Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke
I agree that we must remain submitted but that is different than becoming submitted.
Yes you did say that
|
No I did not say 'there is no further need of submission'. I said that when one repents one is fully submitted (by the very definition of 'repent'). This does not mean one does not need to continue to submit. I deny that one can 'submit partially', because the very meaning of 'partial submission' is NOT FULLY SUBMITTED. If one is not fully submitted to God one is not submitted to God at all. I emphatically deny 'partial obedience to God' in any moral sense is possible. Obedience to God is to love God with all your being. If you do not love God with all your being then you are not submitted to God, are not obedient.
How this means 'no further submission is required' is beyond me. UNLESS, you mean 'no increased submission if required'. That is true, IN A SENSE, namely, that if one is obedient to God, one cannot increase their obedience except as more light becomes available. As one discovers more opportunities to obey God, as one's strength is increased, as one's ability is increased, one is obligated to obey God with that increased ability. In that sense one may 'increase submission' although I would describe it more as 'abounding more and more'. One is not going from PARTIAL obedience to a more complete obedience, but rather as one's ability expands, one's obedience must necessarily expand to keep pace. Hope that makes sense.
Quote:
|
I agree that a saved person should stop sinning and I agree that a saved person must both renounce all of their sin and turn from all of their sin but this is salvation not sanctification. Salvation deals with committed sin while sanctification deals with the roots of sin or the draw of sin.
|
So then sanctification deals with temptation? You believe sanctification eradicates temptation, or the ability to be tempted?
Otherwise, I hear what you are saying, but I cannot deny the fact that I honestly do not see any place where either Jesus or the apostles taught sanctification the way you are presenting it, as a 'second work'. I see that you interpret various passages to be in agreement with the second work theory, but I do not see where the apostles actually TAUGHT such a thing.
Various passages are being interpreted as suggesting a second, post-conversion work, but i would expect such a fundamental doctrine to be clearly expounded by the apostles, wouldn't you?
Entire sanctification is most definitely and clearly taught by the apostles (especially by Paul, in
Romans 6-8, and by John in his first epistle). Of that there is no doubt. But entire sanctification 'as a second, definite experience or work after salvation' I do not see it.
Suppose you are preaching an evangelistic message to the lost. Can you put forward to them, the following points?
1. They are sinners in need of pardon.
2. They are unholy and unrighteous, blackened by sin.
3. Jesus died so they can not only be 'declared righteous' (pardoned), but actually made righteous and holy.
4. Faith is the only way to come to God or receive pardon and cleansing from God.
5. If they believe the gospel, they can,
right now, tonight, be forgiven of their sins and cleansed from ALL unrighteousness, made pure, holy, good, right with God in all ways, they can have their hearts purified by faith, they can be filled with God's Spirit and empowered to live and walk as Christ lived and walked?
If you can,
then we are on the same page.
Threaded Mode
