new Christians who had come to the Lord through this first letter of Paul. Thus Paul had written a very strong letter to a fellowship that had some unbelievers in it. Paul was sorry , he regretted writing the letter for a short time.

repentance

that ye might repentance but the sorrow of

for ye were made sorry after a godly manner,

yea, what vehement desire,

The Greek word used here in 2 Corinthians 7 is: „ ‟ This can mean a Season, or hour

, short time. Kings James Translators to be applauded here because though it can mean a

literal hour it can mean for a time or a season. Thus we know it is about being sorry , regretting, for a ‟Short Time‟ but there is no rule or compunction dictates what this is.

So it is Okay to feel sorry for a short time for a while. That is Okay. But the key thing here is it is not about God‟s relationship to us. It is nothing to do with God‟s relationship to you and me. God is Not there waiting for you to come back. Then welcoming us once we say we are sorry :

‘Hey about time! Welcome back now’

God has already accepted you in your Born Again state. This is more about your mentality, your psychology. This is about you being sorry, about any of us being sorry , regretting for a short time. However if you are feeling sorry for something, Repenting and keeping hold of something for 3, 6, 12 months after an event there is something that is psychologically damaging and wrong about that. Thus you do not move forward. You do not build that relationship with God, you lose revelation and what is more you open yourself up to negativity and unbalanced thinking and emotional states lie Depression , stress and rage.

So we do the wrong, the fault, the sin and are sorry for a short time. We Regret it, we get the emotion out the way and then we move On. We realise that the reality is about the Work already done through Jesus and the Cross 2000 years ago and our Born Again nature. There may be sins we are not aware of or that have not been revealed to us. But the key is that we do not have to be taken out of our state of Grace in Christ, sure we acknowledge them , but we learn, work out what they are and move on. So you are not there anymore. So as the old adage goes ‟All is well with you and God‟ at least on your side there was never any doubt that God was always there for you.

That is a good lesson that we all need to learn

message, teaching for the beginning of August 2011 I had an incident happen which is

really a very good illustration here.

When I first wrote this down s a

Myself and my wife were walking our dogs on the beach as we often do. When we see no one around we let them off for a run. We had four dogs at this time. Three of our own and

a dog that we were looking after for a friend. Our friends dog is virtually blind and can

only see very little. So we let him off the lead but just after we notice that there was a

family on the beach. We tried to call the dog back , it did not happen and he knocked over one of the children (Not seriously).

My wife Carol is such a witness for the Lord and so apologised. I was at the other end of the beach with two of our other dogs and started walking over. This gentleman and his wife would not accept my wife‟s apology and starting being abusive and rude to her. Then of course „Butcho Husband‟ comes into the equation and starts putting his, that is my penorth in as well:

What do you think you are doing?… What you saying to my wife?… You want to say that to me?… Blah! Blah! Blah!

And on it went as an argument developed. I was yanked forward by the wife as she pulled on the lead around my neck and stupid personal things were said on both sides.

I Was Wrong! Yes: I Was Wrong! But it did Not effect my relationship with God. But it

effected how I felt and thought. It effected me. So I had a time for a couple of hours. Well I had a short time of around 30 minutes where I got the „Carol‟ (that‟s my wife) Repentance session, I won‟t dwell on that. But I had a couple of hours following where I regretted what I had done. Of course Satan came in;

You are teaching on Repentance? I don’t think so. How can you, you are such a hypocrite and sinner phone and tell the Pastor to forget it. Cancel. You are not worthy

to do it’

I realised that my dead flesh still doing its headless chicken thing on the beach spurred

me on. But I saw that I was the righteousness of God ( 1 Corinthians 1: 30, 2 Corinthians

5:21, Philippians 3:9, James 2: 23).

Even though I acted this way I bear no ill will to that family and would gladly apologise if I saw them again. Just adding that in case some one will argue that what I did was wrong and did not show love as it states to do in 3 John. I still love and do not hate them or myself. Two years ago I probably would have been angry then brought down and the have several days of depression. That did not happen. I got back on living under Christ and being open to his Grace.

I did not have to go through a ritualistic thing, confessing this that and the other or go

through 3 days of this or a week of that or 6 weeks of this. Again a cross fertilization that has crept into the Church through Pagan rituals, Islam and Judaism. I did not have to phone up , or meet up with people saying I would not be teaching on Sunday. I did not have to claim I was a sinner. But can claim I am the righteousness of Christ. But the

righteousness of Christ was not working that day and like the proverbial dead headless chicken I did my own fleshly thing.

So what it boils down to with our second meaning of Repentance is this: Metamelomai is to Have regret. It is to be sorry.

Here are two readings:

Matthew 21:28-31 [Metamellomai]

But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work today in my vineyard. He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not. Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.

Hebrews 7:21 [metamellomai]:

(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent [1] , Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:)

This is about regret, it is about being sorry to others, to self and to God. This is a psychological thing. God in his infinite wisdom knows our psychology and has put resources into place for us here. But it is not about God being affected by this. We are and because we are God has given us a way to deal with it but not to go back again to being cut off from God. No! We are still God‟s righteousness and we can still move in that position we are Not „Dirty Disgusting Sinners in Need Of Judgement‟. All that was done on the Cross 2000 years ago. It truly belittles the power of the Cross to say otherwise.

There is a third Greek word not really worth mentioning but it makes a guest appearance once and so shall be covered. This as much as anything to get it out the way.

A

(Ametameletos) (Pronounced am-et-am-el'-ay-tos)

A’

(As a negative particle) and a presumed ; irrevocable: - without repentance,

be repented of. NOT TO

(Ametameletos) (Pronounced am-et-am-el'-ay-tos)

REGRET

not to

To be without Repentance, to be without Regret, By implication not to be repented of. This has one key scripture only:

Romans 11: 29 [Ametameletos]

‘For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.’

Here it is saying that Repentance is not about God‟s gifts, that repentance is not in the equation here. But this is the key I believe when It comes to this word. God will never change his mind on the issue. God‟s Living Word is His will and choice. We can thus trust this Word completely and with A confidence renew our mind (Metanioa). We are thus lead

into all truth by the Holy Spirit who enables us to remain in God„s power and keep in his righteousness not by anything we do but by what has already been done by Christ. That is saying that God never changes his mind, does not have to be sorry or apologise.

SUMMING UP THE GREEK CONCEPTS

In Romans 12:2 it states that Born Again believers must be :

And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

We are transformed by that initial repenting at our conversion our spirits are completely new and we are new creations however the changing our mind, feelings and thoughts

about something, in the physical realm has to be worked through and takes time. are on a continual road of change where we are being transformed in the physical.

So we

This change of mind will thus brings about a change of actions. Thus true Repentance (Metanoia) has taken place. We can apologise to God if we want and this is the root of Metamelomai. But our relationship with him (On his side) is not effected. One can but wonder in Joy as God has put there the psychological, and emotional, tools to help us (On our side return to him).

1. What does Metamelomai mean ?

2. Does Metamelomai mean that we have to keep Repenting to an angry God?

LET’S GO THE HEBREW WAY The Hebrew words now are what we need to look at. So we can draw a conclusion and see how all this fits together.

Hebrew was a symbolic language it was a pictorial language thus a word would form a picture in the mind and this would associate itself with an idea which in turn may associate to another word and picture and on it goes. Sometimes we translate Hebrew words but can miss some of the concepts of what it was saying, or even add more than it originally meant.

Hebrew was therefore a very descriptive language. Remember that at the Fall we lost contact with the Spiritual. We thus needed a way that could explain the spiritual, in ways and Terms, that people could understand in the Old Testament times. Thus God used the best

language to do that and that was a pictorial language and one of the best to use was Hebrew And so God used that.

םחנ Na^cham / Nhm (Pronounced Naw-kham')

The first word is :

םחנ Na^cham / Nhm (Pronounced Naw-kham')

This is :

To Sigh/ Breathe Heavily /To Be Sorry/ To Pity/ To Be Consoled / To Rue / To Avenge (oneself)/ To Comfort ( oneself)/ To Ease [oneself] Into / To Repent (-er, -ing, self).

(Strongs)

It is to sigh with deep emotion. Note that in John 14 John refers to the Holy Spirit as the Comforter. Many of the Na-cham references are the ones that refer to God „Repenting‟ (Getting heavy with emotion???).

Genesis 6:6 [‘Naw-kham']

And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

Or:

Deuteronomy 32:36 [‘Naw-kham']

For the LORD shall judge his people, and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that their power is gone, and there is none shut up, or left.

Psalm 90:13 [‘Naw-kham']

Return, O LORD, how long? and let it repent thee concerning thy servants.

But we (people) can be laid heavy with emotion too:

Job 42:6: [‘Naw-kham']

Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.

Exodus 32: 12 [‘Naw-kham']:

Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people.

1.

Does God Repent in the Old Testament?

2. What does Naw-kham mean when it speaks of Repentance?

םחנ [No^cham] ( Pronounced No'-kham)

The second word here is :

םחנ [No^cham] ( Pronounced No'-kham)

Thus this means:

To Stop / Be Rueful, / To Have Desistance: - repentance?

(Strongs)

No-Kham here can be seen in the following scripture:

Hosea 13:14 [No'-Kham]

I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction:

repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.

This is about stopping, finishing, ending.

1. What shall be kept from God’s Eyes and why?

2. Repentance here just means what?

בוּשׁ shu^b (Pronounced Shoob)

The 3 rd word and most used in scripture is the word as you can see This seems to mean so much:

בוּשׁ shu^b (Pronounced Shoob)

To Turn Back (hence, away) transitively or intransitively, literally or figuratively (not necessarily with the idea of return to the starting point)/ Generally to Retreat/ To do Again /(cause to) answer (+ again), Bring (again, back, home again)/ Call [to mind]/ Carry Again (back)/ Come again / Reconsider/ Continually Convert/ Deliver (again)/ Deny/ Draw Back/ Fetch (be brought home again)/ Get [oneself] (back) Again/ Give (Again)/ Go Again (back, home)/ Repent/Recall/

Recompense, Recover Refresh/ Relieve/ Render Again/ Requite Rescue (get back)/

Restore (Bring Back)/ Retrieve/ (cause to, make to) Return/ Reverse Reward, Say No Again/ To Send Back/ To Set Again as was/ Slide Back (Not Back slide)/ Still/ Surely/ Take Back (off of) /Cause To/ Make To/ Turn Again/ Self Again/Away / Back

/ Back Again / Backward/ Forward (as was) / From /Off To/ Withdraw/ Go 0ut Again /Hinder Again / Pull in again/ Put (Again, Up Again).

sources)

(Strongs & Other Lexicon

As you can see it has so much to it and can be hard to really pin point what it means. I could do a very traditional thing and say that there are some mysteries that God does not yet want us to know. But that is not true. Just by looking at how the word is used in The Word we can get some idea.

Shoob on the whole seems to mean to Come Back From, or to Return To. This can be:

a place, or a state, or idea, a concept, or even an original point etc.

So let us look at Shoob readings. I am not even going to pretend to know what it means in Total; but I ask you to ask the Holy Spirit to show you as you read the following passages from Scripture.

1 Kings 8: 47 [Shoob]

Yet if they shall bethink themselves in the land whither they were carried captives, and repent, and make supplication unto thee in the land of them that carried them captives, saying, We have sinned, and have done perversely, we have committed wickedness;

Now you know that here is about returning to „The Land‟ and not a state of righteousness etc.

And again Genesis 31: 13 [Shoob]:

I am the God of Bethel, where thou anointedst the pillar, and where thou vowedst a vow unto me: now arise, get thee out from this land, and return (repent) unto the land of thy kindred.

But I can see that without knowledge of the word you can be drawn to thin that this is about „Repentance‟ from sin.

However the following is all about sin….Ezekiel 18:30 [Shoob]:

Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.

Come back to God, turn back to God. Note also in Ezekiel

Ezekiel 14:6 [Shoob]

Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Repent, and turn yourselves from your idols; and turn away your faces from all your abominations.

Return to God, Return to the way you were before you had idols. Remember to that this was to a people , culture, society and not to individuals but it spoke to individuals within that grouping (namely the Jews).

The next scripture is from Obadiah. You know the only way I‟d really want kids (yes I‟m weird that way) is if I could give them good old Testament names like Obadiah, or Jeremiah, or Amos (Good old Jewish Yorkshire names. Anyway lets move on.

Obadiah 1: 15: [Shoob] states:

For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return (Repent) upon thine own head.

1. Shoob means what when it comes to Repentance?

2. Is Shoob easy to define and if not why?

AFTERWORD

TIEING UP LOOSE ENDS There are three points before we close I see that need to be addressed here. There may be more, and please if there is let me know. These three points need to be clarified. So I will attempt to do so with God‟s help and the Grace of Jesus.

If Repentance (Metanoia) is a done deal then:

1. Why do we have readings like Romans 6 ( 1ff)

2. Why do we read and see Judas Repent (Matthew 27:3) and why is he lost.

3. What of 1 John 1: 9

1. Romans 6: 1ff is not that difficult if we read in context. Look at what Paul is talking about before this section and we see it is about faith and obedience to that new life we have in God and what he goes on to talk about afterward is about the Law and how it is spiritual and our flesh is carnal.

Now to put all this in context. We are called into a new life with Jesus and because of Jesus. we no longer have to be guided by our flesh but are guided by the spirit. We are servants of righteousness. We are not Sin conscious anymore but centred on

Jesus.

Jesus has done I am not under its penalty. This does not mean that I can, in the flesh, sin freely but it does mean because I have Christ in me so I Just do not want or have the desire to sin because I love God so much. Of course like healing, salvation, deliverance, and the rest this still has to be worked out. But it has all taken place thus

we have to bring out of our spirit that truth of our Redemption that has taken place. Repentance is only ongoing for us as we Work it out into our flesh and mind But we are not called to do it again and again and again for this would truly be an insult to The Cross of Christ (see also Hebrews 6-7)

We are servants of sin no longer. Because I am dead to sin, through what

2. Judas regretted (Metamelomai), not Repented (Metanioai) [Matthew 27:3] . His was

a

worldly repentance of self pity and loathing filled with fear hate and depression. This

was no Repentance „Unto Salvation‟. We may not like it or understand it yet but we

Remember though this was prophesied,

this was Judas‟ choice and I believe that. Regret Metamelomai however is Not Metanoia, and as we can see from scripture Judas did not come to repent and believe

(Mark 1: 15).

should not dwell on this if it brings us down.

call to conversion but a call to not to be drawn back to old ways. We are called to bear fruit and as we work out what our repentance means this will come to fruition.

Thus Confessing all our sins before God and then making a list all the bad, evil things we can remember, and even some we cannot then weeping,

wailing in sackcloth and ashes the punishing ourselves (Our Egos and hope that we may be forgiven, is NOT what Repentance is about.

wicked

gnashing and Flesh) in the

This is NOT the way we are to come before God, as if by our works, doings or what we say we cannot obtain our forgiveness from sin this way. Jesus has done it our job is to accept and believe this truth.

The only way that we are ever forgiven of our sin is by that Born Again process and believing in what Jesus has already done for us on that Cross. The Forgiveness of God has come from our simple belief that Jesus has paid the price once for ALL and that He has dealt with sin and the effects of Sin forever.

There is more I know but for now that is where I am at.

CONCLUSION So you see when we break it all down, see the contrasts, rather than holding on to traditional view points that have left us in the mess we are now in and leaving us seeing „Repentance‟ without truly understanding its simple intricacies that we see in scripture; if that is the word we choose is just Repentance (as traditionally understood) and not Metanoia.

Metamelomai,

Naw-Kham, Naw-khom, or Shoob we then miss out on so much as well as getting caught up in a tradition that can, without even knowing it many times, hold us back from God.

That moment that we give ourselves to the Lord, come to him knowing who he is, who we Were, and are now living in him because of the finished work upon the Cross then this is the „Repentance unto Salvation mentioned in 2 Corinthians 7.

However Regret, and we‟ve all had a few (What many today refer to as Repentance) is fine. You do it for a short time and move on, or back to. But it is your relationship with God that is effected NOT HIS RELATIONSHIP TO YOU. Read John 17, Or Galatians or Hebrews

Or a plethora of scriptures in the New Testament and see how true this is.

The key is that your Repentance is done you can still regret but this does not effect God‟s relationship to you. God is not waiting in Judgement on you the believer. It may seem

we

are effected in our relationship to God but that is another issue. All God ever sees now

when

he looks at us is Jesus finished work and Jesus himself in us

We maybe become aware of „Sin Patterns‟ in our life as we grow with the Lord however

this

is our awareness and it is still something God dealt with 2000 years ago upon that sweet

Cross of Calvary. God dealt with those sins , you have just become aware of them but

these

along with past sins and future sins were dealt with at your conversion.

The Dealing with our transgressions (sins and other stuff) has happened. But what can be wrong with the old style Repentance you ask. Hebrews answers that question:

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

If we keep Repenting old style we keep taking Jesus to the Cross. Jesus wishes us to

grow in relationship with him not to be held back by those things that focus on ourselves rather

than

God (Read the whole of Hebrews).

The work of the Cross is finished for Jesus then and for us now ( John 17:4, 19:30) .

we

All

have to do is believe, and the effects that the Cross showed us will bear fruit (John 15: 1-

8)

as we knowledge the Fathers Love in and through Jesus. This work of God comes out

from

our spirit through to our flesh and mind. We gain revelation (already there) as we grow

in

knowledge of Jesus, who he is and what he has done for us. Because this is spiritual

knowledge revelation then comes from the Holy Spirit who now dwells within us.

Here for me is a radical truth .

Repentance, because of all the negative crap that has been built into it by men‟s tradition.

We did this with the word Penance (in the Protestant and Catholic traditions) altogether.

I would now prefer and would rather drop the word

would rather have the original words and the concepts they provide.

Metanoia

(One time coming to God, Accepting Jesus, change of state)

Metamelomai (Regret, state of being sorry for, similar to but not totally same as Naw-kham)

Naw-kham

(A heavy state, emotionally charged to lead one to breath heavily and to sigh)

Naw khom

(To stop, Cease from, have Desistance to)

Shoob

(To return to state [emotional, mental, physical], return to place, to go back to)

It would be odd at first. Many are now coming to terms with „Metanoia‟ the rest could follow But you know, and I say this in grief , rather than any pride, I do not think the majority of the Church are ready for this yet and so I shall keep saying Repentance with the rest of them (us) but correcting lovingly, where I may, and being open to that truth that has been revealed to me and now hopefully to you.

So again repeating what I just said , for those skimming through. It is all about Jesus and his finished work on the Cross. I hate the concept of putting him up there: again, and again, and again, and again. Many Traditionalist in Christianity hold on to what they believe is true but these are things not even true of the old covenant. We perceive God sees us in the flesh, we fail to see that we are New Creations ( 2 Corinthians 5:17, Galatians 6:15; Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3: 10) in him and we hold his righteousness (Romans 5:17; Romans

10:4;

Philippians 3:9)

Thus as "Born Again", „New Creatures‟ in the Righteousness of Christ Jesus our old sinful nature has been washed clean by the precious „Blood of Jesus„. Our spirit (that which is ‟Spiritual) is sealed by the Holy Spirit. Now having been washed clean of our sin nature, once and for all, our spirit is eternally sealed so that the sin of that nature cannot be put on it again. We are now in our spirits Dead to Sin.

For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil 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 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. 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.

(Romans 7: 18-25)

However we still live in a sinful physical body that has drives to sin. But that body is now dead to us it is like a headless chicken running about. It is crucial that we all understand the „New Born Again Spirit‟ does not sin because it Loves God so much, and in response to his love for us it requires to please God. It responds, not because it has to, not through religious traditional views of an angry God, But because it wants to and it loves God so much. Here I am talking to those truly born of the Spirit of God and not just church going traditionalist. I am speaking to those who are in , or require to be in , a relationship with God.

This is not about a remit to sin. As Paul says many times: ’GOD FORBID!’ Far from it because we now walk in the freedom that God‟s love brings us we do not want to sin. Our drive lies elsewhere as we live in obedience to his will and his choice for us in Jesus.

Sin separated us from the presence of God but we are now not thrown out of His Presence any longer every time we do something we should not. Jesus has paid the price for us

once and for all if we keep using the religious view of repenting then all we do is make a mockery of the Cross and make Jesus, and thus God a liar:

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

And

(Hebrews 6:4-6)

God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

(Romans 3:4)

He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

(1 John 5:10)

One more thing that bothers me is how whole sacramental systems have been built up around the issue of Repentance and the like. For a word that really appears very little in scripture it has taken on the weight of crucial complicated teaching where in reality, as you break it down, it is simple, direct and, seems to mean exactly what it says on the label. Feast days, fast days have been created all around this issue. In some denominations a whole period (Lent) is put aside on this issue as it is Man rather than Jesus that is focused on.

Though there are scriptures that would seem to support traditional views, I believe these need to be read in context, and with the mind of Christ, through unfiltered thoughts (That is not entirely filtered by our ‟Earthly concepts and experiences) of revelation. Revelation will happen and the Church will grow and learn as it works out these issues. But hey that is another bowl of cherries.

Love and Grace go with you all.

SDPA Mason-Corkery

Acknowledgements

To my dear wife Carol, to my friend and Pastor Vic Cameron and his wife Nuncy, To Dave and Chris, Jo, and the others who are great friends at Moray Grace fellowship. To others too that I can share a laugh and fellowship with. You know who you are.

Love & Grace and many thanks Sean

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alister E McGrath, Christian Theology, An Introduction 4 th edition (Blackwell Publishing Oxford 2007

Robert Williams, A Guide to the Teaching of the Early Church Fathers (Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1960), P142.

Luther's Works, vol. 36, The Babylonian Captivity, 61

Robert N. Wilkin (Study By): ‘The Doctrine of Repentance in Church History Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society Volume 1, No. 1 -- Autumn 1988

Thomas F. Torrance, The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers (Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1959).

Hermas, Mandate,

Polycarp, Letter to the Philippians

Justin Martyr, The First Apology, 15-16;

Origen, Homilies on the Psalms, On Psalm 37

Ambrose, Concerning Repentance

Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 1.17-18;

Augustine, On the Creed, 15- 16.

Anselm, De Concordia III: Grace and Free Choice, 8;

Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles, IV: 71-72.

Clement of Rome, First Epistle to the Corinthians

Cyprian, Epistle 52 , Treatise on the Lapsed,

Jerome, Letter 122: To Rusticus,

John Cecil Anderson, "Repentance in the Greek New Testament" (Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1959), 14ff.

Calvin Institutes of the Christian Religion,

Luther's Works, Vol. 48,

Dirksen, Metanoia, 79-80

James Graham, "Repentance," Evangelical Quarterly 25 (1953): 233;

George Peters, "The Meaning of Conversion," Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (1963): 236, 239; R

Rudolph Schnackenburg, The Moral Teaching of the New Testament (Freiburg: Herder and Herder, 1965), 25-33;

A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology (Philadelphia: Judson Press, 1912), 832-35;

Eugene La Verdiere, The Need for Salvation: A New Testament Perspective," Chicago Studies 21 (1982): 234.

William Barclay, Great Themes of the New Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1979), 72-73;

William Douglas Chamberlain, The Meaning of Repentance (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1943), 47, 143-44, 216, 222-23;

Billy Graham, The Meaning of Repentance (Minneapolis: The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, 1967), 5-11;

George Ladd, The Gospel of the Kingdom (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959), 95-106; 1.

Bob Stokes, Repentance, Revival, and the Holy Spirit (Chicago: Moody Press, 1975), 10- 16, 24,

John R. W. Stott, Basic Christianity (London: Inter Varsity Fellowship, 1958), 111-32,

Effie Freeman Thompson, METANOEO and METAMELEI in Greek Literature Until 100 A. D., Including a Discussion of Their Cognates and of Their Hebrew Equivalents (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1908), 24-25.

H. A. Ironside, Except Ye Repent (New York: American Tract Society, 1937), 34, 53,

171-76;

Charles Caldwell Ryrie, Biblical Theology of the New Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1959), 116-17;

Richard A. Seymour, All About Repentance (Fayetteville, GA: Clarity Publications, 1974), 33, 46, 62;

Treadwell Walden, The Great Meaning of Metanoia (New York: Thomas Whittaker, 1896), 4-9, 79-81,125,151.

Downloads by :

Andrew Wommack, Joseph Prince, Vic & Nanette (Nuncy) Cameron Derick Prince David Watson John Stott Nicky Gumble Andrew Farley Bruxy Cavey

Resource Links