"1. How do I not believe in 'entire' sanctification. Saints are either sanctified or not."Well you said before that you didn't.
Again, you would not say you were sinless. Are you know saying you are?
I don't think Paul is claiming to be sinless. Some of the people in his churches were pretty messed up. In comparison, he was a holy man, not a perfect one, which he confirms many times.
Yes, we are blameless because we are in him. Not because we possess any righteousness of our own.
"and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith." Phillppians 3:9
No Paul was admitting to still struggling with sin. I've heard the old claim in holiness churches that this was Paul identifying with unsaved people, but I don't buy it.
The old testament passage doesn't really qualify but let us understand that it's only Christ that gives us a new heart and spirit. The whole of the Old Testament confirms that we can't do it for ourselves. No one ever kept the law but Jesus. So you should understand why only through his righteousness can we be rescued from ourselves.
I'm more a storyteller than a debater, so: I was going to be over by the Dollar General today, and everytime I'm over that way, there's this little voice in my head saying: "Stop and get a Dr. Pepper." It doesn't matter if I need anything at the store or not. Well, what's that about? It's a useless and ultimately harmful desire for something that only brings momentary pleasure. Isn't that the very essence of sin? Well, you say, it's just a soft drink and I agree. But I don't need it, it has no redeeming value, nor does any junk food. What's the difference between these "little" sins that we indulge in and if I was to go out and hire a prostitute? I know, you are thinking: "What a ridiculous comparison!" But is it? I think it's just a matter of degree. Isn't any useless and harmful desire sin? I have no intention of hiring a prostitute, but I'm sure I'll buy a Dr Pepper sometime this week. Most people probably don't even think about their "little" sins. Gluttony, for example, is so acceptable in our society it's not even commented on.
My point isn't to harp on people's little vices and judge them. I'm in the same boat. Sitting here arguing on the computer is ultimately pointless and no doubt sinful when I could be being productive. The point is, none of us have achieved perfect holiness. Thank God that Jesus righteousness covers us because otherwise we would all be doomed.
Well you said before that you didn't.
Quote please.
I may have misspoken, or you misunderstood. I certainly wouldn't say it, because I have no clue what it means to not believe in an 'entire' sanctification.
Again, you would not say you were sinless. Are you know saying you are? I don't think Paul is claiming to be sinless.
Therefore, you agree that living blamelessly with a pure heart is not a claim to sinlessness?
I am showing you how the effort to equate preaching righteous, holy, and blameless living is not preaching 'sinlessness' nor the perfection of the resurrection. The doctrine and exhortation of blamelessness in Christ condemns living in unrepented sins, and is an admonition to remain faithful and steadfast in enduring temptation and overcome sins unto the end.
Yes, we are blameless because we are in him.
Is that because we are doing so in the flesh, or only because we are 'counted' as doing so, though we are doing it not?
Are you agreeing we must live blamelessly even as Paul did so in Christ, to attain the resurrection of the dead as Paul hoped to do?
Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ...If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
Not because we possess any righteousness of our own.
Of course not.
And so you acknowledge the difference between doing works of our own righteousness by our own faith and will, which pleases not God nor justifies any man in His sight, vs doing the works of His righteousness by His faith according to His will, by which we are justified with Him in the faith?
Many have a concrete wall between either living like the world or being perfect.
Do you now acknowledge the Scriptural place between the two, which is living blamelessly with a pure heart in this life? And is neither continuing in unrepented sins, nor is living in resurrection perfection?
Them who equate blameless living by faith from a pure heart in this life, with the resurrection of perfection, also falsely believe such blamelessness and purity of heart cannot be lived in this life until the resurrection, which will be too late.
Paul was admitting to still struggling with sin. I've heard the old claim in holiness churches that this was Paul identifying with unsaved people, but I don't buy it.
1. Struggling with sin is being defeated by sin, not being an overcomer in the faith against sins.
2. Paul was not identifying with the unbelievers, but was empathizing with the double minded Christians, who need deliverance with purity of heart and defeat of the law of sin in the mind and over the body.
Are you saying you agree that wretched double mindedness is the normal state of all Christians unto death? And there is no such thing as living blamelessly in Him from a pure heart and mind, freed from lust and desire to sin?
We are not speaking of the corrupted mortal body, but of the soul, heart, and mind of them that have been washed clean and live with clean hands unto the Lord.