Please explain this.

[Lady Crosstalk]

Jesus didn't mean to limit knowledge. And I think you know this.
Are you gnostic?

I think you may have nailed it, GG. I knew there was something familiar in what JBF was posting. I remember arguing with a modern gnostic (a number of years ago, now). I found that man's posts to be a bit chilling actually, as he said that soon he and his ilk would be taking over Christianity and righting what was done to "his" people. He went on and on about the Cathars and how the RCC wiped them out. He said they would be getting revenge through their people within the Vatican who would be working, at the highest levels, to "correct" the doctrine of the RCC.

It seems that there has been something of a revival of gnosticism since WWII. There are, I suspect, a lot of gnostics among the elites (many of whom are outright Satanists). Occultist, Madame Helena Blavatsky cited gnosticism as a way to fight orthodox Christianity. There are reportedly gnostic groups who support "gnostic bishops". These "bishops" go about trying to convince religious leaders of their "superior" doctrine. They pretend to be conventional, orthodox Christians--all the while seeking to subvert orthodoxy. Gnostics teach the "perfectibility" of a gnostic here on earth, and that one can be elevated to that position through some kind of mystical ceremony. Their beliefs are heretical and are fought against by using the example of the Apostle Paul having to rebuke the Apostle Peter for being a hypocrite, in the account recorded in Galatians 2. JBF argued with me on that point. The hypocrisy comes through very clearly in the NLT--in fact, precisely that word is used. The Epistles are difficult to understand in the KJV--probably why JBF promotes it.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

You're funny JBF!

Why not give me and @Lady Crosstalk a try?

Betcha nothing could shake our faith.
And I have reasons for saying this....

He doesn't send it to me because he can't. He doesn't think anyone but him is a true believer anyway, so why would he be upset by the idea of "destroying my faith". He is not logical--but then mystics of one sort or another are rarely very logical.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

And also, my beliefs about Calvinism are irrelevant to the current discussion; and I also do not want to put forth the time and energy of expounding on them here.

Not irrelevant at all. We are trying to determine if you hold to orthodoxy in your beliefs. I consider Calvinists to be orthodox Christians although I believe that there are a couple of areas in their theology which could stand a revision. But, if you actually believe in "perfectibility" here on earth, and that the KJV teaches that, you are a heretic.

 

[Enoch111]

But, if you actually believe in "perfectibility" here on earth, and that the KJV teaches that, you are a heretic.

That would be going too far. "Misguided" but not a heretic. Heretics attack fundamental Bible doctrines.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

Ok. In many other translations, the word "perfect" is mistranslated as "mature" or "complete", creating a completely different message throughout the whole of the Bible. There are still oases of truth strewn throughout some of these watered-down translations, such as 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24; however the biblical evidence for the doctrine of entire sanctification is effectively stripped away for the most part when you are reading the watered-down versions.

And you may say, "sinless perfectionism is a heresy." to which I say 1) that is a misnomer, the doctrine I am speaking of is in all reality accurately called entire sanctification; because it does not claim that we are without sin as believers but rather that sin is rendered dead and crucified within us; and, 2) you only say that because you have rejected the kjv. If you held it as authoritative you would realize that entire sanctification is a biblical doctrine. Thus, I contend that some of these newer translations are indeed a conspiracy and attempt by the devil to do away with certain basic and essential doctrines of the holy scripture.

I don't care what you call it, whether you call it "entire sanctification" or "sinless perfectionism" it is HERETICAL. I thought that when the "holiness" movement died, that the heresy died with it, but apparently not. Entire sanctification while here on the earth is NOT taught anywhere in the New Testament, whether in the KJV or other translations.

Are you kidding me? Now, to hold that the way to everlasting life is narrow and few there be that find it is identified as gnostic?

You are very slippery. We weren't talking about the way being narrow, we were talking about the possibility of earthly "perfectibility."

You just (mistakenly) identified Jesus as a teacher of gnosticism.

Not only are you a heretic but you are a liar as well.

To go into detail about that would take much more time and energy than I am willing to put into it...

Oh, of course.

...especially since my reward will only be more accusations coming from the likes of you.

I thought that you were only interested in heavenly rewards.

...unregenerated people usually find a beef with what I am saying to everyone on here.

No, Christians who hold to biblical orthodoxy have a "beef" with heretics who represent themselves as being "perfect"--all the while, pretending to be oh-so-humble and concerned with their welfare. Humbug!

I would be working of the evil one if I ever actually told you what the heresy is that I am speaking of: for I would then be spreading it; something I am not willing to do.

You wouldn't be "spreading it" if you sent me a PM detailing it. I call BS again.

...also the way of truth would be evil spoken of.

If it is the "way of truth" then those who speak against are evil themselves. Illogical on your part.

You people are simply just too curious for your own good. It seems you want to be hurt by the information. I'm "not gonna do it"; for I would be held accountable before God.

I call BS again. You don't share the information because you are trying to bluff your way out of the corner in which you have painted yourself.

Gen 39:9

, There is none greater in this house than I; neither hath he kept back any thing from me but thee, because thou art his wife: how then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?

*sigh* Do you ever tire of misapplying Scripture? Teaching against what you believe to be false teaching can never be a "great wickedness". What you cite is Joseph's speech to Potiphar's wife, who was inviting Joseph to have relations with her. What has THAT to do with anything we have been discussing? If you have a problem with the supposed "heresy" of other translations and that you have a key verse in the KJV that will combat it, do you not owe it to those of us who are "untutored" to share it with us? You make no logical sense. I suppose it makes sense to you in some weird kind of way.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

That would be going too far. "Misguided" but not a heretic. Heretics attack fundamental Bible doctrines.

From Dictionary(.com):
1) opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, especially of a church or religious system.
2) the maintaining of such an opinion or doctrine.

 

[Enoch111]

From Dictionary(.com):
1) opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, especially of a church or religious system.
2) the maintaining of such an opinion or doctrine.

Since there are all kinds of ideas about perfectibility, there is no accepted doctrine in this regard. So calling some a heretic about this matter is over the top.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

Since there are all kinds of ideas about perfectibility, there is no accepted doctrine in this regard. So calling some a heretic about this matter is over the top.

No--I don't believe it is, but you are certainly welcome to your opinion. No lesser a light than famed evangelical pastor, Keith Daniel said, "there was never anything about the so-called 'holiness' movement that WASN'T heresy". Teaching that "Perfectionism" or "Entire Sanctification" can occur as a "Second Work of Grace" perverts a lot of biblical doctrine. We are to seek holiness in this life--YES! However, teaching that there is some magical level that only a few elite reach, while every other believer is condemned to hell, is gnosticism. AND THAT IS HERETICAL. The Lord invites us in Revelation 22:17: "The Spirit and the Bride say, 'Come'. Let anyone who hears this say, 'Come'. Let anyone who is thirsty, come. Let anyone who desires, drink freely from the water of life." Christianity is NOT some exclusive religion where only some privileged elite gathers rewards. The life of our Lord puts that lie where it belongs--in the pit of hell. Anyone who maintains that it is a religion of cloistered initiates, is a heretic.

 

[GodsGrace]

deleted

 

[GodsGrace]

I think you may have nailed it, GG. I knew there was something familiar in what JBF was posting. I remember arguing with a modern gnostic (a number of years ago, now). I found that man's posts to be a bit chilling actually, as he said that soon he and his ilk would be taking over Christianity and righting what was done to "his" people. He went on and on about the Cathars and how the RCC wiped them out. He said they would be getting revenge through their people within the Vatican who would be working, at the highest levels, to "correct" the doctrine of the RCC.

It seems that there has been something of a revival of gnosticism since WWII. There are, I suspect, a lot of gnostics among the elites (many of whom are outright Satanists). Occultist, Madame Helena Blavatsky cited gnosticism as a way to fight orthodox Christianity. There are reportedly gnostic groups who support "gnostic bishops". These "bishops" go about trying to convince religious leaders of their "superior" doctrine. They pretend to be conventional, orthodox Christians--all the while seeking to subvert orthodoxy. Gnostics teach the "perfectibility" of a gnostic here on earth, and that one can be elevated to that position through some kind of mystical ceremony. Their beliefs are heretical and are fought against by using the example of the Apostle Paul having to rebuke the Apostle Peter for being a hypocrite, in the account recorded in Galatians 2. JBF argued with me on that point. The hypocrisy comes through very clearly in the NLT--in fact, precisely that word is used. The Epistles are difficult to understand in the KJV--probably why JBF promotes it.

So much information for a simple like...
So I thought I'd post a link to what Cathars believed:

Catharism - Wikipedia

 

[GodsGrace]

I don't care what you call it, whether you call it "entire sanctification" or "sinless perfectionism" it is HERETICAL. I thought that when the "holiness" movement died, that the heresy died with it, but apparently not. Entire sanctification while here on the earth is NOT taught anywhere in the New Testament, whether in the KJV or other translations.


You are very slippery. We weren't talking about the way being narrow, we were talking about the possibility of earthly "perfectibility."

Not only are you a heretic but you are a liar as well.


Oh, of course.

I thought that you were only interested in heavenly rewards.

No, Christians who hold to biblical orthodoxy have a "beef" with heretics who represent themselves as being "perfect"--all the while, pretending to be oh-so-humble and concerned with their welfare. Humbug!



You wouldn't be "spreading it" if you sent me a PM detailing it. I call BS again.

If it is the "way of truth" then those who speak against are evil themselves. Illogical on your part.


I call BS again. You don't share the information because you are trying to bluff your way out of the corner in which you have painted yourself.

*sigh* Do you ever tire of misapplying Scripture? Teaching against what you believe to be false teaching can never be a "great wickedness". What you cite is Joseph's speech to Potiphar's wife, who was inviting Joseph to have relations with her. What has THAT to do with anything we have been discussing? If you have a problem with the supposed "heresy" of other translations and that you have a key verse in the KJV that will combat it, do you not owe it to those of us who are "untutored" to share it with us? You make no logical sense. I suppose it makes sense to you in some weird kind of way.

Since you answered him, I won't.
I'm rather tired anyway and I dislike when I don't understand a persons theology.
And yet, he did such good work on another thread. We seem to come to a belief and then close our minds.

I left a church and so had to learn to study doctrine before accepting it.
And, I'm still doing this to this day. When I hear something strange,,,I study up on the topic and make sure I still agree with myself.

Otherwise we'd never grow to understand something new by throwing the proverbial baby out....

We can disagree with someone...but they at least have to make sense.

 

[GodsGrace]

No--I don't believe it is, but you are certainly welcome to your opinion. No lesser a light than famed evangelical pastor, Keith Daniel said, "there was never anything about the so-called 'holiness' movement that WASN'T heresy". Teaching that "Perfectionism" or "Entire Sanctification" can occur as a "Second Work of Grace" perverts a lot of biblical doctrine. We are to seek holiness in this life--YES! However, teaching that there is some magical level that only a few elite reach, while every other believer is condemned to hell, is gnosticism. AND THAT IS HERETICAL. The Lord invites us in Revelation 22:17: "The Spirit and the Bride say, 'Come'. Let anyone who hears this say, 'Come'. Let anyone who is thirsty, come. Let anyone who desires, drink freely from the water of life." Christianity is NOT some exclusive religion where only some privileged elite gathers rewards. The life of our Lord puts that lie where it belongs--in the pit of hell. Anyone who maintains that it is a religion of cloistered initiates, is a heretic.

I belonged to what might be called a holiness church for 10 years.
You might not know (judging from above post of yours) that although John Wesley taught entire sanctification was possible in our lifetime, this is no longer taught by the Methodist or Nazarene church or any other offshoot of the Methodist church.


This reminds me of early Christianity....
they believed that after baptism one would no longer sin.
At all.

When the early fathers realized that persons were still sinning, they had to come up with a solution --- confession. The cc kind of confession. This took hundreds of years of course...no email back then.

Jesus never taught sinless perfection.
He did repeatedly say not to sin..but we can know He didn't mean sinless perfection because He knew our nature and knew this would be impossible.
He did mention confessing sins one to another...so sin was possible.

This is also confirmed by 1 John.
And 1 John 3:9 is referring to a life of sin...not sins.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

Since you answered him, I won't.
I'm rather tired anyway and I dislike when I don't understand a persons theology.
And yet, he did such good work on another thread. We seem to come to a belief and then close our minds.

I left a church and so had to learn to study doctrine before accepting it.
And, I'm still doing this to this day. When I hear something strange,,,I study up on the topic and make sure I still agree with myself.

Otherwise we'd never grow to understand something new by throwing the proverbial baby out....

We can disagree with someone...but they at least have to make sense.

There is a growing influence of gnosticism among Christians today. Just as in the early Church. The aspect of Calvinism that I particularly take exception to is the idea of double predestination. That is what the gnostics believed--that there were some who were predestined to hell if they were not members of the elite group called to gnosis. Not sure that all Calvinists believe or teach this but it is certainly implied by "irresistible grace" and "unconditional election". Calvinists appear to be taking over the mighty Southern Baptist Convention--a bastion of orthodoxy.

 

[GodsGrace]

There is a growing influence of gnosticism among Christians today. Just as in the early Church. The aspect of Calvinism that I particularly take exception to is the idea of double predestination. That is what the gnostics believed--that there were some who were predestined to hell if they were not members of the elite group called to gnosis. Not sure that all Calvinists believe or teach this but it is certainly implied by "irresistible grace" and "unconditional election". Calvinists appears to be taking over the mighty Southern Baptist Convention--a bastion of orthodoxy.

Young people seem to be drawn.
Why do you believe this might be so?

I think it might have to do with responsibility.
It kind of takes personal responsibility away if we
think that GOD does it all.

(I think we've had this convo already).

There are too many aspects of calvinism that are not orthodox:
free will
double predestination
irresistible grace
LIMITED ATONEMENT --- even some calvinists don't accept this!

I'm leaving out Eternal Salvation because it seems to be pretty much evenly divided these days...but I think orthodoxy is for Conditional Eternal Security.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

I belonged to what might be called a holiness church for 10 years.
You might not know (judging from above post of yours) that although John Wesley taught entire sanctification was possible in our lifetime, this is no longer taught by the Methodist or Nazarene church or any other offshoot of the Methodist church.

Actually, John Wesley, if the biographers are correct, never taught that sinless perfectibility was possible in this life. It was his followers who came up with that. I was raised in the Methodist Church--very liberal, except for some of the older ones who still believed biblical doctrine. It was very social gospel as well--that one went to heaven based on being pretty good and doing good works (which is why that makes my blood boil when I come across it). I never heard the true gospel in my church growing up. Had I done so, it would have probably saved me heartache.

This reminds me of early Christianity....
they believed that after baptism one would no longer sin.
At all.

Satan was working even then to pervert the gospel. Christianity has always been a "boiling pot" which I suspect God permits for a purpose. That is why I love His word because: 2 Timothy 3:16

When the early fathers realized that persons were still sinning, they had to come up with a solution --- confession. The cc kind of confession. This took hundreds of years of course...no email back then.

A bit mechanistic for my tastes but, I suppose that it helped put the "fear of God" into some (either that or the fear of Father McMonagle--as my husband, a former RC--has said--LOL).

Jesus never taught sinless perfection.
He did repeatedly say not to sin..but we can know He didn't mean sinless perfection because He knew our nature and knew this would be impossible.
He did mention confessing sins one to another...so sin was possible.

Yes. ONLY HE has ever achieved sinless perfection here on earth. It is to destroy a central doctrine in Christianity to insist that sinless perfection is possible for mere mortals like us--and it is prideful (guess who would like us to believe that we can "become like God"). Sin goes with the territory of mortality. When we become immortal, then we will become like Him and be safely beyond the grip of the evil one.

This is also confirmed by 1 John.
And 1 John 3:9 is referring to a life of sin...not sins.

Yes. In an odd sort of way, teaching sinless perfection invites the evil one into one's life. A mega church pastor whose ministry I am acquainted with, became devoted to Calvinism, and used that as a springboard into saying that, since he was a member of the Elect, that nothing he did could cause God to be displeased with him. He paid lip-service to the idea of being a sinner but we show what we really believe in our behavior. He fleeced the denomination out of millions upon millions of dollars, and lived an extremely worldly life. It is difficult to see how he got away with all of the double-dealing and constant lying and abuse of everyone with whom he came into contact. He was recently tossed out of the pulpit but he has done a LOT of damage to the denomination which he and others founded.

 

[aspen]

I do not believe we can be sinless on earth, but most people do not believe this. What is worse, especially because it is a pervasive belief within Christianity today, is total depravity. It is a lie straight from Hell sent to short circuit our sanctification. Even after we are justified and supposedly free from our complete worthless ‘worm’ status, you still hear Christian’s false humility at full volume - “I am nothing, it is the power of Jesus! I am filth and worthlessness; it is only Him within this pitiful shell called me! Any accomplishment or spiritual growth or transformation is Jesus’s work merely witnessed by me!” The result is far from living a victorious life. We are supposed to be is a transforming relationship with Jesus and encouraged towards loving perfectly like Him by the Holy Spirit He provided for us! Even in our sinful days, we were creatures who were created good.

If I were trying to destroy the work of God on Earth, I would promote dualism (distract people from loving others by teaching them to label Gods good creation with positive and negative opinions), personal entitlement, and simultaneously, total depravity.

 

[GodsGrace]

I do not believe we can be sinless on earth, but most people do not believe this. What is worse, especially because it is a pervasive belief within Christianity today, is total depravity. It is a lie straight from Hell sent to short circuit our sanctification. Even after we are justified and supposedly free from our complete worthless ‘worm’ status, you still hear Christian’s false humility at full volume - “I am nothing, it is the power of Jesus! I am filth and worthlessness; it is only Him within this pitiful shell called me! Any accomplishment or spiritual growth or transformation is Jesus’s work merely witnessed by me!” The result is far from living a victorious life. We are supposed to be is a transforming relationship with Jesus and encouraged towards loving perfectly like Him by the Holy Spirit He provided for us! Even in our sinful days, we were creatures who were created good.

If I were trying to destroy the work of God on Earth, I would promote dualism (distract people from loving others by teaching them to label Gods good creation with positive and negative opinions), personal entitlement, and simultaneously, total depravity.

Would like to answer to this tomorrow morning.
Too tired now...12:30 am here.
You've made a couple of very good points....

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

Young people seem to be drawn.
Why do you believe this might be so?

I think it might have to do with responsibility.
It kind of takes personal responsibility away if we
think that GOD does it all.

I think you have pointed to some of it certainly. But, I think this is also a supernatural battle. Satan has stepped up his activity in anticipation of soon taking as many souls as he can to the LoF. The growth of evil has been astounding. Interestingly, some of the ancient Jewish sages recorded a similar intensification of demonic activity prior to the first advent of Christ.

There are too many aspects of calvinism that are not orthodox:
free will
double predestination
irresistible grace
LIMITED ATONEMENT --- even some calvinists don't accept this!

I'm leaving out Eternal Salvation because it seems to be pretty much evenly divided these days...but I think orthodoxy is for Conditional Eternal Security.

I believe that the Bible teaches Eternal Security of those who are truly indwelt by the Holy Spirit. But there are many who believe that it is possible to come to Him on their own terms. Surrendering to grace through faith is difficult. We are our own worst enemies. Satan knows us well and knows just how to not only tempt us to sin, but get us to believe his lies as well. In the Garden, he first worked on Eve's inclination to believe his lies.

 

[justbyfaith]

I think you may have nailed it, GG. I knew there was something familiar in what JBF was posting. I remember arguing with a modern gnostic (a number of years ago, now). I found that man's posts to be a bit chilling actually, as he said that soon he and his ilk would be taking over Christianity and righting what was done to "his" people. He went on and on about the Cathars and how the RCC wiped them out. He said they would be getting revenge through their people within the Vatican who would be working, at the highest levels, to "correct" the doctrine of the RCC.

It seems that there has been something of a revival of gnosticism since WWII. There are, I suspect, a lot of gnostics among the elites (many of whom are outright Satanists). Occultist, Madame Helena Blavatsky cited gnosticism as a way to fight orthodox Christianity. There are reportedly gnostic groups who support "gnostic bishops". These "bishops" go about trying to convince religious leaders of their "superior" doctrine. They pretend to be conventional, orthodox Christians--all the while seeking to subvert orthodoxy. Gnostics teach the "perfectibility" of a gnostic here on earth, and that one can be elevated to that position through some kind of mystical ceremony. Their beliefs are heretical and are fought against by using the example of the Apostle Paul having to rebuke the Apostle Peter for being a hypocrite, in the account recorded in Galatians 2. JBF argued with me on that point. The hypocrisy comes through very clearly in the NLT--in fact, precisely that word is used. The Epistles are difficult to understand in the KJV--probably why JBF promotes it.

Jesus said,

Mat 5:10, Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:11, Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
Mat 5:12, Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

I am therefore blessed.

I confess to you unequivocally that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

He doesn't send it to me because he can't. He doesn't think anyone but him is a true believer anyway, so why would he be upset by the idea of "destroying my faith". He is not logical--but then mystics of one sort or another are rarely very logical.

I don't think anyone but me is a true believer anyway? Where do you get that from anything I have said?

Not irrelevant at all. We are trying to determine if you hold to orthodoxy in your beliefs. I consider Calvinists to be orthodox Christians although I believe that there are a couple of areas in their theology which could stand a revision. But, if you actually believe in "perfectibility" here on earth, and that the KJV teaches that, you are a heretic.

So you are looking at me with narrow eyes, as a kind of "crotch inspector" as John Courson coined it. You are trying to prove that I am somehow a false teacher. What I teach is plain to see in the following thread:

Commentary on Romans.

So if there is anything there that you can identify as heresy, you have my permission to go there and expose it (not that you would need my permission to do such a thing, if there were really any heresy to be exposed)

I don't care what you call it, whether you call it "entire sanctification" or "sinless perfectionism" it is HERETICAL. I thought that when the "holiness" movement died, that the heresy died with it, but apparently not. Entire sanctification while here on the earth is NOT taught anywhere in the New Testament, whether in the KJV or other translations.

That is your personal opinion that God calling us to holiness is a heretical doctrine. The word of the Lord would teach us otherwise. Did not God say, Be ye holy, for I am holy (1 Peter 1:16)?

Have you considered 1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:3, and 1 John 2:6? What about Jude 1:24, 2 Peter 1:10, and 2 John 1:10? And of course you have probably weaseled your way around 1 John 3:9, 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24, and Hebrews 10:14 (kjv).

You are very slippery. We weren't talking about the way being narrow, we were talking about the possibility of earthly "perfectibility."

This is what we are talking about now; but previously my statement that was responded to had to do with the fact that the way to life is narrow; and that was identified by someone as gnosticism. But Jesus Himself taught that the way to life is narrow.

Not only are you a heretic but you are a liar as well.

You have three fingers pointing back at you. Why do certain people only seem to bear briers and thorns when I am only attempting to preach to them the truth?

Mat 7:15, Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Mat 7:16, Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Mat 7:17, Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

You wouldn't be "spreading it" if you sent me a PM detailing it. I call BS again.

I would be spreading it to you. And I don't have any confidence in you that you would not spread it from there.

Because of the principle in Matthew 7:3-5. If you are calling me a heretic and a liar, and this is because of a seeming speck in my eye, what kind of beam resides in your own eye?

However, teaching that there is some magical level that only a few elite reach, while every other believer is condemned to hell, is gnosticism.

#1, I do not believe that every other believer is condemned to hell. #2, your accusation against me that I am gnostic is not based in any kind of reality. I believe and confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

I do not understand why you have begun to attack me so incessantly. What did I ever do to you that you did not do to me first?

 

[justbyfaith]

Jesus never taught sinless perfection. (i.e. entire sanctification)

That is a lie from the pit of hell. In John 8:31-36, Jesus taught the doctrine of entire sanctification, or freedom from sin. He said that those who sin are the slaves of sin; and that if the Son sets you free you will be free indeed.

He also stated at one point, If you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins. (John 8:24)

I would rather not die in my sins, how about you? But what state must my heart be in to not die in my sins? Is it not what is spoken of in 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24, Hebrews 10:14 (kjv), and 1 John 3:9?

Yes. In an odd sort of way, teaching sinless perfection (i.e. entire sanctification) invites the evil one into one's life.

Actually it is quite the opposite. Just like the evil one to call God's doctrine the doctrine of the evil one. If you die in your sins, you will not go to heaven.

He paid lip-service to the idea of being a sinner but we show what we really believe in our behavior.

So, in all actuality he lived a holy life, but only paid lip service to being a sinner?

He fleeced the denomination out of millions upon millions of dollars, and lived an extremely worldly life.

So he really was a sinner; and was not only paying lip service to the idea.

Satan has stepped up his activity in anticipation of soon taking as many souls as he can to the LoF.

Indeed he has. he is even using you to try to tell people that if they live a holy life they are under his sway.

he is even using you to try to promote his doctrine that one must continue to walk in slavery to sin in order to be saved.

If that seems far-fetched to someone that he could even promote such a doctrine and have people believe in it; nevertheless people are believing in it. It goes like this: if, in order to become a Christian, you must admit that you are a sinner, then if you stop being a sinner (per 1 John 3:9), you cannot therefore confess that you are a sinner and continue to be saved by the same confession.

But it should be clear from certain verses (1 John 3:9, Hebrews 10:14 (kjv), 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv); 1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:3, 1 John 2:6; Jude 1:24, 2 Peter 1:10, 1 John 2:10) that we do not have to continue down the pathway of sin when we become born again. In fact, God calls us to walk in the opposite direction; and the result is the following:

Pro 4:18, But the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.