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?! | Meg, the Wesleyan model, which is alive and well in many different forms, is rampant in mainstream evangelicalism. It reared its head about 20 years ago in the Lordship Salvation debate. Jesus is Savior at salvation but becomes Lord of your life sometime later. John MacArthur's book, "The Gospel According to Jesus" was not the first treatise on the subject but it certainly was the most prolific in stimulating modern debate. At it's the core the debate centered on the scope of what happens to a believer when they come to faith. The Wesleyan model teaches that the process begins but is not complete until there is complete surrender on the part of the individual. Thus, the free will of the individual is active in sanctification as it was in salvation according to the Wesleyan. The Reformed view? Let me quote the 1689 London Baptist Confession.
As to the offices of Christ: Quote: |
It pleased God, in His eternal purpose, to choose and ordain the Lord Jesus, his only begotten Son, according to the covenant made between them both, to be the mediator between God and man; the prophet, priest, and king; head and saviour of the church, the heir of all things, and judge of the world; unto whom he did from all eternity give a people to be his seed and to be by him in time redeemed, called, justified, sanctified, and glorified.
| As to the standing of the child of God: Quote: |
All those that are justified, God vouchsafed, in and for the sake of his only Son Jesus Christ, to make partakers of the grace of adoption, by which they are taken into the number, and enjoy the liberties and privileges of the children of God, have his name put upon them, receive the spirit of adoption, have access to the throne of grace with boldness, are enabled to cry Abba, Father, are pitied, protected, provided for, and chastened by him as by a Father, yet never cast off, but sealed to the day of redemption, and inherit the promises as heirs of everlasting salvation.
| As to the work of sanctification in the life of the believer: Quote:
This sanctification is throughout the whole man, yet imperfect in this life; there abideth still some remnants of corruption in every part, whence ariseth a continual and irreconcilable war; the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.
In which war, although the remaining corruption for a time may much prevail, yet through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part doth overcome; and so the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God, pressing after an heavenly life, in evangelical obedience to all the commands which Christ as Head and King, in His Word hath prescribed them.
| The Wesleyan rightly concludes that Christians sin and need grow in their faith and practice. But they err in that they consider the work of sanctification to be synergistic, just as they do salvation. |