Revival Forum Interview with Leonard Ravenhill

Ravenhill says that the church in America is in a bad way. So what has come of the many years he has been preaching? And what of the ministry of the two sons he boasts about? The problem is not in evangelism as he says, that produces fake believers, the problem is in men like him who think that they are anointed but they are not. If he had lived what he preached then revival would have come. He beats an empty drum.

Jeremy I listened to it all and no I am not walking in the Spirit but have done and know when another is.

Jeremy, l have no known sin and spend my days in prayer and scripture study but that is not walking in grace.

Lisa l am not walking in the anointing. I pray to God that one day l will. Once one has, then it is easy to see if others are operating in it. It definitely does not mean preaching a popular message which is what preachers like Ravenhill preach. Everyone wants to see revival, but just talking about it does not bring it about, even longing for it does not.

Men like Ravenhill are pointing the finger outside of themselves for the reason why revival tarries. If others were acting like themselves, they say, then it would come. If they saw that they themselves needed to be revived then we might get somewhere.

I realise l am touching a holy cow here or a golden calf rather in saying that men like Ravenhill and Poonan are wrong. They are not holiness preachers.

I get the same feeling from both of them. but i agree with Jeremy221 as well about being led by the spirit to do this, or not do that. its a learning process for a sinful rebel like me to learn how to obey a wholly good God. but that in essence is revival, correct?

Edit: 12/11/2013 I'm sorry for saying this. I learn so much from these men.

Jeremy221 you seem more knowledgeable about this than I am. I love Poonen's teaching, he has more insight than any other teacher I've listened to. but in comparison, the Lord Jesus Himself is fully Spiritual. how many of us can be like that every moment? he knows exactly what to say, and how to say it. because he only did God's will all the time. so in that way I agree with Kraufrau: to be fully Spiritual would be union with God's will and living revival. how often is "relying on the flesh" or "relying on the intellect" or "relying on theology" the problem? its so hard to be Spiritual because it takes painful takings up of the cross every day. and even then how short do we fall? see my point now? Jesus had to cry out and weep all night. God knew what was coming and prepared him with trial and testing. what a beautiful soul he has. we can have all Jesus had by following his example. but remember 10 apostles finally took a literal cross. its exciting to be in Christ. especially abiding. to fellowship with him. but also to know the heights we can attain to, literally giving our life for him and him snatching our soul up to his throne. wow.

edit: 10 is not the right number.

Hi wijnand

Walking in the anointing is walking in a state of grace which enables a man to be in complete obedience, that is without sin but it is more than this, it is complete union with Christ.

Poonan and Ravenhill although popular preachers and obviously have pastoral gifting, are not preaching holiness and will say that man cannot stop sinning in this life. Their standard is that it is what he should be aiming for and their bugbear is that so many in the church are sloppy in this, but they are really preaching an improvement of the flesh although they use words they have read from holiness writings. So they use the right words to a certain extent, and people like them because they think that they will beat into shape the ones who are sloppy but they leave those ones smug because they allow the false doctrine to continue that man cannot be without sin in this life and this is why they are so popular.

They certainly are not being persecuted by the church which would happen if they were holiness preachers.

To tell you the truth I do not know of any who are walking in the anointing though there are a few, very few old style holiness preachers but they are not anointed atm.

I believe "all things are possible to him who believes". I believe God can do wondrous things in someone who believes in "annointing", "second blessing", "entire sanctification", "baptism of the Spirit" etc. but God has to do it. for his purposes and glory. all we can do is strive for the kingdom (or strive to enter) whether or not he will do a special work with us

Ravenhill, Poonen, etc are blessed men of God who God used/uses greatly. over-comers.

my thoughts

Sister,

If this is your belief then I think you should not be interacting on the website because no-one would be who you deem "holiness preachers." So perhaps you need to find the group that is and fellowship with them.

On the other hand we believe that many preachers on this website preach a message of holiness not just in separation but walking in the fruit of the Spirit: Love, meekness, gentleness, kindness, self-control.

Greg, l agree that many on the site were holiness preachers. I meant those who are living today. Your site is of great benefit for sermons and writings of those who were preaching holiness and l am encouraged that members here are seeking the blessing. I don't know of any other site where there are genuine seekers. Of course l will leave if requested but did not know that agreement with you was a condition of being here.

Thanks for the links. I have also read the sermons we have here in print.

Yes indeed he preached holiness doctrine, and seems to have known many holiness folk in his time. But I don't find his sermons anointed.

A man who is walking without sin (and Ravenhill omits to mention in the ones I have read, whether he is/was walking in the blessing or not) has such power on him that sinners are convicted even just by the presence of the person, and believers are revived (receive the second blessing). I have never heard of this happening or any talk of revival although I am not saying that people my have been blessed by him. That is not the same thing.

I quote him:

People say to me all over the country, "I am interested in revival." I say, "Yes, so are a million other Americans."

I find all kinds of people interested in it. I don't find many people burdened for it. People are very interested in revival, but we don't start to break the fallow ground. We don't prepare the way of the Lord.

So again why has not revival broken out wherever he preaches? Is he including himself in the 'we'?

But apart from this issue, he seems to not have the discernment expected for example he says:

God is yet to produce the greatest men ever. I don’t believe that God went off production with Wesley, Finney, and George Whitfield. Fire begets fire. In my opinion, John Wesley caught something of his fiery zeal from George Whitefield. In this day some claim the revival, often called the Wesleyan Revival, was not Wesley's at all. Wesley picked up the revival torch that Whitefield dropped when he went to America.

Putting Wesley together with Whitefield is putting chalk with cheese. Whitefield opposed second blessing doctrine. I find this very common in people who seem to have the blessing but they don't otherwise they would know exactly who opposes the true gospel. It is not just an add on to it.

He also made a remark about it being a shame that a certain man's house was not bombed during the war. I am afraid that sentiments of that sort are not part of godliness.

No I am sorry but this man does not pass the muster and if he was asked if he does not sin. I would like to hear the reply. I am guessing he would say he had not reached that stage yet.

gators leading people to Christ does not denote a holiness preacher.

Oracio

I will respond to the Lords Prayer comments first.

When the Lord gave His followers this pattern of prayer, it was in the context of their spiritual state at that time. It was prior to the time that the church was formed and prior to the time that they were baptised by the Holy Spirit and therefore into the death and resurrection of Christ. In other words, before they were united and at one with Christ and we can see that by the way that they were not at one with another, always doubting and disputing who was the greatest. After Pentecost there was a profound change in them.

In the prayer that Jesus gave them, they were to pray for the kingdom to come and indeed it did come when they were united with Christ in His baptism. It was then that His will was done in them on earth as it was in heaven.

So whilst they awaited that time, they were in need of daily forgiveness, until the day that they would be delivered from evil, at Pentecost. In fact the prayer is a prayer for entire sanctification.

Putting Wesley together with Whitefield is putting chalk with cheese. Whitefield opposed second blessing doctrine. I find this very common in people who seem to have the blessing but they don't otherwise they would know exactly who opposes the true gospel. It is not just an add on to it.

Sister, to be clear with you SermonIndex does not promote second blessing holiness doctrine and if anyone comes on the forums to promote 1 "ism" they hold above the rest then we ask them not to participate anymore in the forums.

As per the community rules:

3. HAVING A PERSONAL AGENDA - We look down on people who come with personal agenda's or are trying to justify themselves on a particular doctrine or emphasis. We believe it is not healthy to try and impose a truth that you have on many other brothers or sisters. This type of believer feels that a truth they have is more important then the rest and feels a godliness for holding to that truth. Such a godliness is false and will not bring about the fruits of the Spirit in the life of that believer (Galatians 5:22-23).

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=44556&forum=13

So please do not continue to speak on this subject in the way are doing or you will be asked to move on from participation in the forums. It is a privildge we all have to speak openly on a public forum along aside so many great godly men from the past. We must be more teachable and realize that we all need to grow in grace and can learn from many if not all the sermons here. To have a ministry to critize messages and speakers is fruitless and will not do anything except mar the name of Christ and the testimony of the Lord.

2. BEING TEACHABLE - Being teachable is another guiding principle that we ask would be something we would all desire to cultivate. To have this humility with the apostle paul who in a humble attitude was seeking for maturity in the Christian walk yet would not judge his brothers for other opinions and teachings (Philippians 3:15). We can learn from even the weakest amongst us for each one of us has some truth, some practice that they understand or have a better revelation then we do. Therefore we must continually humble ourselves to learn from even the babes in Christ. This glorifies God and brings unity to the body (1 Corinthians 12:21-23).

from: https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=44556&forum=13

Greg brother

I am rather confused about what you want. I have to ask you to be more specific with the behaviour you say you are not happy with as you seem to allow it from others.

I do have an agenda, if you can call it that, and that is, I desire to see revival and the type of revival that changes whole communities. As a sizeable number of its proponents have writings and sermons you promote here including Duncan Campbell, T Austin Sparks, Andrew Murray, Watchman Nee, Jonathan Edwards, John Wesley, L Brengle, Beverly Carradine, Charles Finney, George Fox, Oswald Chambers and Asa Mahan to mention only some, whom I admire and have studied extensively, I would have thought that you would not object to someone coming from the same stable as it were, or that you would not expect that their followers would be attracted to participate where their teachings are promoted.

You also promote many men who actively opposed the teaching that these men promoted, so it seems a little strange for you to object to this being pointed out. One side must be right, I hope you see. So perhaps you can be clear regarding your wish that the teachings of the men you promote not to be the subject of any discussion if that is an issue with you? I am rather confused by this on an open discussion forum as opposed to a cult. Also the ones here who oppose the teaching of the men mentioned, and believers here, yet are not considered as coming here with an agenda (against second blessing holiness).

As far as someone feeling a godliness in holding a truth, I feel far from that. In fact I feel that I am the worst of sinners for not being unable to sustain that most blessed of states which is at odds with your assessment. There are those who strongly oppose this teaching, and they have often been very rude to me, and downright nasty in some of their posts, but I do not react to that nor do I report them. I am without fail, polite towards them and answer their accusations, the latest of which has been to imply that I am lying in my testimony, but you never seem to object to their posts. The worst culprit has now left, but he was allowed to be as nasty and as threatening as he wished and broke the regulations right left and centre, even though many objected to his threatening demeanour and manner yet you allowed that. I have to wonder whether the atmosphere you desire here is furthered by administration not applying the regulations to all.

On being teachable, I am a student of theology at present with some very wonderful evangelical university lectures and do learn from those on the forum so I am beat at trying to understand what you mean. As a matter of fact, I do not see the sort of posting behaviour which you are demanding from others and especially not when they post in opposition to me.

It seems like you are saying that I am not teachable because I will not change my views to the opposing party, yet you promote men who held my views which is a bit confusing,

I have been here for a long time Greg, and appreciate the resources and did not come here with any of the intentions you are accusing me of though I do not have the time I had in the past to post on various subjects so perhaps you are confused in thinking that I am here to promote one doctrine? I have no reason to do so, no church to promote, no books to sell, only a burning desire for holiness which is shared with others here who also believe in second blessing holiness. So I ask you to please clear up the misunderstandings I have mentioned.

Oracio

I agree with you that Jesus' teaching in the Lords Prayer is applicable today and any time in the future regarding those who like the disciples have not yet entered into the kingdom and absolutely agree that saying that the Sermon on the Mount is not applicable today is dangerous.

Also, James 3:2 tells us that in many things we all offend. Matthew Henry's commentary on that verse may be helpful here,

"Were we to think more of our own mistakes and offenses, we should be less apt to judge other people. While we are severe against what we count offensive in others, we do not consider how much there is in us which is justly offensive to them. Self-justifiers are commonly self-deceivers. We are all guilty before God; and those who vaunt it over the frailties and infirmities of others little think how many things they offend in themselves. Nay, perhaps their magisterial deportment, and censorious tongues, may prove worse than any faults they condemn in others. Let us learn to be severe in judging ourselves, but charitable in our judgments of other people."

Brother, the verse actually says that in many things we offend all, not we all offend. Jesus offended many but that was not because He was not perfect. He continues the verses to point out that the perfected are able to bridle their tongues and says

"If any man among you seem to be religious and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is in vain" James 1:26

Paul was not using 'we' in the way you say. He often said 'we' when but was not including himself as an expression of speech.

Sermon Index does not promote Calvinism. Yet there are Calvinistic sermons from Calvinistic preachers in the archives. We can benefit from their insights. Yet the moderators and guidelines specify that Cal/Arm discussions not be initiated as such discussions can be divisive.

Greg as, moderator of this forum, has asked that one not come into this sphere promoting their own "ism". Whether is be Calvinism, Arminianism, Perfectionism, Charisnsticism, or any other "ism". I like what E. V. Hill once said. The best "ism" was an "ism" that was a "warm".

Let us respect the authority of the moderator and make our "isms" be "wasms". And focus on Jesus.

My council.

Bearmaster.

Dear Moderators,
I am fairly certain that you all (including brother Greg) not only do not promote ‘second blessing holiness’ but label this as false teaching that is very harmful and a doorway to DECEPTION!!! However I will not speak for you, but request that you go beyond your repeated warnings and make a stand on this matter. Please clear the air and cleanout the forum of this false teaching...for the sake of the young believers who visit this site.

I personally am glad that this thread has developed and explained for all and sundry the true names of this false teaching such as "entire sanctification" and "christian perfection".

It is very scriptural and sound to promote sanctification by faith in Christ, but this is gradual and develops out of a relationship with Jesus, not by some cataclysmic event such as the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit". To suggest this kind of thing, is clearly false teaching, goes against all scripture and is very harmful. The apostle Peter was obviously Baptized in the Holy Spirit yet he was also obviously "not yet perfect". He had to be rebuked by Paul for hypocrisy of all things!!! Paul describes what was happening as "they were led astray by their hypocrisy" and that they "were not walking uprightly". So this ludicrous teaching that twists the meaning and purpose of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit and needs to stop on this forum imho.

It is a scary thought to know that there are people who justify their false teaching by the notion that "this (false) teaching and experience will be promoted in the next Move of God (Revival)" and then to suggest that it has already started on this website!!!

Brothers you have been warned by one of these perpetrators and this is the grace of the Lord to you all...nothing could have flushed this out clearer than their own confession!

Brother Greg, you asked very nicely but it was not understood by some here so I have taken the liberty to put it in a louder tone so there is no confusion.

"STOP SPREADING THE FALSE TEACHING OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTIONISM OR YOU WILL BE KICKED OUT"

And yes that would obviously mean anyone who continues to spread this false "ism" after being repeatedly asked to stop!!!

"I don’t want you to jeopardize the possibility of this site and you not being used in the coming move of God."

Oh my, oh dear...I don't think I have ever heard such arrogance in my life but then again I have not been here that long and have missed a lot of colorful characters in the past it seems. But with this statement it is fairly clear what you are dealing with. I will be praying for you all as you consider how to proceed, but as you do, remember these words of the Apostle Paul,

"Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in - who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery - to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you..." (Gal2: 4 & 5)

Greg

I want up back up what Colin has said and ask that you be very careful in your actions considering what is taking place. You obviously set great store on the second blessing preachers you promote on this site and don't consider them a danger. No-one can deny that God blessed and brought about many thousands of conversions through their ministry and great social changes. Even if you cannot agree entirely with them, then please do not risk interfering with a work of God. If it is not of God then it will just die out itself. But remember that there is always a great opposition to the truth whenever there is a work of God about to take place.

Collin and Brenda,

Greg is moderator of this forum. I exhort you both to respect his authority. Greg has asked in a gracious way this "ism" of perfectionism not be promoted.

Please respect his wishes.

Respectfully,

Bearmaster.

I am rather confused about what you want. I have to ask you to be more specific with the behaviour you say you are not happy with as you seem to allow it from others.

Sister,

Greetings in Jesus Name. Thank you for your message and I will try my best to be more clear. As you stated above. On SermonIndex we actually do not condone saints who come on here to promote "one slant" of doctrine or experience. We simply as brother Blaine pointed out do not want "isms" to be promoted in anyway. The reason is that we have believers from all different backgrounds of Christianity. 30,000 different denominations you could say and each person holds to something that they feel is more important then the others. This type of thinking we are trying to discourage on SermonIndex that believers come together to realize they do not know everything and are probably wrong in alot of areas.

Being teachable is meaning that we are listening and reading more. Listening to sermons from people that might have different views then us but willing to "take the good" from these messages and grow. Towards more divisive and stronger opinions and doctrines we again have a stronger viewpoint on these. Such as Calvinism and Armianism we simply do not allow these discussions to take place. We have audio sermons on the site that represent both viewpoints and we have fellowship with and admire brethren on both sides and all in-between. But because of believers being from all backgrounds we simply cannot allow one person to trumpet their view because it will just cause debating and arguing etc.

To have the sermons on these topics available is more of a passive way for God to lead people to learn from both sides without abrasive comments and speaking hard against things they do not know. So that is where we are in things like this. This includes Christian Perfectionism or Second Blessing Holiness doctrines. We have seen the fruit of discussing this extreme position is minimal and causes more confusion, arguing and debating. So we simply ask that saints do not focus on it.

There have been honest short discussions on the topic and other very heated topics where people honestly had a question and that brought forth fruit to get simply a sense of what it was. But for someone to come onto the forums with that doctrine they hold to and to do 80% of these posts in that direction and always overly some of their posts with that "one" doctrine they hold to is simply not condoned on SermonIndex. We feel that is having a personal agenda:

3. HAVING A PERSONAL AGENDA - We look down on people who come with personal agenda's or are trying to justify themselves on a particular doctrine or emphasis. We believe it is not healthy to try and impose a truth that you have on many other brothers or sisters. This type of believer feels that a truth they have is more important then the rest and feels a godliness for holding to that truth. Such a godliness is false and will not bring about the fruits of the Spirit in the life of that believer (Galatians 5:22-23).

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=44556&forum=13

Towards you sister whether you know you are coming across promoting this belief alot in your posts or not we felt we needed to alert you to this. Now if I can have the time of people to read abit more I would like to expand abit further to state why I feel it is ok to have some of those teachers you stated on the website that held to Second Blessing doctrine if we do not want it discussed on the forums.

Second Blessing Holiness was taught by John Wesley As Christian Perfectionism. He took the idea of having "perfect peace" that the Moravians taught for one to "know" they have truly accepted Christ. He took it further that there should be an experience of "perfect love" shed abroad in the believers heart all the time and this could be attained In England Second Blessing Holiness doctrine became very popular and was more of a outward firm doctrinal view that originated from some of Wesley's teachings. Men like William Booth held to it for his entire movement of the Salvation Army. Many other groups had this viewpoint. It was brought to America also through Methodism and other means and there were many groups in America and it became at one point a very popular message. All the original pentecostals were Holiness Pentecostals, but that has now been lost.

I believe another brother said it right in the forums which I believe is that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was simply not being taught in many circles and the experience of Second Blessing Holiness was that Baptism of the Spirit for many people.

The problem is that men tried to live off that baptism experience and not seek as much the filling of the Holy Spirit. And men did not realize that the Baptism experience though it will help a believer grow in grace does not make you perfect and is not a quick fix to a heavenly life on earth.

In the end though we respect these men greatly and desire to emulate their ways in the Lord and desire their fruit, these men saw in a mirror dimly. And as we continue along as believers in the Church we are seeing more and learning from others mistakes. At the same time we have lost many vital things that they had in their day.

only a burning desire for holiness which is shared with others here who also believe in second blessing holiness.

Sister, to state again clearly we do not condone the promoting of doctrinal viewpoints that cause division and are extreme points that are not necessary to the unity of fellowship of believers. Another brother in this thread stated that second blessing is false. I do not agree with that as a whole but do agree that there is a way to to teach and believe second blessing doctrine that will deceive someone. But the general idea that there is more of God to experience and they He can make us more holy (separate) and like Him (fruits of the Spirit, self-control, patience, kindness, meekness, etc) I agree with that aspect of the need for holiness.

So Yes we do ask sister that you for-goe discussions on this topic of Second Blessing Holiness and if that is your "burning desire" then I recommend you find another Christian forum to share and discuss these things.

---

It is interesting to note that this statement of faith from the 100 million underground house church believers in China does not mention second blessing holiness but clearly shows the orthodox faith believers can agree upon:
http://gospelfellowships.net/pdf/statementoffaith.pdf

here are 2 answers on the about and contact page that clarify our viewpoint also on this:

Q. Some speakers on sermonindex vary in their doctrinal stance?
Answer. Because of the nature of this website and the amount of material available here, the views are those of the original speaker or author. Because of the diversity of viewpoints on some issues, there probably isn't a single individual anywhere who would subscribe to all of the views on all of the topics presented here, and we don't either. However, the material is still valuable and worth study. The importance is not what you agree with and what you do not agree with! But the most important thing is your obedience and love in your relationship with Jesus Christ.

Q. Is there a statement of faith for the website?
Answer. Being undenominational, we seek to minister to all who love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity (Eph. 6:24), and to love all who love Him (John 15:12; 1 John 4:20-21). By this shall all men know that ye are My disciples, if ye have love one to another (John 13:35). We hold to the Bible, both Old and New Testaments, as the inspired word of God. We believe in the New Birth, and that Salvation is a free gift of God through Jesus Christ to all who will repent, and believe the Gospel (Mark 1:15; John 3:16). We believe in the virgin birth of Jesus, the only begotten Son of God (Isa. 7:14; Matt. 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-35; Luke 2:1-7; John 1:14; John 3:16; Acts 13:16-41; 1 John 4:1-15). We believe in the deity of God the Father, the deity of Jesus, the Son of God, and the deity of the Holy Spirit. We believe that, while we were yet sinners, Jesus Christ shed His precious Blood on the cross, and died, that we might have life, and have it more abundantly (Rom. 5:8; John 10:10). We believe that Jesus rose again from the dead (1 Thess. 4:14; Luke 24:1-8; Acts 10:34-41; Luke 24:33-46). We believe that Jesus, some days after His resurrection from the dead, ascended to God in heaven (Acts1:1-10; Eph. 1:15-23). We believe in the personal return of Jesus with power and great glory (Luke 21:27), and that His return is an event for saved people to look forward to with great expectation and with constant watchfulness and prayer (Luke 21:34-36; 1 John 3:2-3). We believe that this same Jesus, which was taken up from the apostles into heaven, shall so come in like manner as they saw Him go into heaven (Acts 1:1-11). We believe it is the privilege and duty of every Christian--to be filled with the Holy Spirit, and to live a holy life, and to be always ready for the return of Jesus, and that, in the meantime, each Christian should Occupy (keep busy in His will, and in His service) till the Lord's return (John 7:37-39; Acts 1:8; Eph. 5:18; Matt. 24:44; Luke 19:13; Titus 2:11-15; 1 Peter 1:13-19).

from: https://www.sermonindex.net/about.php

There are those who strongly oppose this teaching, and they have often been very rude to me, and downright nasty in some of their posts, but I do not react to that nor do I report them. I am without fail, polite towards them and answer their accusations, the latest of which has been to imply that I am lying in my testimony, but you never seem to object to their posts. The worst culprit has now left, but he was allowed to be as nasty and as threatening as he wished and broke the regulations right left and centre, even though many objected to his threatening demeanour and manner yet you allowed that. I have to wonder whether the atmosphere you desire here is furthered by administration not applying the regulations to all.

Now that Greg has given his reply to your comments, which include the above Brenda. I am bound to make this one otherwise clarity may be lost and confusion will come in.

Brenda please don't lie against the truth. I was not as nasty as I wished with you regarding the discussions which had to do with sinless perfection, nor my posts which reflect the same concern others have expressed in this thread. Like Greg I also do not think that second blessing teaching is per se a false doctrine. I think Greg's explanation as to how to divide that issue is as complete at it needs to be to demonstrate why I have opposed your particular version of it.

No one can be as nasty as they wish on this forum, and to have suggested this is a little unfair on Greg and as well as the other four moderators. I have no doubt that they monitored those comments of mine including the straightest of them, in which I said of you that you are a heretic. All things have context and form. Nothing stands in defiance of reason if reason is applied. I supported everything I said Brenda by quoting from your own public comments both here and in other places. I did not express an opinion as to your teachings directly at any time.

Not only this Brenda but I have a heart towards you and always felt restrained from reacting or else posting in such a way that I would actually hurt you. I prayed throughout my posts and knew the hand of the Lord in them.

Lastly Brenda I have not left. I have simply felt led to desist from posting. I always watch Brenda. That is what I do. I am a watchman. I love you in the Lord Jesus Brenda and have no ill feeling towards you whatsoever. Nor have I allowed any ill feeling to infect my heart towards you. Please do not confuse plain speech with hatred. It is the Lord Who requires plain speech not men and it is the Lord Who will be adjudge of these things.

Dear brothers and sisters,
In an earlier post I said that ‘second blessing holiness’ teaching was false teaching and deception. Let me clarify this very, very clearly. The context of my remarks where to correct the ‘second blessing holiness’ teaching that murrcolr was promoting and in his own words he called it, "entire sanctification" or "christian perfection" and is stating that this is state of perfection is attained via the baptism of the Holy Spirit. So to be plain, this as described by murrcolr and others is false teaching and a form of deception that will have very damaging effects on young believers.

Quote by awakened: It is very scriptural and sound to promote sanctification by faith in Christ, but this is gradual and develops out of a relationship with Jesus, not by some cataclysmic event such as the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit". To suggest this kind of thing is clearly false teaching, goes against all scripture and is very harmful.
Quote by Leonard Ravenhill: I believe in instant purity: "The blood of Jesus Christ, His Son, cleanseth us from all sin." (I John 1:7) I do not believe in instant maturity.

Murrcolr, do you understand the difference between purity and sanctification? Or are you deliberately trying to twist words? You are now confusing people even more by throwing another word into the mix...maturity. Lets just stick to the topic at hand, maturity has nothing to do with this discussion.

Of course Ravenhill and all the other teachers here and probably most forum members believe in instant purity from sin when they repent, confess their sin and receive forgiveness of sin. But this is not sanctification. Here is a good teaching from brother Zac that will help explain the difference between justification (the foundation) and sanctification.

"Sanctification is the superstructure of the building. Sanctification (meaning `being set apart' from sin and the world) is a process that begins with the new birth (1 Corinthians 1:2) and that should continue throughout our earthly life (1 Thessalonians 5:23,24). This is a work that God initiates in us through the Holy Spirit, writing His laws upon our hearts and minds; but we have to do our part, working out our salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12,13). It is we who are to put to death the deeds of the body through the power that the Spirit offers us (Romans 8:13). It is we who have to cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and the spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Corinthians 7:1). Where a disciple is radical and wholehearted in cooperating with the Holy Spirit in this work, the work of sanctification will progress rapidly in his life. The work will obviously be slow or stagnant in the life of one whose response to the Spirit's leadings is sluggish.

While it is possible to be perfect in our conscience here and now (Hebrews 7:19; 9:9,14), it is not possible to be sinlessly perfect until we have a glorified body at Jesus' return (1 John 3:2). We can be LIKE Him only then. But we must seek to WALK as He walked even now (1 John 2:6).As long as we have this corruptible body, unconscious sin will be found in it, however much we may be sanctified (1 John 1:8). But we can be perfect in our conscience (Acts 24:16) and be free from conscious sin (1 John 2:1a), even now, if we are wholehearted (1 Corinthians 4:4).Thus we wait for the second coming of Christ and for our glorification - the final part of our salvation, when we will become sinlessly perfect (Romans 8:23; Philippians 3:21).”

” God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; and put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Acts 15:9”
The example above provided from scripture is an example of the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit ”“ when your Baptised in the Holy Spirit and made pure. Remember - sanctification ”“ is purification?

No,this is not a scripture referring to sanctification, but to the blood of Jesus purifying us from our sins when we repent and ask for forgiveness. It has nothing to do with the ongoing work of sanctification of the believer and it certainly has nothing to do with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The purification of sins at salvation and after a believer is saved is by the blood of Jesus and this speaks to purity, not about the work of being made CHRISTLIKE that happens all through the life of the believer. What you and krautfrau are doing is twisting the word of God to suit your "christian perfectionism" false teaching.

For all of those young Christians who happen on this thread, read the passage above from Zac Poonen and learn (be teachable) from gifted and anointed bible teachers such as brother Zac.

murrcolr, I would appeal to you as one who is not versed in proper study of the Holy Scriptures but after having read much of what you have written on this forum it now appears to me that you are either deeply confused or under some kind of deception. I say this with humility in the hope that you will listen, if not to me, then to others? I don’t know when this deception started but you dear brother are deceived to the point that it seems you now twist even simple to understand scriptures to fit your false doctrines.

I accept and admire you for your sincerity but dear brother, you are sincerely wrong and many here have tried to help you see this. Is this the end of the world if you are wrong about non-essentials? No of course not, but it is important that we adhere to the request of the moderators about certain subjects such as these very things in this thread that you are attempting to foist on others which can confuse and even deceive new believers as well.

Let me show you how you twist scripture to suit your agenda:

'So as we know this verse (Acts 15:8-9) is Peter explaining what happened when the gentiles first received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit'

This scripture has NOTHING to do with the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

But now that you have revealed what YOU mean by "the second blessing” we can see that you are desperate to prove by any means possible your false doctrine and the only way you can do that is if you twist certain scriptures to mean something completely different.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit which you equate to the teaching on this thread as "the second blessing” is actually described very clearly in the book of Acts.
Jesus Himself describes this baptism in Acts chapter one as "receiving the power from on High”. This is an endurement of power that Jesus said would quite simply empower the disciples for acts of service, "but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses…”.

Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would come UPON them.

This is clearly not the same thing as salvation, whereby the Holy Spirit is given and received WITHIN the new believer.

"I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in my ways.” Ezekiel 36:26

"…but you know Him (the Holy Spirit) because He abides with you and will be in you.” John 14:17

"Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you”? I Cor 3:16

"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you "? 1 Cor 6:19

”He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.” Titus 3:5

In your quote above I hope you and others can now see that you are wrong in your statements. I am trying to put this nicely brother. Do you see it now? Look at the simple text again, it is not hard to understand at all:
"Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith." Acts 15:8-9 NASB

Here the Apostle Peter is explains salvation amongst certain gentiles:
1) They heard the gospel
2) They believed the gospel.
3) They received the Holy Spirit.
4) God cleansed (purified their hearts (of sin) by faith.

These are basic principles of the gospel and I know you understand these things brother, but I am laying them out here for young believers who will inevitably stumble on this thread.

So what is Peter saying in this passage you are quoting? He is simply saying that the gentiles had the gospel preached to them, they then believed the gospel and received the deposit of the Holy Spirit.

The deposit of the Holy Spirit?
"set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.” 2 Cor 1:22

"the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father." Romans 8:15

"The Spirit is God's guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.” Eph 1:14

So that is what Peter is describing here. These statements from Peter have NOTHING to do with the Baptism of the Holy Spirit or a second blessing or whatever you want to call it. This is speaking of the simple concept of salvation that comes by faith in Christ. This salvation is granted to a person who exercises faith in Christ, they are given a new heart, a new nature, and are cleansed and purified from all sin! They are justified and made righteous (made pure) in the eyes of God - through faith!

To those who are reading this, please do not be deceived…the baptism of the Holy Spirit or any kind of "second blessing” is not required in order to be saved or cleansed or purified of your sin.

I really hope Brenda is not ex-communicated from this site. Too many good saints have been and discussions are really drying up.

Brenda challenges me to think and has NEVER been offensive or rude and that counts for a lot. She has behaved exemplary as a member of SI and especially when others have been downright venomous to her, of which you know right well. But where are the warnings and corrections for them?

There are many teachers on this site in the form of posters, sermons, audios and videos that teach an "ism", so Greg, you would have to close down your site.

Please don't let yourself be influenced by people in the background.

If what Brenda testifies to is not correct, then let the community of Believers through the Word and the Spirit freely discuss and come to an understanding.

I think it would be helpful if you entered more into these discussions not as a moderator but as a participant.

just-in thank you for defending me. You are very kind and brave in sticking your neck out.

I don't think it is fair to brush under the carpet the point you made - that l have never put a foot wrong yet the many attacks and insults including false accusations of being a heretic and a liar have gone without any rebuke yet they have been breaking the so called rules repeteadly.

But to get back to the principal accusation which has led to a restrction of the free speech others can take part in, that l came here with an agenda, l deny this most strongly and respectively ask the moderators to prove it going back to the five years when l joined. People who come with agendas do not stick around because they are not interested in interaction whereas l have shown the opposite and painstakingly answer questions etc. I have taken part in varied conversations including, home education, parenthood, and J. S. Bach and have responded to pleas for help and advice from others. So what evidence is there for this treatment apart from the fact that half of the forum do not agree with my theology which is part of the evangelical tradition?

I would like to point out also that l am not in the habit of starting off many second blessing threads. It is obviously a popular subject and l have not been talking to myself over five years. Have a look down the threads and see how many l have started? People with an agenda do it often.

Hi Paul,

I can't help but disagree with you. My observation has been that I see many threads started by other people regarding the Holy Spirit or walking without sin, or any number of things and then Brenda will weigh in according to her beliefs and testimony. I mean, she talks about what she understands and has experienced, personally. Don't we all? I am sure that she has started some threads but who hasn't? And who is it that always determines if someone is pushing an agenda? The "agenda" label seems like a scarlet letter and once someone has been labelled with it, it is unremoveable. It's patently unfair to treat one another in such a way.

It's not right to label someone with an "A" genda just because it is what they believe. People who truly have agendas don't stay around any forum if they see that they are not making any progress. At least not long term like Brenda has.

Would you kick her out of your fellowship? Why in the world would we kick her out of a forum where there is supposed to be more freedom to discuss, since afterall, it is a public forum?

Remember your own drum beat about mortification, Paul? Can we call that an agenda? I suppose if it is labelled a "good" agenda, then it really is no "A" genda, right?

My vote in the community (I know we have no vote) is to let people bring their "agendas", if that is what you want to call it. What in the world are we afraid of?

I don't know, I just don't see why everyone is so intent on silencing her. I think she has done more good in raising awareness of holiness for us than anything else. She has also been instrumental in exposing some messed up agendas and brings a wealth of knowledge from all her personal reading and investigations and experience.

You guys will do what you want to do and it seems the wheels are already in motion. It just saddens me how people are singled-out and labelled with the "A".

Brenda, since you are about to lose your freedom to share from your heart you probably won't want to stay around anymore. Thank you for your stimulating posts and not being wishy-washy. One other thing I can testify about you is that you definitely do not swing indecisively from one course of action or opinion to another. I respect your firm stand on what you believe. And may we all seek His anointing and endeavor to walk in the Spirit ALL THE TIME and yes Paul, practice mortification, too.

If SI shuts out Brenda, it's just one more light they have shut out.

I am sure that we all have our favourite subjects. This one for me is important because of what the Lord has done in my life, and still blows me away to think of it. If something happens to you that totally turns the world upside down, then you do talk about it whenever anyone shows any interest. Longing for revival is not an agenda, its what we all want surely? I have read a great deal on revival and enjoyed discussing it with others and yes, l do say what l think about leaders who do not practise what they preach or teach error. The proof is there that leaders are not bearing the fruit they should and that is why the church is weak and l don't care if that makes me unpopular.

I do admit that this past year or so l may have not joined in other conversations so much but this has been due to increasing illness and it is easy to just take part in what one likes the best. If l have detracked threads then l am sorry. Someone could have pointed it out. I am open to correction.

Of course, I have to defer to you Paul and you are correct, regarding the context of your posts. That was not a very good example at all that I gave.

I will abide by your decisions and rules of conduct. It is after all your forum and I am a guest.

I sure hope you guys are able to work it out with Brenda and vice-versa.

ADisiple, please read my entire response carefully again. The point of what I wrote (and spent a long time doing so) was to carefully show that in Acts 15 Peter is explaining purification that comes from salvation by faith...I suppose some would call this the "first blessing".

The argument of this thread is that there is a second blessing called the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Second meaning that there was also a first blessing. Well the argument goes that a person is not purified from sin until they have experienced this second blessing (baptism of the Holy Spirit).

I was attempting to show that this is false. Peter is stating here in this Acts 15 passage that the gentiles hearts were made pure because they believe! This Acts 15 passage does Not support murrcolr's assertion that the gentiles hearts were purified from sin because of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Dear Awakened ”“ your relatively new on sermonindex, so I will cut you some slack and have forgiven you - as I was at times nasty and said some hurtful things to people when I first came on to this site as well ”“ for which I am ashamed.

Hi brother I am sorry you feel that I was nasty and hurtful, that was not my intention and I apologize for giving you that impression and for hurting you. I am a very passionate person and not very good at being diplomatic...please forgive me. But how would you tell someone who appears to be very well versed in scripture but is also confused or in deception? I suppose that would hurt me too brother so I understand what you are saying and I pray that you would not try to take it too much to heart but rather consider the good intentions and truth of what others are trying to show you?

I was just trying to get a point across to you that your position on this matter is causing problems on these forums because it clouds the essential issue of salvation justification/purification by faith in Christ alone and now places the onus on a believer to seek an addition step to faith in order to receive purification and perfection. This is wrong dear brother and can be harmful to new believers. This is why I spoke in strong terms but it pains me that I have offended you because I know you are a precious brother who very much loves the Lord.

Can I just say that if I was in your shoes and being reproved by others, I would hope that I welcome the admonishment...and I would consider that any brother who did so is a brother that truly loves me. I hope you can hear my heart.

Again I am sorry for causing you pain but I stand by my comments and I will try to season them with more grace going forward. Perhaps I don't have a voice yet that you respect but at least listen to the moderators and a few years from now read my comments again and perhaps you will be able to receive them better.

awakened,

Murrculr was apologizing for his nastiness not spotlighting yours.

Paul,

Which one is an agenda?:

1) We have a sin nature

2) We don't have a sin nature

This topic comes up all the time.

Do we have to stop talking about number 1 or number 2 or do you see the camps split 50-50 so both topics are still fair game? Many think #1 is a destructively false topic and yet, there is a camp that feels the same about #2.

How do you decide which topics are agendas (which mean they forbidden from that point on)?

Thanks Paul. Your responses are reasoned and seasoned (with grace).

We are going to lock this thread. And ask that saints do not start threads on the topic of second blessing holiness. May we seek the better of others in the forums here and focus on Jesus Christ our Lord. He is doing a wonderful work throughout the earth and His Church is growing may we not be side-tracked arguing over matters that are non-essential.

Principle 24 - Christ the Unity of the Body (pdf)
http://gospelfellowships.net/pdf/principle24.pdf

Principle 26 - Having a Right Doctrine but Wrong Spirit (pdf)
http://gospelfellowships.net/pdf/principle26.pdf

Principle 27 - The Priority of Love (pdf)
http://gospelfellowships.net/pdf/principle27.pdf

Principle 29 - Being Rich in Mercy (pdf)
http://gospelfellowships.net/pdf/principle29.pdf

These files are from here: https://www.sermonindex.net/fellowships/principlesbook.php

This thread is locked.