Tag: Christian Perfection

Revelation 2:1-7

pastorwardclintonLeave a comment

Rev 2:1  Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks; 

Rev 2:2  I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: 

Rev 2:3  And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name’s sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted. 

Rev 2:4  Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love. 

Rev 2:5  Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. 

Rev 2:6  But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. 

Rev 2:7  He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God. 

pastorwardclinton.com

Ephesus is the type of a strenuous Church. There is something singularly masculine in the first part of the description. “I know thy works”—that is, thine achievements; not thy desires and purposes and aspirations, not even thy doings, but thy deeds. This Church in its severe self-discipline affords a welcome contrast to the easily-excited populace amid whom they lived, rushing confusedly into the theatre and shouting for two hours, “Great is Diana of the Ephesians.” The patience of the Church is twice mentioned; the second time it is patience not as a feature of the workman, but the patience of him who can suffer, and suffer in silence. And this virtue has a threefold delineation—patience, endurance, fortitude. “Thou hast patience, and thou didst bear for My name’s sake, and thou hast not grown weary.” There is another mark of the masculine character in Ephesus, a noble intolerance of evil—“thou canst not bear bad men.” And with this intolerance is the power to discriminate character, the clear judgment which cannot be deceived—“thou didst try them which call themselves apostles, and they are not, and didst find them false.” There is no surer mark of a masculine nature than this keen insight into pretentiousness, and fidelity of rebuke. There is so much good in this church that we are surprised to discover that they had left (not lost) their first love.  The honeymoon was over (Jer 2:2).  No amount of separation, sacrifice, or service can make up for your lack of love for the Lord.

It is love in its largest sense which the Church once had and now has lost; the love of God animating piety undoubtedly, but no less certainly the love of men making service sweet. Nor is it the feeling alone which has changed, it is not that love as a sentiment is lost; but love in its far reach has gone, kindliness and tender consideration and disregard of self, the grace that suffers long and is kind, that beareth all things, hopeth all things, believeth all things. The toilsomeness, the endurance, the stern self-judgment, the keen discrimination of character, are obvious; but the spirit that rises above toil or sweetens toil, the grace to woo and wed, has fled. We can understand the history only too well. Life has many sore trials, none sorer than this—that virtues which are unexercised die out, and that the circumstances which call for some virtues and give occasion for their development seem to doom others to extinction. The Christian character cannot live by severity alone. There were two demands which the Church at Ephesus had forgotten—the demand for completeness of Christian character, never more urgent than when the times are making us one-sided; the demand of God Himself for the heart. There must be impulse in His people if they are to continue His people; there must be love in all who, not contented with doing “their works,” desire to do the work of God.

The warning of the fifth verse must have been very surprising to the angel of the Ephesian Church. The Church seemed to be so efficient. Its works had been so hard, and yet they had been done. Its achieve-merits were patent. Especially its service in the cause of truth was conspicuous; the Church had not lost its zeal, its candour, its piercing vision. Ephesus warns us against the perils of the Puritan temper; it warns us also against the stoical temper, with its tendency to a not ignoble cynicism, of which some of our gravest leaders in literature have been the exponents. Puritanism plus love ham accomplished great things, and will do yet more; for a masculine tenderness is God’s noblest gift to men. But Puritanism, when the first love is lost, drags on a sorrowful existence, uninfluential and unhappy; its only hope being the capacity for repentance, which, God be praised, has never failed it. Perhaps the most solemn part of the message is that in which the Lord Himself declares—“I am coming; I will shake thy candlestick out of its place.” The Lord can do without our achievements, but not without love. He can supply gifts unendingly, can make the feeble as David; but if love be wanting He will shake the noblest into destruction, and remove them out of the way. There is one striking word immediately following this warning, a word of commendation; it is the only one of the messages in which a word of commendation does come in after the warning has been uttered, and it is a commendation of feeling. “But this thou hast, that thou hatest,” etc. Hatred is hardly the feeling we should have expected to be commended: but it is feeling, and any feeling is better than apathy or stolidity. Where men can feel hatred, other feeling may come; love may come where men have not reduced themselves to machines like an “Ebenezer Scrooge”.

The word “Nicolaitans” means “conquer the people.”  Apparently, a group in the church lorded it over the people and promoted a separation of “clergy” and “laity” (see Matt 21:20-27; 22:1-12) The priest hood was set up by God, but its purpose is not to “lord it over” the people but to serve and produce high quality disciples of the Christ.  Some of the priests and pastors started out good but lost their way somewhere along the pathway.  Ephesus had too little of what so many have too much of—sensibility, passiveness, willingness to receive, to be made something of, to be quiet and let the Blessed One save them who had long been striving, and of late so ineffectually, to serve Him. Good as strenuousness is—and of human virtues it is among the chief—even better is the responsive spirit. Why was the one we call St Paul given a vision when none of the other priests, as far as we know, in his day given one?  Much of the reason likely had to do with his sincerity and earnestness to do the will of God coupled with a responsive spirit that none but God was able to see during the time when he was a persecutor of those called Christians.

— A preview from my forthcoming book on the Revelation of Jesus the Christ. – pastorwardclinton.com

Progressive Sanctification

pastorwardclintonLeave a comment

God’s purpose is that each Christian should press onward in the life of holiness aiming at final perfection, like a runner in a race. God has made provision for each Christian to be a “perfect” runner.  In running a race, it is half the battle to make a good start.  And in the Christian race, it gives a tremendous impetus to the believer if he starts and continues with a clear, steady faith in Christ for full deliverance from sin.  What is the greatest hindrance to a Christian starting and continuing in this glorious race?  Surely it is indwelling sin.  But praise God, as we shall show, we may be set gloriously free from this indwelling, entangling hindrance, we may be made perfectly whole and clean within and filled with the blessed Holy Spirit. This is “Perfection the True.”  Thus we can, through grace, fulfill the command, “Let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith” (Heb. 12:1, 2) – Brockett

The unchristian world that walks by sight and not by faith and knows not the dignity of the Christian nor what the Christians are entitled to.  The Christian is favored by heaven and will be an inhabitant of that place where the unchristian as well as the antichristian person cannot go.  The unchristian and the antichristian alike will see Jesus with His frowns, the terror of His majesty and vengeance but the true Christian will see His smiles, the glory of His majesty, His beauty.  The impure will be terrified by His purity.  Those who hope to live with Him must strive to be more pure.  “It is the hope of hypocrites, and not the sons of God that makes an allowance for the gratification of impure desires and lusts.” – Matthew Henry

The work of the Holy Spirit in the progressive sanctification of the newborn soul is indirect: in opening the heart to receive the truth, the instrument of purification; in giving vigor to the spiritual life; in strengthening the will to resist temptation, and in diminishing the power of evil habits. It is repressive of depravity rather than totally destructive. 

The entire eradication of the propensity to sin is by the direct and instantaneous act of the Holy Spirit responsive to a special act of faith in Christ claiming the full heritage of the believer. It is in reference to this distinctive act of the Sanctifier that it is noted by an eminent expositor “that in the New Testament we never read expressly and unmistakably of sanctification as a gradual process.” This is said in view of the almost universal use of the aorist tense of the verbs to sanctify and to cleanse. – Dr. Daniel Steele

An excerpt from my soon to be released book “Jesus the Christ made a statement,” Pastor Ward

Those who are hostile to God will not be allowed into His Heaven

pastorwardclinton1 Comment

Although God invites everyone to be part of His forever family, those who are hostile to God and His ways will not be allowed to enter in to His heaven.  Ladies and gentlemen that includes militant homosexuals and antagonistic atheists as well as many who call themselves Christian.

It is actually somewhat understandable why many people mistrust certain Christians; however, there are other Christians whom it is quite dangerous to despise.  Those Christians and their way of living may make you feel a bit uncomfortable regarding life-choices you may have made or may currently be making but if they are actually embarking upon the spirit-walk we are all called to travel in then it is wise to take note and, perhaps, move in the same direction and along the pathway and in the same manner they are.

There is a Christian doctrine which holds that the soul of the fully committed Christian may attain a high degree of virtue and holiness and become Entirely Sanctified with the help of the divine grace of Jesus.  That term is not to be confused with Dr. Charles Stanley’s erroneous accusations that those who believe Entire Sanctification is a present possibility in this life are actually claiming to have attained “Ultimate Sanctification.”  The Reverend Doctor may have merely misunderstood and not been guilty of maliciously maligning that grace of Jesus which he couldn’t quite comprehend.  In some of his sermons I heard him come so close to teaching and embracing Entire Sanctification, often while using slightly different terminology that means the same thing, and then, just as it seemed like he was about to have his “eureka” moment, suddenly he was running back away from it.  Why is he afraid of it?

I can remember at least a couple of times, sitting in front of the television saying, “C’mon Doc, you’re only a hair’s breadth away from your breakthrough.”  Unfortunately, every time I heard Charles Stanley speak of Entire Sanctification correctly and get really close to actually comprehending the command from God for us to be holy in this life I would hear him turn around and run back toward hyper-Calvinism much like Gollum seeking out his “Precious.”  Please understand, I do not lump together all those who hold John Calvin in high regard.  I tend to see it as something along the line of:  Hyper-Calvinist … Calvinist … Wesleyan-Calvinist.  An example of the latter might be Charles H. Spurgeon who said, “There is a point of grace as much above the ordinary Christian as the ordinary Christian is above the world.”  He also said of them, who are enjoying that grace, “They are rejoicing Christians, holy and devout men doing service for their Master all over the world, and everywhere conquerors through Him that loved them.”

Now the concept of Entire Sanctification may initially come from the Roman Catholic Church’s doctrine of theosis.  The critic may pounce at this point and loudly proclaim, “Aha!  It’s not a biblical thing!”  My response is, “Sorry, charlie; go back and reread the paragraph above which starts with ‘There is a Christian doctrine…Jesus.’ because the foundation of that doctrine is God’s command to be holy.”

Thomas Aquinas defined a perfect thing as one that “possesses that of which, by its nature, it is capable.”

“Perfection is that which it is better to have than not to have.” – Duns Scotus

Christian Perfection is another term used to speak of Entire Sanctification.  It is a doctrine that is chiefly associated with the followers and adherents of John Wesley’s theological understanding.  Sometimes the concept is referred to as “sinless perfection,” although a better and more accurate phrase would be “blamelessness before God.”

John Wesley, in his book, “A Plain Account of Christian Perfection,” wrote “…sinless perfection is a phrase I never use, lest I should seem to contradict myself.”  He also explained that he viewed it as “purity of intention, dedicating all the life to God” with “the mind which was in Christ, enabling us to walk as Christ walked.”  This assists in “loving God with all our heart, and our neighbor as ourselves.”

Wesley did not use the term “Christian perfection” to claim sinlessness nor did he advocate it as a state of being unable to sin but rather it is the being more readily capable of choosing not to sin through finding empowerment from the Spirit of God to abide in holiness of heart and life in accordance with our high calling.

Thereby we may experience a freedom from willful rebellion against God, as well as impure intentions and pride.  As we followers of Jesus function at that level of Christian living the world then sees the type of Christian that assures them that God still works in His followers in our day.

Entirely Sanctified Christians remain subject to temptations, and have a continued need to maintain a prayer life that keeps them connected to the One who empowers them to fulfill His command to “Be ye holy, for I am holy.”  Charles Stanley correctly understood we cannot attain Entire Sanctification in our own power, and as long as we try to do it that way we’ll never get it; when we understand that the Spirit of God empowers us to live that way then and only then we may be empowered to receive that point of grace.

Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God. — Jesus

The Witness of the Spirit

pastorwardclintonLeave a comment

The Witness of the Spirit

The Doctrine as Elucidated in Romans 8:16

            The Protestant tradition concerning the Witness of the Spirit has been affirmed on a consistent basis.  However, John Wesley developed and emphasized the doctrine within his own theological system, and gave it prominence as perhaps no one else.  M. James Sawyer, in tracing the history of this doctrine within Protestantism, records:

In the context of the First Great Awakening in America and the Evangelical Revival in England, John Wesley picked up on vital Reformed themes seen particularly in Calvin, developed them, and then formally integrated them into his theological method. Particularly, Wesley advocated and further developed Calvin’s doctrine of the witness of the Spirit in the heart of the believer. He insisted with Calvin, and against the Puritan perspective, that the witness of the Spirit is a personal experience prior to rational reflection” (Sawyer).

Wesley was influenced by the Moravians in this doctrine, but soon found he could no longer follow their lead.  He searched the Scriptures, studying them as tirelessly as he was accustomed to do.  “He had proved beyond question that the earlier fathers taught this doctrine, and sustained his position by quotations from Origen, Chrysostom, Athanasius and Augustine; but it was only in the Scriptures that he found the true principles of its defense” (Wiley, Volume 2).  In his sermon “The Witness of the Spirit:  Discourse Two” Wesley said:

It more nearly concerns the Methodists, so called, clearly to understand, explain, and defend this doctrine; because it is one grand part of the testimony which God has given them to bear to all mankind. It is by this peculiar blessing upon them in searching the Scriptures, confirmed by the experience of his children, that this great evangelical truth has been recovered, which had been or many years well nigh lost and forgotten (Wesley, “The Witness of the Spirit, II,” Sermon # 11, I.4).

Lest we think too highly that this is Mr. Wesley’s doctrine, Adam Clarke brings our feet back solidly to the true foundation:  “The Methodists, in proof of the doctrine of the witness of the Spirit, refer to no man, not to Mr. John Wesley himself: they appeal to none — they appeal to the Bible, where this doctrine stands as inexpugnable as the pillars of heaven” (Clarke).

The primary passage that teaches the doctrine is Romans 8:16:  “The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.”  It conveniently concludes Paul’s section on life in the Spirit, which began in 8:1.  In verses 1-4 Paul contrasts the life lived in the flesh under the law and the life lived under the influence of the Spirit.  Paul reveals what life lived according to the flesh is like in verses 5-8, then describes how Christians are to live according to the Spirit in verses 9-11.

Then in verses 12- 17 Paul employs several expressions concerning the work of the Spirit in the life of Christians, and appears to utilize them to show, in reverse order, how believers may live in the Spirit.  In verse 13, Paul states that believers must live according to the Spirit and not the flesh.  How do believers live according to the Spirit?  They must be led by the Spirit (vs. 14).  The only people who can be led by the Spirit are those who are sons of God (14).  Believers obtain the position of sons through the work of the Spirit of God in adoption (15).  By what means do the people of God know they are adopted into the family of God?  This is the subject of verse 16, and it deserves closer inspection and examination.

The classic, and never-improved, definition of the Witness of the Spirit comes from the pen of John Wesley himself.  In his own inimitable way he succinctly and concisely nails down the essential elements of the doctrine.  “By the testimony of the Spirit, I mean, an inward impression on the soul whereby the Spirit of God immediately and directly witnesses to my spirit, that I am a child of God; that Jesus Christ hath loved me, and given himself for me; that all my sins are blotted out, and I, even I, am reconciled to God” (Wesley, “The Witness of the Spirit, II,” Sermon # 11, II.2).  There are several key elements to help us understand this doctrine.

First, the witness of Spirit is a direct testimony.  Wesley states that the witness of the Spirit is performed “immediately and directly” to the spirit of a man.  When God justifies a person, the act is done in the mind of God.  It is God who knows that a man is justified and pardoned from his sins, and God alone.  Were it not for a direct intervention of God upon a person’s spirit, that person would have no knowledge that such a transaction had occurred.  That intervention is accomplished through the Holy Spirit, because “. . . no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2:11, NIV) and “The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God” (1 Cor. 2:10, NIV).  God the Holy Spirit witnesses or testifies of the very fact of our acceptance by God directly to our inner spirit.

Of what exactly does the Spirit testify concerning?  From the preceding verse Paul informs us that our adoption as sons is witnessed to by the Spirit.  Thomas Horton described it in this manner:  “Now for this it is nothing else but a gracious hint or intimation given to the soul by God, assuring our hearts and consciences of His favour and love towards us, and of our atonement and reconciliation with Him through the blood of His Son” (Excell).  It would stand to reason also that in assuring of their new relationship with God that believers also would be assured of the veracity of the great doctrines which came to bear on their salvation, such as the existence and nature of God, the deity and atonement of Christ, and of the authority and truth of God’s Word.

Some have suggested that the witness of the Spirit is only indirect as He produces His fruit in our lives.  To this line of reasoning Samuel Wakefield objects:

But . . . it has been urged that the fruits of the Spirit, when found in our experience, must be sufficient evidence of the fact, without supposing a more direct testimony of the Holy Spirit. . . . Two things will here be granted, and they greatly strengthen the argument for a direct testimony of the Holy Spirit: first, that these fruits are found only in those who have been received, by the remission of their sins, into the Divine favor. . . . Secondly, that these graces are fruits of the Spirit of adoption (Wakefield).

In order to have fruit produced in Christians’ lives and to be recognized as indeed the fruit of the Spirit, they first must have direct testimony from the Spirit Himself that He has the authority and right to produce that fruit, namely that they have been regenerated by His power and are indeed sons of God.

In an interesting and unique thought, William Lane Craig portrays the witness of God’s Spirit as self-authenticating.

By that I mean that the experience of the Holy Spirit is veridical and unmistakable (though not necessarily irresistible or indubitable) for him who has it; that such a person does not need supplementary arguments or evidence in order to know and to know with confidence that he is in fact experiencing the Spirit of God; that such experience does not function in this case as a premise in any argument from religious experience to God, but rather is the immediate experiencing of God himself; that in certain contexts the experience of the Holy Spirit will imply the apprehension of certain truths of the Christian religion, such as “God exists,” “I am condemned by God,” “I am reconciled to God,” “Christ lives in me,” and so forth; that such an experience provides one not only with a subjective assurance of Christianity’s truth, but with objective knowledge of that truth; and that arguments and evidence incompatible with that truth are overwhelmed by the experience of the Holy Spirit for him who attends fully to it (31).

Atheists have responded enthusiastically to this line of reasoning, dismissing it as disprovable and unsupported.  Not surprisingly, they have missed the point, for that is the point of Lane’s argument.  The problem that the atheists must counter is not Lane’s argument, but his underlying premise, namely that the Holy Spirit exists.

The second element is that of the Spirit’s testimony to my spirit.  The Greek word συμμαρτυρέω (summartureo) is formed from the root word μαρτυρέω (martureo), which means “to testify.”  Affixed to the front of this word is the prefix σύν (sun) meaning primarily “with,” but which may also serve to intensify a word.  The debate concerns whether the phrase τω πνευματι (to pneumati), “our spirit,” is to be interpreted as a dative of association, “with our spirit,” or as a dative indirect object, “to our spirit.”  Daniel B. Wallace authored a lengthy piece debating this subject, arguing on behalf of the latter, stating,

Positively, we can argue from two vantage points: context and correlation. The context of Rom 8 involves especially two themes—assurance of salvation and the role of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s sanctification. These two are not unrelated. The assurance offered seems to come from two sources: inner testimony and external fruit. The one, in fact, seems to be the prerequisite for the other (Wallace, The Witness of the Spirit in Romans 8:16).

Wallace’s argument is convincing, concluding that the direct witness of the Spirit is aimed toward the spirit of man, but that the assurance comes from two sources.

A third element Wesley and others have always pointed out is that this is a two-fold witness:  the direct witness of the Holy Spirit to the spirit, and the witness of the spirit as to the work of the Holy Spirit.  Many theologians refer to the witness of one’s spirit as a reflex action to the work of the Holy Spirit.  This reflex action of the spirit may be what Paul is referring to in the preceding verse when the believer cries “Abba, Father” in response to the work of the Spirit in adoption.  In Galatians 4:4-6 Paul says, “But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons. Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, ‘Abba, Father.’”  Here the Spirit is said to be the one who “calls out, ‘Abba, Father.’”  Bernard Ramm explains these two cries as being only one:  “They are like two forks of the same pitch which vibrate sympathetically and harmoniously together” (Reasoner, 328).  The heart of a believer responds in kind to the call of the Spirit, and these two witness to the relationship that has been established.

The fourth key element concerns how the witness of the Spirit is achieved.  Wesley’s definition enunciates that the witness of the Spirit is “an inward impression on the soul.”  Many, like John Wesley, confess their ignorance upon the subject:  “The manner how the divine testimony is manifested to the heart, I do not take upon me to explain. Such knowledge is too wonderful and excellent for me: I cannot attain unto it” (Wesley, “The Witness of the Spirit, I,” Sermon # 10, I.12).  All agree, however, that it cannot, and must, not be simply a subjective, mystical event.  The relationship is one of subject-object, the touching of the individual by God the Holy Spirit.  Adam Clarke argued that the “spirit” means

In our understanding, the place or recipient of light and information; and the place or faculty to which such information can properly be brought. This is done that we may have the highest possible evidence of the work which God has wrought. As the window is the proper medium to let the light of the sun into our apartments, so the understanding is the proper medium of conveying the Spirit’s influence to the soul (Clarke).

The indirect witness of our spirit is the work of the spirit in our mind and conscience, giving us the knowledge that we are God’s children.  “This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence whenever our hearts condemn us. For God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God” (1 John 3:19-21).  Ralston stated it in this way:

This testimony of our own spirit, we do not possess by intuition, but it is derived through a process of reasoning.  Thus the Bible describes certain moral qualities of the soul, and moral habits of life, as belonging peculiarly to the children of God.  By the exercise of our own consciousness, and a contemplation of our own lives, we may form an opinion of our character; then, by the exercise of our reasoning faculty, we may compare our character with the character described in Scripture as pertaining to the child of God, and rationally draw the conclusion that we sustain that relation.  This is the only plan by which our own spirit can witness to the fact (438).

There are several implications of this great doctrine.  The first and obvious implication is the assurance that is provided to the believer.  This is borne out in the tense of the verb translated “bears witness.”  The present tense here is a customary present, meaning an action that regularly occurs or an ongoing state.  The witness of the Spirit is not a onetime witness at the point of salvation, but is a continual, ongoing witness.  Since the Holy Spirit takes up residence inside the believer, his presence there is a witness to the fact of a continual relationship.  The Spirit is our seal:  “Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come” (2 Cor. 1:21-22).  As a believer perseveres in his faith, the Spirit maintains His witness to him.  God will not leave His child without the witness of the Spirit.  A believer’s own spirit may at times succumb to the wiles of satanic forces seeking to persuade him that he is no child of God, that his works are not good enough, or that his life is not acceptable.  A believer has only to listen to the direct witness of the Spirit to realize that his relationship with God remains unbroken.  “We know that we are saved because of the testimony of scripture and because of the inner witness of the Spirit. I know I am a child of God not just because the Bible tells me so, but because the Spirit convinces me so” (Wallace).

The second implication of this doctrine concerns the perseverance of the saints.  The witness of the Spirit applies only to the present, not the future.  Those of the Reformed tradition would argue that the doctrine of perseverance makes assurance a product of works, and assurance thereby unknowable at the moment of salvation.  This means denying the inner witness of the Spirit and founding assurance only objectively on the Word.  But it is the Spirit who not only offer assurance of salvation, but also sustains and energizes that faith.  The greatest security is found in the life lived in holiness and purity as it is led by the Spirit, and such a continuance is testified to as proof that the life belongs to the family of God.

The importance of this doctrine cannot be overstated.  Today the church is deficient in good biblical preaching and teaching on the important and vital doctrines of the Word of God.  It is imperative, therefore, that the Gospel is preached not just as fire insurance, but as a relationship with Almighty God.  The reality of that relationship is emphasized in the ongoing witness of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer.  Thomas Coke warns about the absence of the direct witness of the Spirit:

The absence of the direct witness of the Spirit

  • leads to legalism
  • in time stifles any conviction
  • invalidates the testimony of conscience since God’s Spirit bears witness with our spirit
  • leads to a false peace while he walks in darkness
  • leads to preposterous ideas of faith without evidence
  • conceals the motives from which our actions flow
  • raises the question of why a person could not also be a penitent without knowing it
  • makes reformation and regeneration the same
  • leaves perfect love with no witness
  • brands the inward witness as fanaticism (Coke)

Unfortunately, his warning has gone unheeded, as evidenced by the state of Christianity in America today.  In a 2009 survey, Barna discovered some startling facts concerning American Christianity and belief concerning the Holy Spirit.

. . . most Christians do not believe that the Holy Spirit is a living force . . . . 38% strongly agreed and 20% agreed somewhat that the Holy Spirit is ‘a symbol of God’s power or presence but is not a living entity.’ Just one-third of Christians disagreed that the Holy Spirit is not a living force (9% disagreed somewhat, 25% disagreed strongly) while 9% were not sure” (Barna).

If so-called Christians do not believe that the Holy Spirit is a real person of the Trinity, then there can be no real assurance of salvation in their lives.  A revival of this doctrine would certainly purify the church, edifying true believers and convicting false professors of their need for verification of what they profess.

J. Oliver Jones, Light of Life Ministry is a 501c3 Religious Non-profit Organization based in Nashville, TN that produces Biblical educational material.
LOLM’s materials are based on conservative, Wesleyan-Arminian doctrine. The organization is affiliated with the Southern Methodist Church.

 

WORKS CITED

Barna Group, The.  Most American Christians Do Not Believe that Satan or the Holy Spirit Exist.  barna.org, 2009.  Web.  3 Mar. 2012.

Clarke, Adam.  Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the New Testament.  WORDsearch, 2004.

—.  Christian Theology.  New York: Lane & Scott, 1851.

Coke, Thomas.  Thomas Coke’s Arguments for the Necessity of the Direct Witness of the Spirit.  fwponline.cc, n.d.  Web.  30 Jan. 2012.

Craig, William Lane. Reasonable Faith. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 1994.

Excell, Joseph S.  Biblical Illustrator.  E-sword.

Reasoner, Vic.  A Fundamental Wesleyan Commentary on Romans.  Evansville, IN:  Fundamental Wesleyan Publishers, 2002.

Sawyer, N. James.  “The Witness of the Spirit in the Protestant Tradition.”  bible.org, n.d.  Web.  20 Feb. 2012.

Wakefield, Samuel.  Complete System of Christian Theology.  WORDsearch, 2007.

Wallace, Daniel B.  The Witness of the Spirit in Romans 8:16.  bible.org, n.d.  Web.  20 Feb. 2012.

Wesley, John.  “The Witness of the Spirit: I,” Sermon # 10. wesley.nnu.edu. Wesley Center for Applied Theology, 1999.  Web.  22 Feb. 2012.

—. “The Witness of the Spirit: II,” Sermon # 11. wesley.nnu.edu. Wesley Center for Applied Theology, 1999.  Web.  22 Feb. 2012.

Wiley, H. Orton (2011-01-01). Christian Theology, Volume 2 (Kindle Locations 7737-7738). Beacon Hill Press. Kindle Edition.

Those who are hostile to God will not be allowed into His Heaven

pastorwardclinton1 Comment

Although God invites everyone to be part of His forever family, those who are hostile to God and His ways will not be allowed to enter in to His heaven.  Ladies and gentlemen that includes militant homosexuals and antagonistic atheists as well as many who call themselves Christian.

It is actually somewhat understandable why many people mistrust certain Christians; however, there are other Christians whom it is quite dangerous to despise.  Those Christians and their way of living may make you feel a bit uncomfortable regarding life-choices you may have made or may currently be making but if they are actually embarking upon the spirit-walk we are all called to travel in then it is wise to take note and, perhaps, move in the same direction and along the pathway and in the same manner they are.

There is a Christian doctrine which holds that the soul of the fully committed Christian may attain a high degree of virtue and holiness and become Entirely Sanctified with the help of the divine grace of Jesus.  That term is not to be confused with the late Dr. Charles Stanley’s erroneous accusations that those who believe Entire Sanctification is a present possibility in this life are actually claiming to have attained “Ultimate Sanctification.”  The Reverend Doctor may have merely misunderstood and not been guilty of maliciously maligning that grace of Jesus which he couldn’t quite comprehend.  In some of his sermons I heard him come so close to teaching and embracing Entire Sanctification, often while using slightly different terminology that meant the same thing, and then, just as it seemed like he was about to have his “eureka” moment, suddenly he was running back away from it.

I can remember at least a couple of times, sitting in front of the television saying, “C’mon Doc, you’re only a hair’s breadth away from your breakthrough.”  Unfortunately, every time I heard Charles Stanley speak of Entire Sanctification correctly and get really close to actually comprehending the command from God for us to be holy in this life I would hear him turn around and run back toward hyper-Calvinism much like Gollum seeking out his “Precious.”  Please understand, I do not lump together all those who hold John Calvin in high regard.  I tend to see it as something along the line of:  Hyper-Calvinist … Calvinist … Wesleyan-Calvinist.  An example of the latter might be Charles H. Spurgeon who said, “There is a point of grace as much above the ordinary Christian as the ordinary Christian is above the world.”  He also said of them, who are enjoying that grace, “They are rejoicing Christians, holy and devout men doing service for their Master all over the world, and everywhere conquerors through Him that loved them.”

Now the concept of Entire Sanctification may initially come from the Roman Catholic Church’s doctrine of theosis.  The critic may pounce at this point and loudly proclaim, “Aha!  It’s not a biblical thing!”  My response is, “Sorry, charlie; go back and reread the paragraph above which starts with ‘There is a Christian doctrine…Jesus.’ because the foundation of that doctrine is God’s command to be holy.”

Thomas Aquinas defined a perfect thing as one that “possesses that of which, by its nature, it is capable.”

“Perfection is that which it is better to have than not to have.” – Duns Scotus

Christian Perfection is another term used to speak of Entire Sanctification.  It is a doctrine that is chiefly associated with the followers and adherents of John Wesley’s theological understanding.  Sometimes the concept is referred to as “sinless perfection,” although a better and more accurate phrase would be “blamelessness before God.”

John Wesley, in his book, “A Plain Account of Christian Perfection,” wrote “…sinless perfection is a phrase I never use, lest I should seem to contradict myself.”  He also explained that he viewed it as “purity of intention, dedicating all the life to God” with “the mind which was in Christ, enabling us to walk as Christ walked.”  This assists in “loving God with all our heart, and our neighbor as ourselves.”

Wesley did not use the term “Christian perfection” to claim sinlessness nor did he advocate it as a state of being unable to sin but rather the being more readily capable of choosing not to sin through finding empowerment from the Spirit of God to abide in holiness of heart and life in accordance with our high calling.

Thereby we may experience a freedom from willful rebellion against God, as well as impure intentions and pride.  As we followers of Jesus function at that level of Christian living the world then sees the type of Christian that assures them that God still works in His followers in our day.

Entirely Sanctified Christians remain subject to temptations, and have a continued need to maintain a prayer life that keeps them connected to the One who empowers them to fulfill His command to “Be ye holy, for I am holy.”  Charles Stanley correctly understood we cannot attain Entire Sanctification in our own power, and as long as we try to do it that way we’ll never get it; when we understand that the Spirit of God empowers us to live that way then and only then we may be empowered to receive that point of grace.

Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God. — Jesus