tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post3614874804089575812..comments2024-03-28T09:52:15.415-04:00Comments on Common Denominator: Acts and Entire SanctificationKen Schenckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-34467417813916957532007-06-11T17:32:00.000-04:002007-06-11T17:32:00.000-04:00Ha! ;-) P.S. the rumors I spread of my importance...Ha! ;-) <BR/><BR/>P.S. the rumors I spread of my importance are greatly exaggerated...Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-52517793181816939462007-06-11T17:27:00.000-04:002007-06-11T17:27:00.000-04:00KenYou are very kind and diplomatic, you are still...Ken<BR/><BR/>You are very kind and diplomatic, you are still an important Wesleyan so you need to be polite. I am not a Wesleyan so I can say it, the holiness theologians of the past were wrong and their errors are coming to light and being disregarded. Just think what will happen to guys like you when in a few generations in the future Wesleyan scholars will re-read your blogs and be correcting you, tending more to the Reformed view of theology:)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-61256821412404947202007-06-11T16:52:00.000-04:002007-06-11T16:52:00.000-04:00Craig, rather than say I'm correcting anything, I'...Craig, rather than say I'm correcting anything, I'd prefer to say that I am pointing out a change that has already taken place among Wesleyan scholars, largely without anyone seeming to notice! These things have to be worded carefully!!<BR/><BR/>I mean no disrespect to the scholars of Carter's day...Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-69504743173259640812007-06-11T16:39:00.000-04:002007-06-11T16:39:00.000-04:00KenCharles Carter would roll over in his grave if ...Ken<BR/>Charles Carter would roll over in his grave if he read this post. He did an article in THE WESLEYAN ADVOCATE years ago linking sanctification with Acts 2. I wrote him and told him I disagreed, if anything Pentecost was more of a ministry empowerment if you look at the context. He wrote me a long letter scolding me for departing from the holiness doctrine.<BR/><BR/>I am glad that you are correcting publically some of the errors of the old holiness movement.<BR/><BR/>Very good post, I enjoyed it alot.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-51479251395190699402007-06-09T18:37:00.000-04:002007-06-09T18:37:00.000-04:00Thank you for this excellent essay. As a relative...Thank you for this excellent essay. As a relative newcomer to The Wesleyan Church, I found the historical perspective here helpful and illuminating. I think that the trajectories implicit in your reconstruction bode well for the future as we seek to articulate and proclaim a robust doctrine and thoroughgoingly biblical holiness for our day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-35523627220935556932007-06-09T08:49:00.000-04:002007-06-09T08:49:00.000-04:00Ben, I want to make a strong distinction between t...Ben, I want to make a strong distinction between the kind of language we use to talk about victory over temptation and the idea of victory over temptation itself.<BR/><BR/>Do I think the apostles taught victory over temptation? I believe Paul <B>vigorously</B> taught that a person could live a blameless life. John similarly taught that sin was avoidable.<BR/><BR/>What I was saying is that the way our tradition packages "entire sanctification" doctrinally is not the way the NT authors did. When Hebrews says to go on into perfection, it says nothing of seeking a second blessing whereby a person is instantaneously freed from inbred sin. The NT never packages victory over sin in that way. But the NT does believe in complete victory over sin and it does urge "carnal" Christians to get there! <BR/><BR/>Bill, in an age where most Wesleyans would now admit that Jesus turned the water into alchoholic wine, it does seem only a matter of time until this prohibition is removed as an absolute. I don't know how long that will take, of course.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-4730860758449406092007-06-08T21:11:00.000-04:002007-06-08T21:11:00.000-04:00Great post, I dealt with this debate in a recent i...Great post, I dealt with this debate in a recent inductive class I taught. As for the drinking issue, the group that is so offended by it are as offended as they are because of a Biblical misinterpretation (Jesus drank grape juice) while others believe that in each and every concievable instance (or at least most), having a drink is a bad witness. I think both point one is wrong, and point two is certainly not true in every case, and it only is true in some cases because the offended parties have bought into point one.Bill Barnwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06519140832310178588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-29751781666492035752007-06-08T16:31:00.000-04:002007-06-08T16:31:00.000-04:00Thanks Ken, I have been wondering about your thoug...Thanks Ken, <BR/>I have been wondering about your thought that Luke wouldn't even have known what the term "entire sanctification" meant. This leads me to ask the question, "Did the disciples have a concept of victory over sin in their life, and was it part of the apostolic teaching?"Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08653659149459466364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-45787914847150723162007-06-07T23:21:00.000-04:002007-06-07T23:21:00.000-04:00A correction. I was not able to find Vic Reasoner...A correction. I was not able to find Vic Reasoner on the faculty of Northwest Nazarene. He seems to be a proflic online writer (a Schenck type) but seems a little unique in his own right.<BR/><BR/>Apparently he has a DMin from Asbury, where he actually studied with Larry Wood. Here is Wood's response to his article on an article Wood himself wrote in the Asbury Theological Journal. Here is Wood's review:<BR/> http://home.insightbb.com/~larrywood/index.html.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-87726760153208817632007-06-07T22:17:00.000-04:002007-06-07T22:17:00.000-04:00Cora, a funny thing about how people read the "fre...Cora, a funny thing about how people read the "freedom" passages of Romans 14 and 1 Cor. 8-10: One person reads Paul saying, "One person eats meat, another eats only vegetables... one person sets aside one day, another considers them all the Lord's." they read the words so as to say, "So if you have a problem with me, look at the freedom Paul gives me to work on Sunday." I have different convictions from you. So these verses were very liberating to me from worry over "standards" at one point.<BR/><BR/>But interestingly, Paul is probably moving the other direction, as in Rom. 15:1. So your conscience is clear to do certain things, <B>don't despite the person who doesn't feel free to do them!</B><BR/><BR/>I wonder if the drinking issue does have some of the same features of earlier debates:<BR/><BR/>1. one group is defending important identity markers of our tradition--and identity markers are nothing to sneeze at even if they are just traditions. Take them all away and you have no identity at all and your group falls apart.<BR/><BR/>2. some Boomers are saying, it's not in Scripture, it's arbitrary, <I>it makes us look stupid</I> when we want to look intelligent and respectable.<BR/><BR/>3. some of the new generation don't get the surrending your rights for others motif. I should be able to do anything my conscience feels clear to do.<BR/><BR/>Having said that, I really don't know what the church should do. I don't think it is immoral to drink moderately. I think Australian and European Wesleyans in particular should be allowed to drink in moderation. But would the identity of the WC fall apart to some degree or even split if the American church simply allowed drinking?<BR/><BR/>There are ways to configure "membership" to where drinking isn't the actual issue under discussion next conference. Glad I don't have to decide or take a position on this one...Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-78440613847541810692007-06-07T21:44:00.000-04:002007-06-07T21:44:00.000-04:00Ken,I really enjoy reading your comments. Since I...Ken,<BR/><BR/>I really enjoy reading your comments. Since I was reading the drinking debate this morning,, how does this view fo acts relate to that issue, or for that matter any other extrnal denial issue? <BR/><BR/>Of course we do have to wait until Acts 10 to see Peter risk being unclean by going into the home of a gentile. <BR/><BR/>I tend to go with heart as my comments I am sure make it sure. It all brings to mind th scripture before taking the sliver in your neighbor's eyes take the plank out of your own. sorry i am sure i massacared that verse a bit. The flip side of this is of course is how often do we tend to look down on those who obsorve some of those "denial laws" with the same distrust and judgement they look down at me for wearing pants, and gasp eye shadow and piercied earings.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com