Whatever Happened To Repentance?

No no body said anybody was damned. That remark came from you reading it into what I said.

Q. 12: "Does then Christian perfection imply any more than sincerity?"

A.: "Not if you mean by that word, love filling the heart, expelling pride, anger, desire, self-will; rejoicing evermore, praying without ceasing, and in everything giving thanks. But I doubt, few use sincerity in this sense. Therefore, I think the old word is best.

"A person may be sincere who has all his natural tempers, pride, anger, lust, self-will. But he is not perfect till his heart is cleansed from these, and all its other corruptions.

"To clear this point a little farther: I know many that love God with all their heart. He is their one desire, their one delight, and they are continually happy in him. They love their neighbour as themselves. They feel as sincere, fervent, constant a desire for the happiness of every man, good or bad, friend or enemy, as for their own. They rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, and in everything give thanks. Their souls are continually streaming up to God, in holy joy, prayer, and praise. This is a point of fact; and this is plain, sound, scriptural experience.

"But even these souls dwell in a shattered body, and are so pressed down thereby, that they cannot always exert themselves as they would, by thinking, speaking, and acting precisely right. For want of better bodily organs, they must times think, speak, or act wrong; not indeed through a defect of love, but through a defect of knowledge. And while this is the case, notwithstanding that defect, and its consequences, they fulfil the law of love.

"Yet as, even in this case, there is not a full conformity to the perfect law, so the most perfect do, on this very account, need the blood of atonement, and may properly for themselves, as well as for their brethren, say, `Forgive us our trespasses.'

John Wesley
Plain Account of Christian Perfection Not even Wesley believed and made such accusations as you hurl when cornered and asked if you actually believe what you preach. Despite his theological window dressing that even the perfect sin "unintentionally" (hogwash), Wesley did not actually preach what you are saying that he did. Read the last portion carefully. He affirms that even the most perfect need ongoing forgiveness. That means that Wesley weasels away from admitting outrightly that his perfectionism is unattainable. If words actually have meaning, then Wesley is admitting that his perfectionism is imperfect. He affirms holiness as a serious and somber goal of any Christian but denies it is attainable.

Wesley then continues to affirm that the "defect" (depravity to Calvinists) in even the most holy of Christians requires a continuing atonement for sins, that even the most perfect have an inborn defect. Therefore, this statement reveals that Wesley did not hold himself or any of his followers to the standard that you are demanding of Calvinists.

Repent your unscriptural and anti-Wesleyan harshness toward us Calvinists. I think we could readily demonstrate that we are actually closer to Wesley than you are on holding a sound approach to the goal of personal holiness. But we do not deceive ourselves into believing that we can be empowered by the Spirit to be sinless, to avoid any repeating of a sin, and to end up accusing ourselves of having lost our salvation because of a failing. The modern notions of Wesley's doctrine are a heartbreak. Certainly, we Calvinists aspire and strive to avoid real sins. But we don't expect, any more than Wesley did, to ever overcome the sin and depravity which is born in each of us.

Certainly, if we listen to Luther's hymn and to the Psalms, we know of the devil that "on earth is not his equal". It seems to me that Wesley knew this just as we Calvinists do.

The Nazarene doctrine regarding sinlessness teaches that a second act of grace, undocumented in the Bible, is what gains a Nazarene the ability to sin once, repent and then never to repeat that sin. When you read Romans 7, do you think that Paul experienced what you are claiming any true Christian experienced, a power to resist all sins after repenting them only once? I don't think that that is what Paul was telling us.

I believe that the second act of grace is one of the best documented in the NT ...in fact it begins the NT

Acts 2:1And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2:2And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
2:3And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
2:4And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

These were saved men GW..they had been given the great commission,yet they were weak kneed cowards..huddled together untill the 3rd person of the trinity came down and entered them

If you look through the OT you see where the "spirit" was upon men of God..but not in them.

Not untill the day of Pentacost and the "second blessing",the Baptism of the Holy Spirit..

Weselyans believe that the purpose of that second blessing is to prepare men for service

Look what followed the 1st second blessing..the cowards preached in the face of ridicule and death and the church was born

Acts 2:29Men [and] brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
2:30Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
2:31He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption
. 2:32This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
2:33Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
2:34For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my
Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 2:35Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
2:36Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
2:37Now when they heard [this], they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men [and] brethren, what shall we do?
2:38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
2:39For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, [even] as many as the Lord our God shall call.
2:40And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
2:41Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls.

When the Holy Spirit came He did exactly what Jesus had promised..He would convict them of their sin and enable courage to witness,and in fact give their lives

J14:15If ye love me, keep my commandments.
14:16And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
14:17[Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
14:18I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
14:19Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
14:20At that day ye shall know that I [am] in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
14:21He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. 14:22Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?
14:23Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
14:24He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
14:25These things have I spoken unto you, being [yet] present with you.
14:26But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
14:27Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
14:28Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come [again] unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
14:29And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
14:30Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.
14:31But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.

Amen

I consider Pentecost a special dispensation of the Spirit, not applicable to modern times. As a Baptist, this is typical. The instance of Pentecost was unique and has not been demonstrably repeated since the work of the orginal apostles and disciples.

Your third quote of scripture is a fine one but, as all Calvinists affirm, teaches of the Spirit as a comforter and a teacher of the believer's spirit. It says nothing of a second work of grace or a power to avoid a sin once repented.

Naturally, these are not the "perfection" proof-texts to which I referred previously. I'm wondering if you are going to bring those out again. However, if you do, you should be prepared to answer my question: If a Nazarene sins and repents and then repeats that sin, has that Nazarene lost his salvation?

The texts used to "prove" Nazarene perfection have a plain meaning. You might use them to accuse Calvinists (without effect), but those same texts, read literally are a far greater accusation against Wesleyan perfectionists if they should ever repeat a sin once repented after their "second act of grace".

I mean no dispiriting injury to any Wesleyans here and would not want anyone to despair. But this is the real heartbreaking substance of modern "perfection" notions, that which really can harm a sincere Christian. This is the very center of the controversy and ongoing dispute between Calvinists and Wesleyans. Or perhaps it is a much broader doctrinal rift and is actually a dispute between the modern Holiness churches and the rest of Christianity. I make no conclusion on that. We should all aspire to holiness. But that is not the same as saying that scripture supports a second act of grace to grant that power to us.

True Calvinists reject the false notions of hyper-Calvinsts who consider their sins to be no danger to their spiritual destiny, a notion that leads to a complacence which can reveal that such a believer was in fact never a real believer in Christ. We likewise reject as extra-Biblical any notion that we are granted by a second act of grace of the Holy Spirit a power to be free of a sin if once repented. We reject these notions because they break hearts and cause despair in those who believe them. We believe that all Christians should strive for holiness. We do not accept that anyone can achieve perfection with regard to any sin any more than Wesley did. We will always need our Saviour. The blessed work of the Holy Spirit upon our own spirits can never replace the centrality of the cross in our belief or in our daily walk with He who paid the price of our sins.

You're right. All humans sin. All Christians sin. They keep on sinning, and they sin a lot. But for the Christian, hopefully less and less, and with more and more remorse for it, thanks to the inner workings of God's own Holy Spirit.

A simple definition of "repent" is to turn. And I find it useful to compare the Christian life to sailing a sloop-rigged boat. To make it move forward, you have to actually be continually turning the boat away from the wind. Otherwise, the boat will naturally turn its nose into the wind, lose headway, end up "in irons," and flop at the mercy of the breeze.

It is certainly not a one-time process and it takes constant vigilance of the wind. It is an iterative, feedback process. In other words: Keep short accounts with God. Sense remorse for sin early and often, and seek pardon, which is amply available.

Wilkerson is exactly right. Without our repentance, we don't avail ourselves of the forgiveness and redmption God granted at the sacrifice of Jesus. WITH repentance, we can begin to forge a RELATIONSHIP with God. And it is the relationship, ultimately, that really counts. It is a mystical process through which God gradually puts a new heart and mind in us.

Another necessary ingredient, according to Jesus and Peter, is to be "baptized." I dont think they mean merely an outward ritual of water. It of course has to be a matter of the heart. But it also has to be public. God seems to demand a visible, public statement of commitment from us. At some point in one's life, there has to come a moment when you make a public declaration of faith. It's what joins you to the family of God's people.

Thus silent, inward repentance, belief and faith is necessary, but maybe not sufficient. If there is one word even more politically incorrect than "repentance" in most churches, it is the word "commitment." Another is "surrender," as in the daily yielding of our wills to God.

Sorry for the rant, but this thread hit a hot button for me. I've spent the past week fending off criticism for suggesting that the WTC disaster was, indeed, a portent for repentance. As with most of life's great events, mankind always seems to learn the wrong lessons.

You are a very smart person. But you forgot two things Mr GWB. You erased the things I read. And you know without them I can't prove a thing. Very good have fun untill the real truth comes out. I saw those things and not only me but one other who refuses to admitt to it. You are irrational. Why would someone else say this? There is no one on these threads who is afraid of me. There is no one who actually thinks I would stop communicating with them if they agreed with you. Not WM, not RnMom, not any of the Calvinists.

Don't you even realize how strange this sounds, that you have a witness who will not admit that they saw what you claim to have seen? Doesn't that even sound wrong, Don? What would you think if I made some accusation about your profile page and then said I had a witness who just wouldn't admit they saw the same thing on your home page? You'd laugh at such a thing in a font of 20 points or bigger.

You were mistaken, Don. I have never had anything on my profile page except the Nebraska flag which showed because I joined the Nebraska group when they first started the state pages and I only really joined to make John Rob happy that people were using his feature. I discontinued the state flag because I only got annoying spam out of it. You can see that I quit that Locale on June 15, 2001 because I left a rather unpleasant message to the spammers when I left the Locale and here you can read it.

You still haven't dealt with theproblem of smoking. You tried real hard to change the area. But you still haven't owned up to the subject of smoking. I don't believe you have done some corrections in other areas of your life either. It's you who won't answer the actual questions and instead try to change the subject and reply with accusations. Answer my questions first.

If a Nazarene sins and repents and then repeats that sin, has that Nazarene lost his salvation?

I have only gotten this far and I want to watch the president..

My understanding of the doctrine is that one would need to make a conscience decision to lose their salvation...decide to become a muslim...or decide to become am athesist

You would have agreement with the Nazarenes regarding speaking in tongues..but it is seen by Wesleyans as a sovereign act of God.. usually (But not always)seperate from salvation (as it was for the apostles) in which Jesus is not only Savior,but truly Lord...submission to Gods will and obedience would be normative markers..a death to self..

This is where the teaching of santification comes in..if one is totally "sold out to Christ" The Holy Spirit fills your heart and your "relationship" to sin changes ......sin is no longer your primary pleasure...serving Christ is..and so through His Grace..you begin to refuse sin when tempted...

Now all Christians can do that....but with the infilling of the holy Spirit it is in His power not yours..

Now I dont know if I have clarified or confused..but it is seen as an act of God that makes complete surrender and obedience come first in the believers life.....thus preparing him for Gods service..

I have given you the base of the teaching on the "second blessing"...now as a Baptist you may refuse to see that as a "blessing " or an act of Gods grace,but as you read through acts you see it was considered the norm for believers..and I have yet to have anyone show me where God resinded it.. Then you are saying that the Nazarene (Wesleyan, Holiness church) notion of a "second act of God's grace", a "second blessing" of the Spirit is, in terms of spiritual action, based on nothing other than a modern application of the ancient Spirit of Pentecost, namely that which caused those who preached at Pentecost to speak and be understood fully in foreign tongues and to bring souls to Christ by speaking a foreign language miraculously.

So in essence, you are similar to the charismatics who believe that the Spirit of Pentecost is granted to modern believers?

You previously stated:

'These were saved men GW..they had been given the great commission,yet they were weak kneed cowards..huddled together untill the 3rd person of the trinity came down and entered them

If you look through the OT you see where the "spirit" was upon men of God..but not in them.

Not untill the day of Pentacost and the "second blessing",the Baptism of the Holy Spirit..'

This is something upon which we can broadly agree, though some non-Wesleyans would read a more restricted role than you paint in the Old Testament. I don't have much problem with what you're saying here either way.

You then stated:

'Weselyans believe that the purpose of that second blessing is to prepare men for service'

Here, you have joined the charismatics in ascribing the work of the Spirit of Pentecost to modern believers. If you had, in fact, that same Spirit of Pentecost, then why do you not speak in tongues, speaking and comprehending foreign languages, and convert those who speak every language upon the earth even though you do not know their languages?

I think you will find it difficult to treat the texts honestly and consistently in answering this. I had no idea that Nazarenes and, perhaps Wesleyans in general, shared this similarity to charismatics.

It seems that your only disagreement with the charismatics then is the exact form which the Spirit of Pentecost takes in a modern believer.

I just can't help but believe that these notions lead to heartbreak as they are not clearly taught in scripture nor do we find recorded instances in the early church of speaking in tongues and achieving conversions. You may have some problems with the readings we Calvinists use in some portions of the Word but surely you can see my point about this interpretation of Pentecost. I think it invites real despair.

I certainly don't wish to discourage you from diligently pursuing (and exhorting others to the same task) ever greater holiness through an indwelling of the Spirit. But I do believe the Wesleyan doctrine here is simply wrong. To me, it is an addition to the scripture and therefore extra-Biblical. And it will lead to unnecessary heartbreak. Perhaps even to apostasy in those who might make of it a rock upon which to wreck their faith, leaving them open to the lies of the Accuser, afraid to claim the birthright of forgiveness granted to those who are born again. But, having said that, my pleas for "Calvinism" should not be regarded as an invitation for you to accept a license to sin. No real Calvinist believes in this. In truth, even the hyper-Calvinists don't practice it though some have made some really stupid remarks on the subject. I myself have heard a few such remarks and completely reject them.

BTW, now that I've gotten around to it, you Nazarenes do train your missionaries in foreign languages, don't you? ; )

LOL...ya they still have foreign language classes

At its founding it was the Pentacostal Church of the Nazarene..I thought you knew that?

There was a split over tongues in particular and actually the demonstration of gifts as the Charasmatics do

The church does believe that the Holy Spirit indwells believers There is scripture which indicates that Paul and others were baptised by the Holy Spirit

If you believe that a believe is indwelled by the holy Spirit what is His function ?

So teach me....inspite of belief to the contrary I am teachable..:>)

I'd like to invite you all to listen to a rather wonderful debate between the leading Arab Christian scholar who has debated Islamic scholars. You can find the debates between Dr. Anis Shorrosh and his various opponents at the Al-Islam CyberTV Network. And you can suck up bandwidth from the forces of American Islam, surely our Christian duty.

The debates are a series of RealPlayer audio/video which vary from 1.5 to 3.7 hours. I strongly recommend that you listen to the rather famous debate called The Divinity of Jesus (RealPlayer). This is the longest debate and has a series of extended statements from each.

You can listen to the beginning of the video to hear of the qualifications of the two debaters at the beginning of the video (at the four minute mark). Then comes forty minutes for the Islamic scholar to state his case. You can listen or skip it. But what I really recommend is listening to Shorrosh himself. You can skip ahead to his remarks which start at minute 53. He is very passionate and incisive in a way we don't often hear. I'm really enjoying his spirit and declamation.

Oh, yeah. Dr. Shorrosh just happens to be a Baptist. And he has a doctorate in philosophy in religion from Oxford and a whole pile of other degrees. He has his own worldwide evangelistic association. He makes a couple of rather Calvinistic remarks but I can't fully vouch for that. His opponent in this debate is considered the leading Islamic scholar.

This is pretty timely material. Let's remember our Arab brethren in these times when so many hearts are turned against those of Arabian extraction due to the recent tragedy. To all of you, I recommend Dr. Shorrosh. He is a great debater but manages to do some very sound preaching in the course of his presentation. As I said, he is very passionate for the cause of Christ.

Uriel, I know you'll love these debates.

LOL...ya they still have foreign language classes Yeah, I suspect the charismatics don't actually rely on speaking in tongues to convert foreigners either. Kind of funny if you take their claims seriously.

At its founding it was the Pentacostal Church of the Nazarene..I thought you knew that?Aaaaa-HA! Now it becomes clearer.

There was a split over tongues in particular and actually the demonstration of gifts as the Charasmatics do

The church does believe that the Holy Spirit indwells believers There is scripture which indicates that Paul and others were baptised by the Holy Spirit Leaving aside cheap shots about which Biblical creature actually has a split tongue (I'm sure someone else will point it out), I will move on to say that Baptists and just about every Christian I've heard of affirms the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Certainly, Jesus did assure us that the Spirit would be our Comforter and Teacher after He ascended. One also hears the teaching that the Spirit only convicts during conversion. I understand this teaching but am not convinced that the Spirit is so limited since the time that Jesus ascended.

Now I have heard (correct me if I am wrong here) that Baptists (probably of the Arminian kind*grin*)believe that a believer receives the Holy Spirit at salvation..is that not true in the reformed church? Well. Yes. Since I accept the teaching that the Holy Spirit is given rise by both the Father and the Son, then it seems to me that if one takes this view, then the Spirit indwelling is also an indwelling of the nature of Christ and the Father. So, I guess you would say that I believe that God indwells in the earthly believer through the Holy Spirit. I'm sure someone will find this unorthodox. But the nature of the Trinity is difficult and the spiritual mechanics can be problematic. One can take my view or any other and someone else can always ask hard questions. I admit I have not yet been totally convinced of any doctrinal view on this matter, not even my own. I think we are not given absolute knowledge on this question because no human being could ever fully understand the nature of God. I'd better shut up about this since the sharks are already probably circling on this one. In FRmail if not here on the thread.

Do you disregard the presence and the power of the Holy Spirit? That wouldnt seem scripitual..I always felt that large numbers of believers did indeed receive the Holy Spirit at salvation,but that didnt mean it wasnt a seperate act of God..Salvation and empowerment to live a Christian life. I felt that was a pretty standard doctrinal standard.. I don't have a problem with what you're saying. This is generally my belief, based as it is in the final words Jesus spoke in teaching his personal disciples. My own belief is that the Holy Spirit also means more broadly the indwelling of the nature of the Father and the Son as well.

If you believe that a believe is indwelled by the holy Spirit what is His function ?

So teach me....inspite of belief to the contrary I am teachable..:>) NEWSFLASH: RnMom Teachable, Calvinists Faint

I think I answered you above. I would say that I'm not fit to teach, an opinion that most of the other Calvinists will undoubtedly leap to affirm.

NEWSFLASH: RnMom Teachable, Calvinists Faint

LOL Interesting observation that you see it as Father and Son indewlling..if you believe in the trinity..that would seem so..but if you look and see tham as a single purpose with different functions..well seems we have done that one and my eyes glazed over!

Mark 1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

Luke 3:16 John answered, saying unto [them] all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire

Luke 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him,(Jesus) and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased

*****************************.

This is some of the gospel teaching on the Holy Spirit

Then we see it as part of the early church

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 4:31 And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldnes

Acts 6:5 And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch:

Acts 8:15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost

**************************

So we know that the "baptism with the Holy Spirit " was a part of the early church..the question is how did they see it..how did of affect the formation of the church?

I think this quote is interesting

1 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual...

***********************************

I know there are many more..but it seems to me that to my mind this is the function of the Holy Spirit..to teach us and lead us

Paul who was not there on Pentacost said this

2 Timothy 1:14 That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us.

************************

Good Calvinist that you are I know that you like this one:>)

Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Hebrews 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

We keep coming back to the Holy Spirit as out teacher and leader..

And the truth of the trinity

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one...(your point?

GW I didnt do this to prove a point to you,believe it or not..I went to look to renew my scripture knowlege on the teaching...

And actually it lines up pretty well with my understanding But seeing I have declared myself teachable I fully expect to be completly demolished .. ...

Interesting observation that you see it as Father and Son indewlling..if you believe in the trinity..that would seem so..but if you look and see tham as a single purpose with different functions..well seems we have done that one and my eyes glazed over! Well, as I tried (poorly) to say, if we believe as the Reformed church always has, that the Spirit arises from the nature of both the Father and Son, then it actually does solve almost every Bible verse provided that we don't somehow disregard the actual person of the Holy Spirit in the Trinity. There is a flipside to this argument which actually argues even more strongly for the absolute and inseparable nature of the Trinity if you adopt this view. So even though it is the person of the Holy Spirit indwelling, then through that Spirit we commune with the teaching and comfort of both the Father and Son. It fits pretty nicely and it avoids the situation that many seem to find themselves in where they believe they are only being comforted and taught by the Holy Spirit and do not acknowledge the source of the Spirit, the Father and Son. It also accounts for the indwelling of Christ in our hearts and provides an agency by which we become more Christlike. It even works in the context of Hebrews 10. Well, like I said, it seems to me that this view can answer almost every Bible verse on the subject of the indwelling of the Spirit. I do have a suspicion that it may not account for the person of the Spirit. Certainly not a perfect explanation, merely one that seems to best explain the unknowable.

I don't really encourage anyone to share these ideas. As I told fortheDeclaration, these are my own beliefs. Really, they're just the only way I've found to answer my own questions. I have to be very careful in reading the Word because hell is always waiting to jump me and whisper unbelief to me. I have to find a way to rationalize certain things and I find myself in the uncomfortable position of being an amateur systematic theologian. Not too comforting. I do think that almost every believer has an imperfect understanding of and some imperfect explanation for the questions involving the Trinity.

I can hear the army of Calvinists forming at the rear,thanks GW We try but it's impossible to march quietly with these hobnailed jackboots.

You seem to be confused on the ability to become sinless. I didn't say a position where you would never sin again I said sinless and have the ability to stay that way If anyone sins then there is forgiveness to wash those sins away Please consider thetwo following posts carefuly I can't make your mind up for you

Well well. It seems like this idea of being sinless is still being deined and confused. I can't remember how many times I have posted the following Scripture but here it goes again. There are some that say it is impossible. All they have done is deny what is said in I John. If that don't work well for them the next thing on thier list is to accusing the person or person claiming these promises is to say,wrongly, "You are saying you don't sin no more" That is a sick cop-out and has been meet by many denials and explanations. But this seems to be a little game with them every time the subject comes up. But regardless everytime the subject come up it is going to be meet by a post like this one. Because of the amount of materal that is needed I am going to break this down to two parts. The first being a general introduction to I John and the second dealing with the idea of the possibilty of becoming sinless

I John chapter one is where all the information lies. It is very clear in the hands of anyone who wants to be honest with himself and others. This was directed toward a group of people. Most likely Montanist or psedudo-Gnostic influnce at Ephesus. Though the Epistle differes from others in the fact there is no one addressed or any form of the normal manner of greeting or closeing as far as that goes. What we know about Gnosticism one of its major beliefs is

"All material in general and the flesh in particular were evil"

Now if you want to adopt that as your belief. You run into a very big problem with the Christian Belief. For Christians hold that God was Incarnated in Jesus in the flesh. Now take notice of how John starts out his message to these people. Chapter 1:1--4 Is a definite attempt to prove Jesus was indeed God Incarnate. That He was real and Devine. In verse four he gives the reason for saying this. "That your joy may be full"

He then begins on the true Christian message he wants these people to understand. This begins in verse 5. with a discription of God. I would like to quote just part of it

".....that God is light and in Him is no darkness at all"

After he says that John begins to quote what these people were saying. He does this in a unusal manner. "If we say" Take notice that this phrase occurs in vs.6,8,and 10 He knew they were wrong in what they were saying and needed to be corrected in thier error. He could just as easy said (bombasticly) "You people are all wrong. There is not a thing you say that is the truth. But what would this produce ? People would be offeneded and made mad. Would this have made it easier to prove to them that they were wrong in what they were doing ? This seems to be the practice of many on this thread and the results are exactly the same. If John would have said this. But he didn't say this He said "If WE say" Thereby inplying it was just as wrong for him to say it as it was for them to be doing it. In this manner the word reciliation comes in.

Now take notice what occurs in vs. 7 and 9 Here he is saying what is correct and that which they ought to be saying. There is one exception and that is verse 10. There is a very good reason for this. For if we say

that we have NOT sinned, we make Him a liar, and His Word is not in us

John if following his logic in the preceeding verses said "Go out an sin, so you don't make God an liar. No that would not have worked and it should help us understand what he is saying. This is If you say you have NEVER NEVER SINED. You have just removed yourself from any need for either Forgiveness or Salvation For what do you need either for ? Thereby making God a liar in that He provided both for you.

Well so much for the introduction. Please Pray, Read, Think and the Praya again It is my hope and prayer that this will help you to understand the second part

God bless

don

Well we are now ready to look into this idea of becoming sinless. The first verse of Scripture is I John 1:7 and it says

But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

I would like to break this verse up into a number of phrases for the ease of explaining

"But if we walk in the Light"
"as He is in the Light"
"we have fellowship with one another"
"and the Blood of Jesus Christ, His Son"
"cleanseth us from all sin"

To take these one at a time

"To walk in the Light" I guess the first question would be: "What is meant by light ?" Light in this case is knowledge. That knowledge of what God would have you do in your life as a believer. Then too it is the knowledge of what you should avoid. This can be summed up in one word. "SIN" To walk within the boundaries define by light requires really only one thing That is obedience. Now there is little or no doubt that it is near impossible to do this all of all of the time. Some have come very close though. God and Jesus made a provision for when; For some reason a person ceases to walk in the Light This will be taken up later on
" as He is in the Light " The greatest example of obedience that ever walked the face of this earth. In the most simple terms this verse suggests that we should become like Jesus in our thoughts and life. A big big order. But with His grace and help it is possible.
"we have fellowship with one another " You and I might have thought John would have said "fellowship with the Father and the Son" But he didn't. In doing this he is showing the importance of us having fellowship with each other. The Greek word used in this case means much more than what the English word says. It means to "have something in common" Something far more important than we can ever know. I suggest we look at His High Priestly prayer for the answer.
"and the Blood of Jesus Christ His Son" The real power that makes all this possible. It has enough power to do it all. And was shed for us while we were yet sinners.
"cleanesth us from ALL SIN" Here we have a twofold idea all wrapped up into one. First we have; The action that is taking place CLEANSING then we have the extent of that cleansing ALL SIN After the last point there can be no doubt of it happening for His shed BLOOD is what is providing it

There we have the first verse. Before we look at the second we need to ask our self a question.

What is a person walking in the light or obedience to the knowledge that God gives him, POSITION IN REGARD TO HAVING ANY SIN ?

Now as I said earlier it is not likely or possible for everyone to walk in the Light all the time However God and Jesus provided a remedy for when we fall from walking in the Light. Before getting to that We need to look at verse 8 of this chapter.

"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us

Here is what those people were saying. Please take notice of the word have There is a big difference between Having sin and Committing sin This points out a condition that existed with these people. They had the idea that they could go about COMMITTING KNOWN SIN and not be held accountable for doing it. But in the next verse John makes it quite clear when ever a person sins He or she should not deny it, but confess it. This is God answer to when a person falls from walking in the light. To confess it and repent from it by beginning to walk in the light by which we know that that action is sin and is to be avoided Now lets consider the next verse

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

"If we confess our sins" The action required to claim the promise that follows
"He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins" Oh my friend those words "faithful and just" This was provided by two items. One was God's grace and the other was Christ propitiation or Atonement You see that word just cost Jesus a great deal. His life. For God required something that would allow Him to forgive our sins. Salvation and forgiveness are free. But the cost to provide them was very expensive.
to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. We need to take note of what the action is "CLEANSING" and what it was and what it produced ALL UNRIGHTEOUSNESS

We are back to that old question again. What is the persons condition after confessing his sins and being CLEANSED ? Does He have any SIN ?

Now it is possible for him to return walking in the light which is an act of repentance Because he has now turned away from sin and returned to obedience. And what is his condition as a result of doing this ?

The amount of time where a person is not walking in the light depends upon his willingness to be obedient and his Christian Maturity.

But he is able to have a sinless life not because he is excluded from the ability to sin. But because of his love for his Saviour produces OBEDIENCE and CONFESSION

Please pray,read,think and pray some more till you receive the answers.

God bless

Don

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.