# Keswick vs. Reformed preaching



## buggy (Apr 19, 2010)

From what I understand, Keswick sanctification is something related to the Holiness movement and is basically pietist in its roots. 

However, in a sermon preached or lesson taught, how does one identify the key marks of Keswick-style preaching or Reformed-style (i.e. Augustinian) preaching? Thanks.


----------



## CharlieJ (Apr 19, 2010)

If sanctification is presented almost entirely as continually choosing to "surrender" to Christ, that's usually Keswick preaching. Or, if the preachers use lots of examples of black dogs and white dogs being at war inside you (or anything else that sounds like good and bad angels on your shoulders).


----------



## rbcbob (Apr 19, 2010)

Keswick doctrine of sanctification views the Christian as passive in the process; "Let go and let God", etc. JC Ryle wrote his book *Holiness* as a refutation of the whole notion of passive sanctification.


----------



## bug (Apr 19, 2010)

Keswick teaching is best summed up in the moto, 'Let go and let God.' Whereas J I Packer sums up the reformed teaching on sanctification as 'Trust in God and get going!' Basically anything that is unbalanced towards progressive sanctification all being the work of God in which we merely allow God to work is the Keswick influence, and there is a lot of it about at present, eg Gracewalk ministries (google it if you ).


----------



## Romans 9:16 (Apr 19, 2010)

Keswick teaching has a different understanding of faith (more a volition than a cognition). Further, they do not believe the sinful nature is eradicated. Rather, they believe it is counteracted, it is overruled by the Holy Spirit. Thus, the continual stress on surrender. Nevertheless, though there is some bad formulation in Keswick teaching, there are some good teachers that are worth hearing. I would strongly recommend H.C.G. Moule. He is Reformed in many ways but was a Keswick writer, speaker, etc. His commentary on Romans is a masterpiece and his short book 'Thoughts on Union With Christ' will edify you and help you to be more like Him. In some ways, the Puritan Walter Marshall (and even to a certain extent, Owen, in 'Mortification of Sin' and 'Communion with God') anticipate Moule. One more thing: in terms of difference in preaching, I used to listed to a Keswick influenced preacher. He would often make 'Christ as sanctifier' the gospel (as opposed to Christ as redeemer). Christ in us is good news, but Christ for us is THE good news. That is a confusion that 'holiness' type teaching runs the risk of mucking up.


----------



## JBaldwin (Apr 19, 2010)

My experience with Keswick teaching (I graduated from a Bible Institute with heavy Keswick leanings) is that it glorifies the will of man and teaches "lordship" salvation. If haven't "made Jesus your Lord" you're not saved. There are levels to sanctification. Nearly all the important words like "grace", "love", "faith" are redefined and twisted. There was a push for holiness to the point where you were expected to ask guidance about which bread to buy at the grocery store lest you fail to listen to the promptings of the Spirit and sin by buying the wrong bread. 

I could go on. Keswick teaching on sanctification looks passive, but in reality it can be simplified to this "man is saved by grace and sanctified by lots of hard work (meaning fasting, praying, meditating on Scripture and avoiding anything or anyone who might poison you).


----------



## DeborahtheJudge (Apr 20, 2010)

It is notably lacking in any understanding of the corporate Church/sacrament involvement in sanctification. That is to say that it is individualistic.


----------



## JBaldwin (Apr 20, 2010)

DeborahtheJudge said:


> It is notably lacking in any understanding of the corporate Church/sacrament involvement in sanctification. That is to say that it is individualistic.



Good point. It is one thing that is one of the obvious results of Keswick sanctification. Before long, those who follow Keswick teachings on sanctification are not only judging themselves constantly, they are busy "evaluating" the sanctification of every person around them. In Keswick circles, if you don't conform, you're out. 

Sadly, some of my "friends" from that era of my life refuse to speak to me anymore, because I no longer one of them.

---------- Post added at 09:19 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:10 AM ----------

If you look at some of the writings of the Keswicks and observe practices, there is an emphasis on meditation, being alone in your closet, prostrating yourself on the floor before God for hours, etc. While there is nothing wrong with doing these things, it is equated with a higher level of spirituality.


----------



## buggy (Apr 20, 2010)

I was going through some of the old-sermon notes from my ex-fundie church. And I realized how Keswick-influenced that was. 

We were told stuff that we have the choice to obey our sin nature or the Holy Spirit. 
Guilt-manipulation was used at least once - we were told how a man was "struck" with a car accident and paralyzed after he chose to skip soul-winning one day. 

And yes, they do believe in a "carnal believer". During a sermon on the parable of the sower, the preacher actually taught that seeds among thorns are genuine believers who are "unfruitful".

The words "OBEY", "always do what is RIGHT at all costs", "No child of God will ever want to touch this" (when rebuking sin) and "surrender" was hammered out through many sermons and Sunday school as well. 

And one fellow even doubled his offering in the midst of the financial crisis and boasted it is done to "express faith in Christ".


----------



## timmopussycat (Apr 20, 2010)

buggy said:


> I was going through some of the old-sermon notes from my ex-fundie church. And I realized how Keswick-influenced that was.
> 
> We were told stuff that we have the choice to obey our sin nature or the Holy Spirit.


 
I'm not familliar with Keswick teaching, but the exhortation above seems to me to be a fair summary of Scripture specifically Rom. 6: 11-14 for the choice that indwelling sin presents us and Rom 8:13 for our responsibility to mortify sin by the Holy Spirit.


----------



## JBaldwin (Apr 20, 2010)

timmopussycat said:


> buggy said:
> 
> 
> > I was going through some of the old-sermon notes from my ex-fundie church. And I realized how Keswick-influenced that was.
> ...


 
The difference between the Keswick teaching and reformed teaching is that in Keswick teaching, one does not necessarily have to rely on God's Spirit in order to do right. If you dig deeply, you find that they believe the will of man is what enables a person to live a sanctified life. If one just tries hard enough, he can be sanctified. This is why, in Keswick communities, there is an emphasis on long periods of prayer, meditation and private worship. They believe this is what strengthens the will so that they can live a holy life. Unsuspecting believers longing to be more holy and Christlike get caught up in this teaching, because it sounds so good. At the core, however, it is nothing more than more legalism. 

While sanctification is not passive on the part of the believer, it is a work of God's Spirit, not a work of man's will.


----------



## timmopussycat (Apr 20, 2010)

Thanks for explaining the point.


----------



## JM (Apr 20, 2010)

Five Views on Sanctification: An In-Depth Analysis

This link might be use.


----------

