Holiness Doctrine | SermonIndex

M

murrcolr Jul 14, 2013

It is very important here to clearly grasp what Holiness doctrine teaches. It basically says that the Cross of Christ secured for the believer the full forgiveness of sin and complete freedom from its power – that is, his justification and his sanctification.

The majority of believers accept by faith that their sins are forgiven, but are unaware that by the Cross they are made partakers in the latter benefit, too. The second blessing, then, at root, is the reception of this divine truth, the realization that sin’s power has been destroyed.

Sanctification is, in this sense, by faith alone, because it is the simple acceptance of something that was completed on the Cross just as justification was. Just as the believer takes no steps to secure his justification, so he need take no steps to secure his sanctification. It is a gift, won on the Cross, received by faith alone.

True faith is always marked by works. Consequently, when the Holiness disciple realizes that sin has no power over him because this was secured on the Cross, he lives his life accordingly. When the opportunity for sin presents, he sees it with the certain (for ‘faith is the assurance of things unseen’) knowledge that it has lost its power over him and he can pay it absolutely no heed. The continuous putting off of the flesh does not cease (for at every moment of temptation it must be done) but it is founded immutably on the knowledge that the Cross broke sin’s power on his life. In this sense it is always and only by faith.

One’s victory over sin in every situation is secured not by one’s own efforts but by one’s assured knowledge of sin’s destruction at the Cross. Hence it was not done by the believer, but by Christ.

Edit: Spelling

sermonindex Jul 14, 2013

Knowledge alone does not make it so.

There must be an active yielding to the Spirit which is the mechanism of relationship to abiding in Christ.

Knowledge of a destination does not guarantee that one will actually begin walking towards that destination.

Faith without works (Holy Spirit authored works) produces no overcoming power.

We must apprehend Christ. (Phil)

"Apprehend is a verb"

Knowledge alone produces nothing unless one is willing to act on that knowledge and then follow thru.

sermonindex Jul 14, 2013

What you have shared here Colin is wonderful and is the precise reason why teaching holiness does not concern me.

One reason why holiness teachings get skewed off into the power of the soul and the inevitable gnostic characteristic is when real light is given but there is an inability to walk in that light. This is what Just-in is saying I think. I remember reading your testimony about the time you were given understanding on this precious reality which is in Christ. I recall you used the words which spoke of a breath leaving your body and then a breath of God rushing in. You then spoke in tongues as I recall.

I think it is important to draw a few distinctions because it would appear from what I have read of say George Fox and say John Wesley that they experienced the same power of God yet the Holy Spirit illuminated to their individual minds different things.The quakers were called quakers because they literally "quaked" or shook under the anointing of the Holy Spirit. I think this is likely what happened on the day of pentecost only then it was the very building which shook, and means the baptism of the Holy Spirit or the power of God from on high. When Wesley had his revelation he didn't speak in tongues but he was suddenly filled with a full and true comprehension that his sins were forgiven and that he was eternally secure in God through Christ. This description by Wesley is nothing short of what George Fox received but yet it was different in sovereign purpose of God. Which is why I speak of some brethren having a revelation of Romans chapter six and from that, comprehending that there is a way of living a Holy Sanctified life before God and men. It is the same Spirit but the reality which comes from such a personal infilling can be different. I believe that in the case of Wesley and Fox the result was common in one respect. They both comprehended the cross in its fullness afterwards. Without that revelation it isn't possible to understand why we fail so often even though we long to be obedient. Without the cross the ground for victory in us, it is in our souls grounded in our own understanding. Only after such a revelation the victory becomes grounded in the light of the revelation of Christ on the cross and not an empty cross with no other way of understanding, that if Christ is alive today, how did He become so? Resurrection from the dead is the reality. And this then is the real meaning of baptism. First death on the cross then resurrection power.

For me this business of speaking about other men is only necessary because they are themselves sought out as a basis for understanding how to deal with the reaction which inevitably comes when one who has a light on this subject is in obedience, determined to walk in it. In short it makes them a pain in the neck of every one else. How that reaction is handled will make for a healthy outcome or else a perverse one. I know that you received a poor reception and in the end have found it necessary to be separate. Your present waiting is very much like my own. Thanks for sharing here it is one of the best definitions of holiness I have ever read.

S

Sidewalk Jul 14, 2013

In one of Jesus' parables (Matt.22) he speaks of a great wedding feast a King prepares for the marriage of his son. The story talks about the guests being invited, the servants rushing out to find the people on the street, the desire of the king to fill his hall with guests.

The food is prepared, and now the king is sending armies to destroy cities, and the story winds about with a thousand meaty sub plots to inspire sermons about everything.

But no mention of the son, or his bride, or anything of the great event that caused the feast. The story descends to one guy- the one without a wedding garment at the feast. The king singles him out, confronts him about his attire, and immediately throws him to the fires of Hell.

Whew. Sounds like someone forgot his Xanax...

Here is what I believe the Spirit is saying in the story:

This is a man who was invited to a great reward he did not deserve, did not earn, did not need any effort to get it. But he was required to put on a garment, and he spurned that. It says he was speechless, made no defense, knew he was in the wrong. He had insulted the king and all the other guests by thinking he could just eat the goodies, and make no effort to please the king. This could not be allowed.

So it is with those who believe they are safe in the kingdom, said "uh-huh" at the altar of forgiveness, but have never bothered to put on the garment of holiness. They are no different from the lost souls of the world, could not be spotted as different, living a life that pleases the king, having evidence of the conversion they claim.

The unholy believers may think they are in the kingdom, but the King is scanning His hall.

You come in, you put on His garment. Be pleasing in His sight!

sermonindex Jul 15, 2013

Thanks Colin, good post. It is through faith not effort.

On the Quakers, neither Fox or any of the early Quakers said a word about physical quaking. From my readings the nickname was given because they were said to fear God in that they obeyed Him absolutely.

Neither did they speak in or teach tongue speaking, like all true holiness teachers until recent times, that is around the time of Asusa Street.

What little they said was negative including from Wesley when he and his brother were compelled to share a bedroom with a French Prophets follower and complained that he 'gobbled like a turkey all night'.

H

Heydave Jul 15, 2013

Colin, I like what your wrote. I would not however call it a second blessing, but all part of the manifold (many sided)blessings we have in Christ.

Sidewalk, This is an interesting aspect you brought out. It made me think of the passage in Revelation 19:8 where the bride of Christ has been given fine linen garments, clean and bright to wear. In some translations this is said to be the "righteousness of the saints" and in others the "righteous acts of the saints".

Recently I looked into what was the interpretation, "Righteousness" or "Righteous acts". One speaks of something we just receive as a gift and the other as something we do. Looking at the word in the original language, it seems that the word has the aspect of an outward display of righteousness. In other words the garments show forth the righteousness that is received. There is an outward manifestation (works) of the inward reality.

So it is not sufficient for anyone to say 'I have trusted Christ and have His righteousness' if there are no works of righteousness that demonstrate that confession. However it is not 'our' works of righteousness, but as Colin wrote in the first post, there will be an outworking of the righteousness and holiness which we have received by faith.