Quote:
Originally Posted by turmeric  I don't want to get into the theological aspects lest I be exercising authority over men - but the history of the thing seems to be a spinoff of Wesleyan teaching, which the proponents tried to make more palatable for non-Arminians. It suggested the need to come to a point, after conversion, of recognition that one could not overcome sin, then reach a point of total surrender to God, after which one would be filled with the Spirit, Who would then meet temptation through the surrendered Christian, rather than that person having to struggle with sin. It's a kind of perfectionism, from what I understand, and it is taught in various guises throughout the evangelical mainstream.
Maybe Pastor Bill or Rich or someone more qualified can help us with the differences between this model - the Keswick model - and the Reformed view. Bill? Rich? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?! |
I laughed out loud with regard to Bueller!
"20 bucks says he's sitting in his car right now, debating whether or not to come over here!"
Actually, your statements reminded me of what the Quietist movement was. It refers to "letting go and letting God"; being in a sense "quiet". You're right, it followed on the heels of Wesley, and involved the "total surrender". But, their take on Romans 6 is what I'm personally familiar with, in regard to what "being dead to sin" means, and "no longer under sin's power." They say, "the power chord of sin is unplugged" in a believer's life, and that we must "believe and apply this by faith". I find this view still being taught. I think MacArthur even presented something similar to it in his earlier book, "Faith Works" in Chapter 7. I don't know if he still holds agrees with what he wrote though.