Church of the Nazarene vs. Anglican

[glfredrick]

Umm, quite a few actually, since OSAS (or, if you prefer, inevitable perservarance or unconditional security) really didn't take hold until after the time of Calvin, and then only within a subsection of Christendom.

There's no real evidence of this doctrine (OSAS) being taught in the first several centuries of the Church's history. Even Augustine taught that not everyone regenerated would have the gift of perserverance.

Really... Cite that please, and not just a simple quote. Give us a reference number so we can read it with you in context.

 

[steaver]

That is not fair enough , it is a complete farce in reality. Steaver has not hammered out his beliefs of Calvinism on his own anvil. For whatever he claim he has not read or studied, those teaching him certanly have. Somewhere he has been greatly influenced with the errors of Calvinism. Steaver is no island to himself.

:love2: You are by far one of my favorites here! Love you man! :thumbsup:

 

[steaver]

HP: That was certainly not the Apostle Pauls testimony as a believer. He said it is NO LONGER I that liveth, but Christ that liveth within me. Notice the 'I' or the flesh had died....unless you want to say that the 'I" was his spirit.

Thank you! This is a good eternal security verse. NOtice how Christ lives IN Paul and the OLD Paul is DEAD. THe New LIFE is Christ IN you. And Christ is that ETERNAL LIFE. The OLD Paul is GONE, DEAD,DONE ENDED!

So say Paul decides to sin and not repent, even choses to not have faith in Christ anymore as you suggest is possible. Does the DEAD (I) Paul come back to life again? Decide which way you would like it to be because you can't have it both ways.

 

[DaChaser1]

Thank you! This is a good eternal security verse. NOtice how Christ lives IN Paul and the OLD Paul is DEAD. THe New LIFE is Christ IN you. And Christ is that ETERNAL LIFE. The OLD Paul is GONE, DEAD,DONE ENDED!

So say Paul decides to sin and not repent, even choses to not have faith in Christ anymore as you suggest is possible. Does the DEAD (I) Paul come back to life again? Decide which way you would like it to be because you can't have it both ways.

well...

Its Gods will that ALL he has saved will be kept, and he gave us the HS as the deposit down payment guarentee that we will make it home to heaven...

isn't God able to do as He stated, not powerful enough?

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Seems like every thread on here ends up being a debate on eternal security. I see no need to post further in a thread I started, unless it comes back to the subject.

 

[glfredrick]

Seems like every thread on here ends up being a debate on eternal security. I see no need to post further in a thread I started, unless it comes back to the subject.

As I recall, YOU brought it up first. Besides, eternal security IS one of the primary doctrines that us examined when asked to compare various denominations and sects. You are seeking some place to reside in your quasi-faith where only the God of Love is held, none of that other bloody Christian stuff need apply. You disavow penal substitution, you disavow the judgment of God, you disavow that Christ is a King who will return with a sword, you disavow that God is sovereign, you disavow that Christ is our imputed righteousness. You disavow that Christ is our only hope. And, ultimately, by process of elimination, you disavow the very bloody cross of Christ. What else is left? Certainly nothing Christian...

 

[Michael Wrenn]

As I recall, YOU brought it up first.

What I brought up is the Church of the Nazarene and the Anglican Church. I don't see much discussion about that or even about how eternal security relates to both. It seems that every active thread in this section ends up in a general debate on eternal security. If that's all I was interested in, I wouldn't have needed to start this thread since the subject is being argued in several other places.

 

[steaver]

As I recall, YOU brought it up first.

Naw, I looked it up, Mike didn't start it but he did egg it on a bit until he said please stop. :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Naw, I looked it up, Mike didn't start it but he did egg it on a bit until he said please stop. :smilewinkgrin:

Well, on second thought carry on, everyone; I guess it doesn't matter that much. Better than no discussion at all.

 

[steaver]

Well, on second thought carry on, everyone; I guess it doesn't matter that much. Better than no discussion at all.

What I like about the Christian and Missionary Alliance which I attend is that they do not take a doctrinal stand on OSAS either for or against. It is neither encouraged as discussion nor discouraged. I have many friends who are of the insecurity persuasion and many who are on the eternal security side. Love them all and we have sweet fellowship together!

 

[Michael Wrenn]

As I recall, YOU brought it up first. Besides, eternal security IS one of the primary doctrines that us examined when asked to compare various denominations and sects. You are seeking some place to reside in your quasi-faith where only the God of Love is held, none of that other bloody Christian stuff need apply. You disavow penal substitution, you disavow the judgment of God, you disavow that Christ is a King who will return with a sword, you disavow that God is sovereign, you disavow that Christ is our imputed righteousness. You disavow that Christ is our only hope. And, ultimately, by process of elimination, you disavow the very bloody cross of Christ. What else is left? Certainly nothing Christian...

I said I wasn't going to do this, but this is the only response I can give and be telling the absolute truth: You are a LIAR!! The truth is not in you. The ONLY thing you got right is that I disavow penal substitution.

Keep on with your lies -- PLEASE! Someone bigger than I will stop you.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

What I like about the Christian and Missionary Alliance which I attend is that they do not take a doctrinal stand on OSAS either for or against. It is neither encouraged as discussion nor discouraged. I have many friends who are of the insecurity persuasion and many who are on the eternal security side. Love them all and we have sweet fellowship together!

Does the CMA teach entire sanctification? I looked at them a long time ago, and liked what I found out, but since there were no churches anywhere near me, I gave that one up.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Michael, count me in with the Nazarenes......IF you PROMISE the pastor won't be teaching something totally contrary to the tenants of Scripture and the Nazarene faith like OSAS, as PadreDurand confesses he believes in and was a pastor there for at least a year. :thumbsup:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Ah, maybe I am being too hard on Padre.:saint:

I did choose a Baptist Church over a Nazarene Church for a year or so, due to some close friendships of some of my children with some going to the Baptist Church. I faired fairly well just sitting on my hands and keeping quiet the best I could. I did email the pastor more than once though and held a de-briefing session once or twice with my children. :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

In the CMA Church I attended, they were simply confused or did not care about entire sanctification as far as I could tell. I certainly never heard it discussed in any manner, not in the pulpit or in the Sunday School classroom that I can recall.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Really... Cite that please, and not just a simple quote. Give us a reference number so we can read it with you in context.

"If, however, being already regenerate and justified, he relapses of his own will into an evil life, assuredly he cannot say, 'I have not received', because of his own free choice to evil he has lost the grace of God, that he had received." (Augustine, Of Admonitions and Grace, Ch. 9)

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Michael, count me in with the Nazarenes......IF you PROMISE the pastor won't be teaching something totally contrary to the tenants of Scripture and the Nazarene faith like OSAS, as PadreDurand confesses he believes in and was a pastor there for at least a year. :thumbsup:

Thank, HP.

What do you think of the Nazarene doctrine of entire sanctification, and how do you interpret it?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

MW: What do you think of the Nazarene doctrine of entire sanctification, and how do you interpret it?

HP: Boy, have you ever opened a can of worms.:smilewinkgrin:

I believe in sanctification in practice, although I do not arrive in the same place via their explanations. Practically I would agree with the Nazarene doctrine as far as the lifestyle goes, but again I could not sign onto or raise my right hand to how they demand one think in order to get there.

They would, or at least did believe, that sanctification is the eradication of the sinful nature or the eradication of original sin. (I am not so certain that they have all but abandoned sanctification in reality at this juncture in their Church. After the split several years ago, those that actually held to Nazarene doctrine were forced out, and the Nazarenes took on a new approach different than that which they held to at the inception of the denomination)

I do not believe in original sin, therefore I have a problem with their explanation. My question to them is, if the sinful nature they say is truly eradicated, how then might a believer sin? What possible hold could any outside influence have upon a heart devoid of any desire whatsoever? James clearly states that we sin in the following manner: Jas 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

If what the Nazarenes believe (believed) is true, that would eliminate the possibility that James indicates can be the process of temptation to 'every' man, IMHO. I am certain there are Nazarenes who would think that I am wrong here for whatever reasons, and that can be expected among humans to have differing opinions even within such a group. There is usually a Padredurand lurking somewhere in the shadows. :saint: (Just kidding Padre!)


I see it entirely possible that a sanctified believer might indeed sin, although living a life so free from sin it could be rightfully said of such a one they do not sin. I see sanctification as the establishment of a holy walk before God to such a degree that sin would be the totally unusual thing in such a persons life, only under strangely strong temptation and again such a rarity that it could again be said, such a one does not sin.

Of course, I would not see observing a picture in the news stand 'necessarily' as sin nor every evil though entering the mind as some would in error refer to as sin.

One thing is for certain. Those finding such a walk do not do it in their own strength, although it is not accomplished totally apart from their will. One would have to depend on God with their whole heart on a daily moment by moment basis for strength and Divine help via the promised help of the Holy Spirit. I would believe that such a state would have to be entered into by faith in a moment of time, just as did the faith occur that birthed such a one into salvation. Although indeed all believers should grow, even one walking in a state of entire sanctification, the experience itself could not be achieved simply by growth any more than one could simply 'grow' into salvation. Without faith it is impossible to please God.

Should I wait for the arrows to start flying or should I take cover now?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

I started writing this post before before MW even asked me about sanctification. Now that I posted what I did, I feel led to go ahead and post it here. Forgive me MW if it is not in keeping with the OP.

Psa 11:2 For, lo, the wicked bend their bow, they make ready their arrow upon the string, that they may privily shoot at the upright in heart.

HP: I can see why the wicked would desire to shoot at the upright in heart, but what for the life of me I cannot understand is why those taking the name of Christ would try their dead level best to destroy any and all that seek to live upright, or God forbid, might testify to living upright before God.

This Psalm has some of the strongest language possible against the wicked spoken of as prively shooting at the upright in heart.......but the Lord is shown to love righteousness, His countenance beholding the upright.

Why would anyone desire a testimony of sinning against a Holy and Just God daily in thought word and deed, or why would any be so brazen as to sport such a testimony as a sign signifying one that loves God and eskews evil? How could such a one be seen to love God, anymore than one would be seen to love his spouse, sinning against her every day? Why one calling themselves a Christian would not desire to be as David, seeking God and righteousness with their 'whole heart,' is beyond the pale of Scripture and reason.

Who shall abide in thy tabernacle, and who shall dwell in His holy hill? He that believes in a doctrine such as OSAS? I never find those words in Scripture, but I do find these: "He that walketh uprightly and worketh rightousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart."

Psalms 24:3 Who shall ascend into the hill of the LORD? or who shall stand in his holy place?
Psa 24:4 He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.
Psa 24:5 He shall receive the blessing from the LORD, and righteousness from the God of his salvation.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Steaver: Thank you! This is a good eternal security verse. NOtice how Christ lives IN Paul and the OLD Paul is DEAD. THe New LIFE is Christ IN you. And Christ is that ETERNAL LIFE. The OLD Paul is GONE, DEAD,DONE ENDED!

So say Paul decides to sin and not repent, even choses to not have faith in Christ anymore as you suggest is possible. Does the DEAD (I) Paul come back to life again? Decide which way you would like it to be because you can't have it both ways.

HP: The word 'dead' as spoken of here by the Apostle, is not dead in the sense of being unable, but dead in the sense of being 'totally unwilling' to yield to the flesh.

As for security of the believer, I certainly believe that one is secure in Christ when they are living in such a state as to be totally unwilling to sin as Paul was. No one in this life is dead to sin in that they are 'unable,' if they so will, to yield to the flesh. Sin is 'possible' as long as we are in the flesh, dead to sin or not dead to sin. We can live consistently unwilling to sin with the help proffered by the Holy Spirit, if we will.