|
Post by Steve Noel on Mar 1, 2006 18:58:33 GMT -5
Okay, I've been doing more research into alot of the things we've been discussing and I'm a little confused on where some of you stand. Here's what I mean:
If you believe in the Wesleyn-Holiness doctrine of entire sanctification, then you must also believe in original sin / inherited depravity. From what I understand the doctrine of entire sanctification applies to the eradication of original sin / inherited depravity in the believer.
Now, how can you reject the doctrine of original sin / inherited depravity and accept the doctrine of entire sanctification? If I understand this correctly, then you cannot. Feel free to correct me if I'm missing something here.
I'm not trying to be antagonistic in anyway, just trying to clarify and work through all this.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Mar 1, 2006 20:09:58 GMT -5
Steve,
I don't think anyone in the discussion that I remember believes in original sin and entire sanctification. I thought most of us on this board who believe in entire sanctification reject the doctrine of original sin. I myself agree more with Charles Finney's views than John Wesley's. Maybe I am just speaking for myself.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Mar 1, 2006 20:47:14 GMT -5
Micah,
I think we're having a diconnect. What I'm trying to say is that if you believe in entire sanctification, then I think you must believe in original sin. That's the point I'm confused on. The way I undestand entire sanctification is that it's the eradication of original sin in the believer.
If you don't believe in original sin, then you must have a different understanding of what entire sanctification is.
What is meant by entire sanctification?
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Mar 2, 2006 1:14:39 GMT -5
(I'm sick and not in right mind, but let me give this a spin)
I haven't studied their theologies much since I'm trying to study with as little outside influence as possible (yet that's nearly impossible, I know). But I understand scripture expressing GOD's heart for us to NOT SIN ANYMORE, period. Obedience is complete obedience, not incomplete obedience. Now being born-again, filled with the Holy Spirit, I should have no desire to sin. Yes, I'm tempted and understand the pleasures of sin, but the desire TO SIN should not be there. So if I willfully supress the Holy Spirit in order for me to fulfill my selfish desires, then I consider that grieving the Holy Spirit... and if I love GOD, why on earth would I want to grieve the Holy Spirit? That isn't love! And 1 John 2:3-4 states who we are if we are not obeying his commandments... some being "be holy", "be perfect", and "sin no more." So I better put my entire life (or death) into making this happen... allowing GOD to transform me, killing the evil in me, so He has a pure and spotless bride to come back to!
I don't know the exact definition of "entire sanctification" but I believe we are responsible for where we are in Him... last year I had plenty more sins I was aware of doing than I do now, but my highest priority in personal death was to have Him KILL it. Was I less holy then? I don't believe so since He's making me aware of more and more sin in my life as I mature in my faith and knowledge of Him. The closer we come to Him, the greater light is shown on our lives and that sin must depart or He will.
(did I make sense?)
GOD bless you all!
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 2, 2006 13:52:19 GMT -5
I agree with you Grant in part, but what you have stated couldn't possibly be 'entire' sanctification, could it? Is entire sacntification not the COMPLETE removal of all sin and therefore there is no need for 'progression' in holiness?? Is entire sactification not the belief that you are faultless before God? For what I can see in the scriptures is that last year you were 'blameless' not 'faultless'. You did sin (as has been revealed to you over the passing of time) so you weren't spotless but you were blameless because your conscience at the time did not condemn you.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Mar 2, 2006 17:31:58 GMT -5
Because of Wesleys belief in original sin, he taught what is called "second blessing" holiness. This is the removal of the original sin.
I belief in holiness from conversion. That the Son sets you free from all sin and cleanses you from all sin and takes away all sin the moment you surrender to Him.
When it comes to entire sanctification, what I tell people is this:
"I have sinned in the past, I can sin in the present and in the future, but I am choosing right now to obey God. All I claim is what the bible teaches, to be "free from sin"Ro 6:18, Ro 6:22, Ro 8:2 and "dead unto sin" Ro 6:11 to be "cleansed from all unrighteousness." 1Joh 1:6 1John 1:9. A true Christian is one who loves God enough to "keep His commandments"Joh 14:15. I "keep His commandments and do those things that are pleasing in His sight." 1Jo 3:22
If you have any sin in your life at all, "unless you repent you will perish" Lk 13:3, 5
"If you sin every day in word, thought, or deed you'll go to hell at the end of your life." Leonard Ravenhill
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Mar 2, 2006 19:20:35 GMT -5
Amen!
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Mar 2, 2006 20:58:08 GMT -5
So if I understand correctly no one here actually believes in "second blessing" sanctification. As far as the Wesleyan-Holiness doctrine is concerned.
|
|
|
Post by josh on Mar 3, 2006 12:46:17 GMT -5
I would say I hold to second blessing theology, as taught by Wesley, but my studies are on going
|
|