• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

A question on Total Sanctification

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This is one doctrinal item from my upbringing that has always eluded my being able to accept, doctrinally. It never made any sense to me.

I have had discussions on this doctrine with a few people including a CoN pastor and a Petecostal Holiness pastor. Both believed this state of being entirely sinless was atainable. Both defended it well, but not to my satisfaction that they were not watering down the definition of "sin" to get to their position.

In the Hebrew scriptures there are sins, transgressions and iniquities. They each have distinct definitions.

In both testaments the base words translated "sin" are archery terms meaning to miss the target. You aim, you try, but you fail. Your arrow does not make it to the target.

"For all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God."

Trangressions OTOH are intentional violations of God's revealed will.

Can anyone here show me how it is possible (in this life) to aim at the target of God's ultimate will and glory and NEVER MISS?
 

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟125,034.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
In the Hebrew scriptures there are sins, transgressions and iniquities. They each have distinct definitions.

Where did you get that idea? I've never heard it suggested that these have "distinct definitions."

As to Christian Perfection, it is a grace gift of God and not something a human being can accomplish by their own work.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Where did you get that idea? I've never heard it suggested that these have "distinct definitions."

From the Hebrew words themselves.

Sin = to miss the mark (archery term)
Transgression = willfully disobey a command
Iniquity = transgenerational effects of sins and transgressions.

As to Christian Perfection, it is a grace gift of God and not something a human being can accomplish by their own work.

Of course all sanctification is by the power of the Holy Spirit. But we can either cooperate with the process or we can fight it. (our choice)

As the old saying goes: God has His part and we have ours, God will not do our part and we cannot do His.
 
Upvote 0

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟125,034.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
As the old saying goes: God has His part and we have ours, God will not do our part and we cannot do His.

Be careful in thinking that we have a part in saving ourselves. It is only by God's grace that we have any ability to respond to that Grace. That is part of the meaning of Prevenient Grace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0
T

ToBeBlessed

Guest
From the Hebrew words themselves.

Sin = to miss the mark (archery term)
Transgression = willfully disobey a command
Iniquity = transgenerational effects of sins and transgressions.



Of course all sanctification is by the power of the Holy Spirit. But we can either cooperate with the process or we can fight it. (our choice)

As the old saying goes: God has His part and we have ours, God will not do our part and we cannot do His.

I think that is a really odd way to describe sin. Paul talks about how his mind wants to do one thing yet he does not do what his mind wants but follows after his flesh.

Is that the best definition of sin that you can come up with?
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think the 3 definitions cover pretty much all the bases. What Paul described in Rom 7 is sin as he was trying to aim at doing the right thing but his view of legalism kept pulling his aim astray.

"The Law (or "legalism)" is the strength of sin..."
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0
T

ToBeBlessed

Guest
I think the 3 definitions cover pretty much all the bases. What Paul described in Rom 7 is sin as he was trying to aim at doing the right thing but his view of legalism kept pulling his aim astray.

"The Law (or "legalism)" is the strength of sin..."
I don't think that is in Romans 7.

I believe in Romans 7, Paul talks about the fact that with his mind he serves Christ, but the flesh serves sin.

I think you may be inserting the law, instead of flesh into that passage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

GraceSeeker

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2007
4,339
410
USA
✟24,797.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Christian perfection is to be perfect in love. Christ gives us a command to love others as he has loved us. I'm assuming two things:
1) the Christ's love is indeed a perfect love
2) that Christ would not command us to do something knowing that it was impossible for us to actually do it.
Therefore, I conclude that perfect love is something this is humanly possible. Further, I submit that the love we see Jesus display he does not in his divine power, but in submitting himself (as a human) to the Father's will, just as Adam could have similarly so done, and the second Adam makes possible for all of the rest of us to do as well by virtue of placing his own Spirit within us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟125,034.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Christian perfection is to be perfect in love. Christ gives us a command to love others as he has loved us. I'm assuming two things:
1) the Christ's love is indeed a perfect love
2) that Christ would not command us to do something knowing that it was impossible for us to actually do it.
Therefore, I conclude that perfect love is something this is humanly possible. Further, I submit that the love we see Jesus display he does not in his divine power, but in submitting himself (as a human) to the Father's will, just as Adam could have similarly so done, and the second Adam makes possible for all of the rest of us to do as well by virtue of placing his own Spirit within us.

Well said!
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

Maid Marie

Zechariah 4:6
Nov 30, 2008
3,548
328
Pennsylvania
✟34,068.00
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Private
This is one doctrinal item from my upbringing that has always eluded my being able to accept, doctrinally. It never made any sense to me.

I have had discussions on this doctrine with a few people including a CoN pastor and a Petecostal Holiness pastor. Both believed this state of being entirely sinless was atainable. Both defended it well, but not to my satisfaction that they were not watering down the definition of "sin" to get to their position.

In the Hebrew scriptures there are sins, transgressions and iniquities. They each have distinct definitions.

In both testaments the base words translated "sin" are archery terms meaning to miss the target. You aim, you try, but you fail. Your arrow does not make it to the target.

"For all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God."

Trangressions OTOH are intentional violations of God's revealed will.

Can anyone here show me how it is possible (in this life) to aim at the target of God's ultimate will and glory and NEVER MISS?

For me, linking the concept of entire sanctification with sinlessness is not something that we should be doing. I know that older pastors in the Church of the Nazarene and other Holiness denominations who were influenced by the American Holiness Movement were taught that the focus of entire sanctification was sinlessness but, as one who grew up in a church with that mindset knows, this made our focus become legalistic and not really holiness. The question for each day was "Have I sinned?" But for myself and other younger Nazarene pastors, our focus and training have been more from a "Wesleyan" point of view in which we focus on God is LOVE, pure sacrificial love that seeks the good of the other kind of love. Thus when we meditate on who God really is, we dwell up on his holy love. Now, our daily question should be "Have I loved today with the love of Christ?" If not, then the response back to God is "Lord, I dedicate my life to you. Set me apart, make me, mold me and fill me with your Holy Spirit until I love as you love." In time [quickly at times and slowly at other times] he creates within us someone who is perfect for God to use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

circuitrider

United Methodist
Site Supporter
Sep 1, 2013
2,071
391
Iowa
✟125,034.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
For me, linking the concept of entire sanctification with sinlessness is not something that we should be doing. I know that older pastors in the Church of the Nazarene and other Holiness denominations who were influenced by the American Holiness Movement were taught that the focus of entire sanctification was sinlessness but, as one who grew up in a church with that mindset knows, this made our focus become legalistic and not really holiness. The question for each day was "Have I sinned?" But for myself and other younger Nazarene pastors, our focus and training have been more from a "Wesleyan" point of view in which we focus on God is LOVE, pure sacrificial love that seeks the good of the other kind of love. Thus when we meditate on who God really is, we dwell up on his holy love. Now, our daily question should be "Have I loved today with the love of Christ?" If not, then the response back to God is "Lord, I dedicate my life to you. Set me apart, make me, mold me and fill me with your Holy Spirit until I love as you love." In time [quickly at times and slowly at other times] he creates within us someone who is perfect for God to use.

I believe you are right on target! It is being perfected in love that is the goal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Can we get the verses from the Scriptures that teach this threefold way of seeing sin?

I did this research several years ago. I will let you do your own research to determine whether you accept it or not. Strongs or Wilsons is a good place to start - even better if you have The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon.

I do not have my research on line and it would not be wise to take work hours to reconstruct it.

In short what I found was base words in Hebrew (and it held but more loosely in Greek) for "sin" were archery terms that meant to miss the target/mark. It would seem that even sin in english meant that prior to 1600 as well (possibly based on the Latin "sine" meaning without)

"Transgression" is really straight forward.

"Iniquity" was a bit more nuanced. That had to come from taking multiple contexts and seeing many instances had something to do with generations, and none that went against that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
For me, linking the concept of entire sanctification with sinlessness is not something that we should be doing. I know that older pastors in the Church of the Nazarene and other Holiness denominations who were influenced by the American Holiness Movement were taught that the focus of entire sanctification was sinlessness but, as one who grew up in a church with that mindset knows, this made our focus become legalistic and not really holiness. The question for each day was "Have I sinned?" But for myself and other younger Nazarene pastors, our focus and training have been more from a "Wesleyan" point of view in which we focus on God is LOVE, pure sacrificial love that seeks the good of the other kind of love. Thus when we meditate on who God really is, we dwell up on his holy love. Now, our daily question should be "Have I loved today with the love of Christ?" If not, then the response back to God is "Lord, I dedicate my life to you. Set me apart, make me, mold me and fill me with your Holy Spirit until I love as you love." In time [quickly at times and slowly at other times] he creates within us someone who is perfect for God to use.

I can see that and it makes more sense than what my dad taught and others I grew up with. Of course their proof-verse was "Be Ye Perfect as your Heavenly Father is Perfect..." Matthew 5:48 That was intrepreted as being totally sinless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Also, if we use your interpretation above, that "sin" is trying but messing up, and trangression is an "intentional violation of God's revealed will", then entire sanctification would mean we'd still sin but not commit transgressions.

I agree totally. But in my experience it is always put forward as "sin" and not "transgression." When pressed, a pair of Church of Nazarene and Pentecostal Holiness pastors said that "sin" could only be defined as intentional violation (which is actually transgression) and "missing the mark" was not sin.

Sounds to me like a convienient work-around to protect the doctrine rather than actually digging in to see what the bible teaches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

Maid Marie

Zechariah 4:6
Nov 30, 2008
3,548
328
Pennsylvania
✟34,068.00
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Private
Of course their proof-verse was "Be Ye Perfect as your Heavenly Father is Perfect..." Matthew 5:48 That was intrepreted as being totally sinless.

And that opens the door to legalism. Perfect in this verse means be complete or be mature, not just be sinless. That's why I like the phrase "Perfect for God to use" so much more than "be sinless".

Some books that have helped me with this are: Theology of Love and Wholeness in Christ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0
T

ToBeBlessed

Guest
Christian perfection is to be perfect in love. Christ gives us a command to love others as he has loved us. I'm assuming two things:
1) the Christ's love is indeed a perfect love
2) that Christ would not command us to do something knowing that it was impossible for us to actually do it.
Therefore, I conclude that perfect love is something this is humanly possible. Further, I submit that the love we see Jesus display he does not in his divine power, but in submitting himself (as a human) to the Father's will, just as Adam could have similarly so done, and the second Adam makes possible for all of the rest of us to do as well by virtue of placing his own Spirit within us.

I think Paul gives us some insight into this.


Romans 7

Believers United to Christ


2For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. 3So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.

4Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. 6But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.


7What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, “YOU SHALL NOT COVET8But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; 10and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; 11for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. 12So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.
13Therefore did that which is good become a cause of death for me? May it never be! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful.


The Conflict of Two Natures

14For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. 15For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. 16But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. 17So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 18For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. 20But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.


21I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. 22For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, 23but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. 24Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.


We are wrestling between our minds and our flesh. With our minds, we have been given the mind of Christ, however in our flesh is still sinful desires. That is how that works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

beforHim

Apologetical
May 18, 2015
3,218
76
44
Near Austin, TX
✟26,624.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
I agree totally. But in my experience it is always put forward as "sin" and not "transgression." When pressed, a pair of Church of Nazarene and Pentecostal Holiness pastors said that "sin" could only be defined as intentional violation (which is actually transgression) and "missing the mark" was not sin.

Sounds to me like a convienient work-around to protect the doctrine rather than actually digging in to see what the bible teaches.

Basically we have to undo 150, 200 years of tradition! Because I agree we should be precise in our terms, and use the terms from the Bible. So if sin is not an "all encompassing" word, or if "intentional, unintentional" don't really get to the heart of the matter, then we should preach and teach this, and anytime we read books or listen to stuff that talks about sin we'll have to do the mental switch to "OK, that's actually talking about transgression...ok, this book uses the word "sin" in different ways..." Man, this'll be a hard sell to lay people and theologians set in their ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Man, this'll be a hard sell to lay people and theologians set in their ways.

I hear you brother.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psalms 91
Upvote 0