[b][size=small]Anger and Anointing (Is 'death the savior?)[/size][/b]
[b][size=small]Some Final Observations 2[/size][/b]
[b][size=xx-small]By Robert Wurtz II[/size][/b]


I find a disturbing sense of ANGER in some teachings and preachings at times that does not work the righteousness of God my friends. We need to know the difference between Anger and Anointing and its sometimes hard for people to tell the difference. They are both “energy” sources (as it were) and when you lash out in anger you are tapping into the fires of hell. Don’t ever preach out of sheer anger. Don’t ever be guilty of such a crime. The sword of the Spirit becomes a “corn knife” to hack people to death rather than to use “surgically.” My pastor was told as a young preacher once in the 1960’s “You really ripped em’ from Dan to Beersheeba tonight!” He told that man “Please don’t characterize me like that, I don’t want to known as that.” When your teachings or preaching does not edify it is at best earthly and at worst demonic. If you are a young preacher reading this- seek the Lord for God’s anointing and he will lead you in the right manor as to speak.

The intention of the Total Sanctification movement was quite nobel and the results of such teaching were good at first as it sparked revival; but later on, the movement of holiness as it played out became EXTREMELY legalistic. Holiness in our part of the country had reached such extremes (in our circles) that drinking coffee was sin. Playing softball was sin as late as the early 1960’s. Fun was sin and on and on and on. I would say that it is quite possible that these teachings took “holiness” to such a state of legalism as to be somewhat responsible for the rebellion backlash of the 1960’s. People who lived in the 1940’s in my circle of friends and family speak of a legalistic Christianity that made children feel as though God was nothing but mean and mad. This in turn invoked a knee-jerk reaction among the survivors that now teach Children that God is love and neglect to teach them the Fear of God. What a tragedy! And that, because, the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. So we see then, that EXTREME doctrines do nothing but keep the Church’s doctrines swinging back and forth from one extreme to another. Then whole denominations would form to focus on these extremes.

To say that a believer can be “immaculate” in his/her walk with God is to claim beyond even what the Apostle Paul claimed. Knowing that ultimately he must suffer the pains of death by martyrdom according to all that was shown him after the Damascus road; Paul still states “neither am I perfect.” He was pressing to the ultimate goal of His life, which was to be faithful unto the death that He might receive a crown of life. This is what it is to run the race, lay aside every weight and sin, and finish the coarse having kept the faith and therefore receive the prize. He brought his body into subjection lest when he had preached to other he himself would be ADOKIMOS (disqualified). The words “bring my body into subjection” literally mean to ‘hit under the eye” and take away captive. This is hard to do with a Phantom foe. The fight was very real and so was the enemy.

What does it profit to teach “Perfectionism” and not have a clear cut means of reaching perfection other than to say “You must be born again” or It happens when you receive the “second blessing” or you must strive to the death to obtain it day by day. This would be like me arguing doctrinally for the baptism in the Holy Spirit and not being full of the Holy Ghost myself or not being able to lead others to a genuine experience in the truth of God’s word. Does anyone know anyone who has so arrived as the Total Sanctification camp so taught? Wesley never claimed it as far as I have read through the years. And if the “founder” never attained it what are we to make of that? What good does it do to sing about it- if it can’t be played out in shoeleather? Lets sing those old hymns! But lets show the people how to live them.

“Preach it until you reach it”- what kind of philosophy is that? We are not talking about a doctrine that has not been grossly abused here. This doctrine has so caused despair in holiness circles that it is unreal. Why? Did the people get taught how to attain victory from God’s word? Did they just despair and quit the church? Some certainly did. Did the ministers believe the flesh had to be dealt with and teach the people how to do it? Were kids shown love in these holiness homes? What is holiness by the way? Last I heard less than 35% of the United Methodist Church have a biblical worldview according to Barna. Is that where Total Sanctification has led them and will ultimately lead us? Lets pray we can balance these teachings and get it right this time around when God sends revival ministers to preach revival once again.

God Bless,

-Robert

_________________
SermonIndex.net Moderator - Robert Wurtz II

Obedience is better esteemed with God than acquired knowledge, it is the most important lesson -fundamental to the gaining of all spiritual knowledge from God. (GW North)

Sanctification in Shoe Leather (Is 'death' the savior?)
Some Final Observations 1
By Robert Wurtz II



Various comments on Robert’s ‘Final Observations’ quoted here in italics.

The Total Sanctification defense of doctrine teachings, I found, were long ramblings of philosophical rhetoric that answered few questions from scripture and have done very little to make me any holier. Repentance teachings based upon the premise that men ought to live holy and get right with God have served to change my heart over the years and especially of late. Charles Finney's Lectures on Revival (especially #3) will prove to change anyones life who follows his suggestions. This is my estimation, is Total Sanctification in Shoe Leather.

Finney’s Lectures on Revival were under-girded by his understanding of scripture generally. I suggest you read The Rev. CHARLES G. FINNEY'S SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY (1851) LECTURE LIX. SANCTIFICATION. I am not a Finney disciple but he deserves your attention if you are going to quote parts of his works.

Total Sanctification ultimately is a straw man argument that is easy to knock down because we all know no one attains such perfection. To say it is “possible” without any real and lasting and verifiable example of genuine sinlessness (and not some conformity to a simple code such as I quit smoking, drinking, and cussing) is to present a false proposition to people. We can teach on pressig towards the mark without taking the doctrine to its final conclusion. There also needs to be more efforts placed on teaching from the WORD on how to walk in Victory!

Your version of Total Sanctification is, indeed, a straw man, but I have already said this previously. Here are some questions for you:
Is He able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, Jud 1:24
Is He able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. (Heb 7:25 KJV)
Is He able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, (Eph 3:20 KJV)
Is He able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work: (2Co 9:8 KJV)
Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. (Rom 14:4 KJV) Is He or isn’t He?
For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted. (Heb 2:18 KJV) Is He or isn’t He?
That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life. (Luk 1:74-75 KJV) Is this in heaven when we die, or all the days of our life?
Can He or can’t He save His people from their sins?


True Perfection is to walk perfectly in the will of God which is first of all God’s word. Who would claim to attain such perfection to the word of God? Would that no be madness? We all know we need to strive for perfection, BUT that is NOT what the end of these arguments propose. When you make statements as boastful as Adam Clark supposedly made it is a wonder the Church didn’t flat revolt. Sometimes trying to correct a problem you can go too far trying to balance the scales and cause error. When I read in his writing about perfect love and I see a total lack of conformity to James 3; what should I think? Hear the word of the Lord…

Please quote me one of Adam Clark’s boastful statements. Did you never read This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. (Gal 5:16 KJV)

James 3:14-18
But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.

Where is the love in the teachings of Entire Sanctification after Wesley? John Wesley according to Leonard Ravinhill died worth $30. He built orphanages, etc. What a disservice to this man is done when Entire Sanctification is taught, as it has filtered through the holiness movement, without that great love that he had. It is a travesty! Those people have been some of the meanest people I have ever met in my experience. I know the retort “well that’s not the real holiness people.” Well, maybe not, but you see what monsters teaching this doctrine unbalanced can produce? It can produce devils like the Pharisees! Paul was blameless concerning the law, but he killed or had killed innocent people in cold blood- thinking he did God a service. So then I ask… where is the peace when you hear such arrogant remarks as “If people would spend as much time seeking God as they do trying to combat the doctrine of entire Sanctification we might get somewhere in the Church.” The man had not the wisdom to see that he had indicted himself with the words of his own mouth. He was such a distraction with this teaching that the people were hindered from repentance, seeking God, and getting to where they needed to be. They were provoked to anger- not to love. Why not just say “we agree to disagree on this matter… but let’s be brethren and lets seek God or lets love one another so that all men may know we are Christ’s disciples?” Lets live holy and love one another brethren?

I could tell you but I won’t. Wesley was asked the same. His response was that he would not point to such because those who asked their identity did so from same motive as Herod ‘to destroy the child’. You have accused me of various attitudes in this correspondence; you have been in error every time. However, this paragraph has succeeded in angering me, however I will not return like for like. I think your comments about ‘monsters’ are the most immoderate things I have read for some time; I will leave you to God and your conscience.

_________________
His/yours
Ron B
www.biblebase.com

"Love perfecteth what it begins;

Thy power doth save me from my sins;

Thy grace upholdeth me.

This life of trust, how glad, how sweet;

My need and Thy great fulness meet,

And I have all in Thee.

Jean Sophia Pigott (1845-1882)

**Some clairifications and edits have been made 4/2/04**

Brother this teaching has nothing to do with you. I have savored fond feels of you since hearing your message yesterday- though in past posts we heve seemed to be somewhat at odds. I was encouraged that there are people out there teaching the truth. To say... "You have accused me of various attitudes in this correspondence; you have been in error every time. However, this paragraph has succeeded in angering me, however I will not return like for like. I think your comments about ‘monsters’ are the most immoderate things I have read for some time; I will leave you to God and your conscience." You are reading into this post something I neither seen or intended.

The statement about monsters is in reference to these people:

[size=small]The intention of the Total Sanctification movement was quite nobel and the results of such teaching were good at first as it sparked revival; but later on, the movement of holiness as it played out became EXTREMELY legalistic. Holiness in our part of the country had reached such extremes (in our circles) that drinking coffee was sin. Playing softball was sin as late as the early 1960’s. Fun was sin and on and on and on. I would say that it is quite possible that these teachings took “holiness” to such a state of legalism as to be somewhat responsible for the rebellion backlash of the 1960’s. People who lived in the 1940’s in my circle of friends and family speak of a legalistic Christianity that made children feel as though God was nothing but mean and mad. This in turn invoked a knee-jerk reaction among the survivors that now teach Children that God is love and neglect to teach them the Fear of God. What a tragedy! [/size]

In what way do you infer or see that I directed that at you? I don't know you brother, apart from this forum and have just yesterday complimented your message. Anger? I would have though the Ron I heard teaching would have wept at such a thought as this. There are a host of people in my family who were taught holiness until everything was sin and no one was good enough. Is this not a tragedy? Is it not a tragedy that these men would teach holiness at a level they could not live and ended up backsliding? Is this not sanctification gone mad?

Your view of Adam Clark's comments and mine are subjective. So we will not go there. It would be strifes of words to no profit. ***(edit) Moreover, I should have the good sense not to bring a man into the conversation that is not here to defend himself! Sometimes the flesh rises up and I say things I ought not. Not that I don't feel that way, sometimes it is better to just leave it alone. They are as they are in my view and I merely am pointing to what seems clear was a improper method of pressing your points on people (as I view he did it). I did put a quote from Clark in the post- if so be my source is as accurate as I would expect. I do and have used his commentaries. I am simply pointing out the "spirit" that I would see in certain of these men that I did not see in Wesley. Are the statements pure, peacable, gentle? I trow not; but that will remain my opinion. He is a brother who is dead and gone and I must leave from my critic of his behavior as I am no discerner of hearts. God forgive me. (edit end)***

We are back to where we were... you said it in the beginning and there is no reason for it. (Edit***You also cited a Chinese curse that made me very uneasy.***Edit end) We are bretheren Ron? Must you feel so defensive of these men as to be angered at me when you don't know them? Or would you be defensive of a doctrine that I can never agree with to the place to be angry with me?

I am genuinely hurt that I have been so regarded. It is likely I will not return to this thread and will concern myself to revival. it is sad... because I really think a lot of good could have come of it.

God Bless and Farwell,

-Robert Wurtz
1529 Harvard
Independence, MO 64052
816-461-4246

_________________
SermonIndex.net Moderator - Robert Wurtz II

Obedience is better esteemed with God than acquired knowledge, it is the most important lesson -fundamental to the gaining of all spiritual knowledge from God. (GW North)

_________________
The soul that would not fear to climb a mountain may actually stumble over a straw. The real secret of perfect rest is to be jealously, habitually occupied with Jesus. - A.B. Simpson

Sometimes it is a sin not to be angry. (Eph 4:26)

_________________
His/yours
Ron B
www.biblebase.com

"Love perfecteth what it begins;

Thy power doth save me from my sins;

Thy grace upholdeth me.

This life of trust, how glad, how sweet;

My need and Thy great fulness meet,

And I have all in Thee.

Jean Sophia Pigott (1845-1882)

Bro Ron,

After much consideration over lunch and then listening to part 4 in your series I see why there has been so much conflict in this series of posts. You teach "Instant Sanctification" which is on the farthest extreme of even the Entire Sanctification movement. As a matter of fact, I know of no other sect of Christianity more extreme than this except possibly true Arminianism. Type in key word "Instant Sanctification" in Google and see how extreme the view actually is. That is extreme even by holiness movement standards. No wonder you as so angry!

It was not me attacking you; it was me setting forth what the word teaches. And if I stand against many of those who are featured on this site (which I do not) then one would have to say that your view is in strong opposition to the whole of Christendom. 1 John 1:8 clearly states: "If we claim to be without sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us." To teach people to claim to be without sin it is not only to deceive yourself, but also others.

This "Instant Sanctification" is not revival teaching. And if it were it would be possible only in an atmosphere of extreme revival the like of which has not been seen in 100+ years. We are seeing revival. We are in the streets. We are visiting the fatherless and orphans.

I cannot concur in anywise with such a doctrine. I wonder to what extent others believe as you do and know what you are actually teaching?

-Robert

_________________
SermonIndex.net Moderator - Robert Wurtz II

Obedience is better esteemed with God than acquired knowledge, it is the most important lesson -fundamental to the gaining of all spiritual knowledge from God. (GW North)

Robert writes This "Instant Sanctification" is not revival teaching. And if it were it would be possible only in an atmosphere of extreme revival the like of which has not been seen in 100+ years. We are seeing revival. We are in the streets. We are visiting the fatherless and orphans.

I think you should listen to 1 & 2 before you make any more absurd suggestions. As regards 'extreme revival', I suggest you listen to Duncan Campbell's messages on this site. As far as I am concerned this is what Fox, Wesley, Finney, Duncan Campbell saw. If you can settle for something less, I can't. Don't confuse human activity with revival.

I am happy for others to listen to what I am teaching as long as they listen to my telling of it and not yours.

_________________
His/yours
Ron B
www.biblebase.com

"Love perfecteth what it begins;

Thy power doth save me from my sins;

Thy grace upholdeth me.

This life of trust, how glad, how sweet;

My need and Thy great fulness meet,

And I have all in Thee.

Jean Sophia Pigott (1845-1882)

[b][size=small]Brother Raymond[/size][/b]
[b][size=xx-small]By Robert Wurtz II[/size][/b]

Brother Raymond was a Jew who lived at the Independence Manor Care Center in Independence, MO. When I first met him he was a quiet man who sat in a wheelchair with his hands turned in and clinched. We always used to enjoy Brother Raymond as he would get excited and begin to "box" with his clinched hands towards the TV set. Brother Raymond was not always in a wheelchair, as a matter of fact he opened a burger restraunt called "Big Boy" in the 1950's and it is still there today. He had married a Christian woman who to my understanding always served the Lord and prayed for him.

Twice a month our circuit of nursing home's would find us at Independence Manor. We usually would come in and set up our equipment and begin greeting the folks who come to hear. You see some of the dear residents have served God all their life and now they can't go to church anymore. Some are pastors or pastors wives that the church has all but forgotten. Their families often forget them also and they literally die alone. Some simply tell the staff, "call me when their gone." Others have people handling their legal business and they sometimes fail to ensure that the person in the home even have basic clothing. I have known of people who had millions of dollars in the bank and yet the staff would have to find used clothes to dress the people in. Nurses who are working their shifts may come in to check the residents from time to time and see if they have yet expired. So many of these people die alone.

Bro. Raymond had a good wife. She loved him. She stayed with him until the end. As the years passed Bro. Raymond got weaker and weaker; till one day we came in and said "he's taken a turn for the worst and we don't expect him to live much longer." His wife, who was older herself, simply could not stay up any longer and had to go home to lie down. She asked if I would go in and see him. "He's not responding" she said, "he has been in a coma for nearly a whole day."

When I entered the room some time after his wife left it was as she said. He was in a coma and near to pass away. I simply asked for help from God and He led me through a path to share the Gospel with this man in His language. God had prepared me for 3 1/2 years at the Messianic Institute for that moment. I opened up and began to share. To my amazement when I asked him if he would like to accept Yeshua the Jewish Messiah as his Lord and savior; a man who had been in a coma tried to sit up as if to reach for me and cried out with what strength he had left I believe to accept this Messiah. I said to him Brother Raymond, I believe you are telling me you want to accept your Messiah and he settled himself down and was at complete peace. I prayed another prayer and left the room. I was the last person to ever speak to this man alive.

A strange feeling it is to be that last person. Some would say this or that about what happened. I know God sent me to his room on that night to speak to Brother Raymond. I also believe that I may well have spent those years at the Institute to know the issues with which to deal with and lead that man to his Messiah. Many things I have written in this thread are to that end. Many, many, more things are left to say. There are many hours of valuable information here and I pray that you prayerfully consider it. Messianics may disagree with me and that is fine. My teachers will even disagree with me on some points; but that is because I do not ascribe to the depth of which they may like to draw me into the issues and I respect them for that. I have labored in this thread to synthesize the issues as much as possible.

Some info is for the readers benefit- such as the writings on the Oral Law and are not at all intended to be used in an unChristlike way. Friend, I pray you understand that this has been a labor of love for the Jews. We have strayed into areas that I did not intend and have brought me again to terms with issues I had long since settled in my heart; but this is about Jewish Roots and I hope we can stay there.

Every Jew is different and no two are alike. As a matter of fact there was a common little saying that went in the class like this "Ask 2 Jews and we get 3 opinions." They are precious people whom God loves as everyone else. They have suffered terribly at the hands of 'Christians' over the years. God forgive us for not being more attentive to them. May we remember to pray for them and the peace of Jerusalem as you likewise remember all others. these are troubled times.

God Bless,

-Robert

_________________
SermonIndex.net Moderator - Robert Wurtz II

Obedience is better esteemed with God than acquired knowledge, it is the most important lesson -fundamental to the gaining of all spiritual knowledge from God. (GW North)

_________________
SermonIndex.net Moderator - Brother Greg

Our Lord said 'For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat.' (Matthew 25:35). So as you help feed some of the poorest believers in the world in North Korea you are feeding Jesus Christ. And by giving Bibles to those believers who have no access to Scriptures you are equpping believers to be disciples of Jesus Christ to share the Good News with a lost world.

North Korean Christians Fund: https://www.heavensfamily.org/north-korea?goMotiv=I000-SEIN

Bibles for Believers Fund: https://www.heavensfamily.org/bibles-believers?goMotiv=I000-SEIN

Beloved and Brother Ron,

In our discussions it is often difficult to scale the language barrier and understand what each other is talking about because we have understandings of the meanings and use of words that cause us to misunderstand what is being written, In the humblest spirit of shalom I wish to bridge this gap between myself and Ron with love and affection and concede that I have taken terms he has used such as "Instant Justification" and "Christian Perfectionism" and extrapolated from them meanings of my own experience and study. I have listened AGAIN to his part 4 series with the understanding that I may not fully realize what he means by these terms and have come away with a FAR different view.

In fairness to myself I think that it is the immediate reaction of most to use the definitions of words as you know them to be; and cannot know any other definition unless someone explain it. Ron is a tremendous teacher and I am writing this with feelings of extreme fondness for him-- even though our correspondence has been quite sharp. This is a man I would love to sit down and chat with for hours. I say that with deep sincerity because I appreciate his understanding of scripture.

I think we are probably having a "language" issue again with the whole "sin nature" thing; though I don't want to be presumptious. I will wait to hear him out on that matter and expect based on what I have heard that he will have a deep perspective on the matter.

It is a strange thing that happened last night as I chatted with a friend and tried to come to terms with all this. I talked about the dangers of entire sanctification in an atmosphere where there is no revival. We looked back on our ancestors who were very legalistic and called it holiness. The preachers would preach on high heels and every other thing that you could imagine. I used an inflamitory term "monsters" yesterday that I borrowed from Paris in his Ten Shekels sermon. I tend to borrow people terms I suppose. That was the only way I felt described a person who taught legalism to people under the pretense of holiness because the Spirit of God was not present. then I listened AGAIN to Ron's sermon #4 and at the end heard this statement (which in my flusteration or business I missed yesterday):

[i]"It is one of the persistent dangers of the holiness movement that it denegrates into legalism. What was lived almost effortlessly in a life empowered by the Spirit. If that consciousness begins to ebb and is no longer evident, people try to hold the standard and hold it by producing great lists of how long your skirt must be, etc." (Ron Bailey Regeneration sermon #4).[/i]

This is EXACTLY what I mean. When they wrote Ichabod over the door years ago at some of the Pentecostal Churches here in Missouri they got out a list and started making up laws. That was not holiness and a lot of people rebelled against it. It gave the Gospel a real black eye. It was a travesty to tell you the truth. Of the preachers who preached this that I'm aware of (and there were many) every one of them fell but 1. The difference? He really wanted to be holy and the others had a bad spirit that sought to put the people in bondage and be overbearing.

Sort of like talking with the Jews, when people have been used to terms meaning one thing, even when they have an actual and different meaning- they understand them as they are used in the common language of their people. this can cause great misunderstanding.

The key to this is to explain what is meant and while I would (for example) wait for clairification, give you the benefit of the doubt. I did not do that concerning your "Instant Justification" term. I apologize openly and publicly. I would also ask that you help me not to perceive your writings as hostile by showing a more loving tone. This may be my weakness and it is not your fault. A soft answer will turn away wrath. I will also agree to take this tone towards you. :-) We are brethren and it is a shame that you could not hardly tell it by this thread.

God Bless and Much Brotherly Love,

-Robert

_________________
SermonIndex.net Moderator - Robert Wurtz II

Obedience is better esteemed with God than acquired knowledge, it is the most important lesson -fundamental to the gaining of all spiritual knowledge from God. (GW North)