^'jiil^U-r!^ describes also the initial sta^e of tlie Christian life ^yhen by .f'-^h the i.idnidu. wholly yields himself to Christ. \\ hen i't 1 -uU said • ' Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? Ac an that is self-denial. Man apart trom God is seltisl, controlled from below. ' Homo ex ra Deum'quanit pabulum in "'eatura n.atena i el per voluptatem vel per avantiam (I'^'t^^'. "",''" W While the 6 iTu, a.OpcTros llo ; ; ct. I 1 J ) or the roCs acknowledges the higher law o God n
i^,Ss^-St:S'Lle^%.^s^H
Sxl:-ofSi!i^i^."'^iS"prL|on2 order to the reception of communicated hfe (T H Green, Worlcs^, London, 19U6, i "• iJ*)- The ckatl. of Christ is the objective condition of llie ueaui oi ™if fieiiial The idciitihcation
^'urJ;:;^on^i^ :;^'ch?i^t is.possiblehe«iuse ChHst 'first identified Himself with us. lus^ is tip Tlivine moment in Christian self-denial, and dsls w at dXguishes it from the I'latomc^ H gelian. Plato speaks of the 'inner ".an (i^c; ■ ix 589 A • cf. Plotinus, linn. i. 1. 10), or the goa within' This was also a favourite btoic conc^ep- don To the Stoics self-denial was due to the WprTt native ener-y of this Divine element, just -'rr^%nii.a^ce.in.u.ne^^^
IjrS^r^'-inS^ent^f'the Divine la^. and
"'Tbur chditr iiif ^1 aui ^:^S^ ^
"rnotdDe'ilu- cancels all claims (Uo 6-^) am the result is a new man (vio,, Kai.b, dvep^^o,, Co s'o Eph 4". Gal 6'=). Christian self-denial is not tlu'is si^ililV a bare moral act-it is redemptive y onditi'^i^nor is it an end m lUel nor sd^ destruction as it seems to be "'.l^' '""';• ^^^ i,;..,.t- U self-renewa , self-re-creation in Chnst. "'' .Tt is leadTto another self-denial, which is he gracual life-long process of ^anf>/'cation negatively viewed iust as the former self-denial which is its ^■^s^he one decisive ixieal -<;' tf^-|^,j;^';P at conversion (Sanday-Headlam, ^^^t", Kom, ns Edinburgh, 1902, p. 158). \V e must not ^.epaiate
468
SELF-DENIAL
SELF-EXAMINATION
the two and make the one forensic and the other ethical. ' I'aul never presents Clirist's death as a substitution for ours in tlie sense that we need not die as well' (Green, iii. 194). It is equally true — and this is wliat Green does not sufficiently emphasize — that he never thinlcs of our dying as possible apart from the prior substitutionary death of Christ for us. The modern tendency is to over- emphasize in St. Paul's teaching what Green neglects. J. Weiss {Paul and Jesus, Eng. tr., London, 1909), e.ff., makes it a radical dis- tinction between St. Paul and Jesus that for St. Paul the ethical content of the new life is an etlect of Divine acts, while for Jesus it is an ett'ect of man's own ethical endeavour. But to St. Paul it is an act both of will and of Divine working at one and the same time ( Ph 2'-- ").
The self to be denied is the sinful self and its works. The phrases used for this self-denial are to 'put oil'' {airorldeaffai), 'to cleanse' (KaOapl^eiv), ' to slay ' (^afaToCi-) the flesh and its works. The new life of the Christian in virtue of his faith and of tlie presence of the Holy Spirit is hid with Christ in God, it is a walk in the Spirit, it is Christ in us and we in Him. Hence it is inconsistent that the fruits of this new life should spring from the tlesh. The Christian life is not a life of moral indilierentisra, rd oSia^ipwj t^tjo (Clem. Alex. Strom. iii. 5. 40), as some of the early sects held. It is be- cause this moral indifierentisra was associated with intellectual error concerning Chiist that John, Jude, Peter, and Paul (Col. and Pastorals) oppose Christian self-denial to intellectual error and to moral delinquency. Self-denial in this sense is the personal regaining, through conflict, of all the personality and of society for God. It is the "radual realization of all that is involved in our dying with Christ in conversion and our rising with Him to newness of life.
(rf) But Cliristian self-denial rises to even higher heights. The Christian life is one of self-denial in the sense that the life of Jesus was also one of supreme self-denial. His life was one of complete obedience to His Father's will (He 5* ; cf. Mk 14^"). It was a life of self-emptying for the sake of redemption (Ph 2'), and the Christian is under law to Christ (Ifvo/ios Xp^uroO, 1 Co 9"). The law of Christ is tliat each one must bear the burdens of others (Gal 6-). The Christian law of self-denial is thus that we serve one another through love (Gal 5*'). The example of Christ constrains us to renounce privileges, liberties, ease, even life itself, for the sake of bringing blessing to others — ' we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren ' (1 Jn 3'°). How far this may go we can judge from Ro 9"-, a 'spark from the fire of Christ's substitu- tionary love' (Dorner, quoted in EGT, London, 1900, in loc). It is in this light that we must view the giving up of property by Barnabas and others. This self-denial is not consciously directed against sin as described above (c), but is rather the out-tlowings of Christ's love in the heart. St. Paul connects the example of Jesus often with this self-denial, and this example is not simply a human example but that of One who, though He was rich, for our sakes became poor; of One who, though He was Divine, yet became obedient unto death, the death of the Cross. The Christian life of self-denial is motived by love. This is the immanent principle which is present all along and which unifies in one Christian experience all these forms of self-denial. Without this all is worthless (1 Co 13''). It was in Christ that this love dawned on men. It is the love of Christ shed abroad in our hearts.