In the back of Finney’s Systematic Theology 1878 edition that is published by Bethany House Publishers, there is a glossary of terms. From what I can tell, the glossary of terms were not written by Finney but inserted by one of the publishers, as it is not in the online 1878 edition of Finney’s Systematic Theology.
This definition will give you a feel for the kind of disinformation people involve themselves in when they are trying to invalidate a doctrinal position they disagree with.
This definition is found on page 589.
Sinless perfection is not a term I have ever used to explain the “free from sin” teaching that I hold. While I do not think anyone believes the above definition of sinless perfection, I put it there to make a point.
Carnal people have always been willing to build straw men and rejoice as they tear them down. In doing so, the only ones they are tearing down is themselves and the simple people who do not have enough prudence to find out what a person teaches for themselves. “The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going” (Pro 14:15).
So perhaps I should lay out what I consider the Bible teaches concerning the doctrine of “free from sin”. The following lays out clearly how I would hold the Bible teaches, when it comes to being free from sin.
1) A person who desires to become a child of God must bring forth fruits to God that are consistent, worthy, keeping with, and befitting repentance (Mat 3:8). Fruits befitting repentance have no merit in becoming a child of God, but are scriptural requirements.2) A person must have godly sorrow (2Cor 7:10) for their sins and repent of their sins (Luk 13:3) to become a child of God. Sorrow and repentance have no merit in becoming a child of God, but are scriptural requirements.
3) Repentance is a complete change in attitude toward your past sinful life and a commitment to completely change and reform your life by the power of God.
4) Becoming a child of God is by grace through faith and is not based on the merit of any works, but is the gift of God (Eph 2:8).
5) When by grace with godly sorrow and repentance through faith you believe in your heart (Rom 10:9) on the merits of the death and resurrection of Jesus, and ask God for forgiveness of sins, and believe by faith God has forgiven you (1Joh 1:9; Act 4:12 1Pet 1:9), you are converted and have become a child of God.
6) Freedom from sin (Rom 6:18) is obtained at the moment a person becomes a child of God (1Joh 1:8).
7) The sin that a person is freed from is willful acts of sins of commission and omission (Jam 4:17).
8) In order for a child of God to maintain victory over sin, the flesh, and the world (1Joh 2:15, 16), they must abide in Christ (Joh 15:4-6), in prayer obtain grace to help in time of need (Heb 4:16), be diligence to add the fruits of the Spirit to their life (2Pet 1:4-10), humble themselves before God (1Pet 5:5), build up their faith through reading the Word of God (Rom 10:17), hunger and thirst after righteousness (Mat 5:6), work out their salvation with fear and trembling (Phi 2:12), and be led by the Spirit of God (Rom 8:14).
9) If at any point a Christian commits a willful sin, they no longer have eternal life abiding in them (1Joh 3:15) and have become a child of the devil (1Joh 3:10).
Really, there is no difference between becoming free from sin and becoming a child of God.
December 8th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Hi Bob
This article by Finney on SP is very well put.
July 6th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Bob, Great blog site, I look forward to reading more. I don’t like Finney’s definition because he defined it as being accomplished without God’s grace and that is impossible. Victory over sin only is possible by God’s grace and not our own strength. With God all things are possible, we can indeed do all things, including obey if we follow Jesus. I believe a sinless perfection can be achieved in this life and I am aiming for that, seeking to be Holy as my Father in heaven is Holy, suffering in my flesh to cease from sin, and striving to enter the narrow gate. I hate how people twist Romans 7 into a false doctrine based on 1 or 2 passages. I believe 1 Cor 10:13 says there is not a single temptation we cannot overcome if we trust in God and the leadings of the Holy Spirit (assuming we are indeed Born Again). If the son sets us free, we shall be free indeed and that freedom wasnt from the penalty of sin, it was from the power of sin in our lives. May God bless you and lead you in your ministry.
July 8th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Hi Pete,
That definition was not written by Finney but was added to his book by some one that didn’t know what sinless perfection means. While most holiness people use the term Christian perfection versus sinless perfect, the definition is away off.
I would hold that he Bible teaches that free-from-sin (willful or known) comes with salvation.
Thanks!
Bob.
July 8th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
THanks Bob for the clarification. When you say free from sin with salvation does that mean when we are resurrected in new bodies upon the Lord’s return or when we are fully sanctified in this body in this life? This opens up all kinds of issues, but if we are saved now, we are free from sin now unless of course we walk away and become unsaved, which I believe the bible teaches we can choose to do as unbelievable as it seems.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:37 am
Hey Bob and Pete, I agree with you both. Pete I believe you can walk in sinless perfection in this life. We can’t say we’ve never sinned but we can say that with the sinless Holy Spirit in us we can be made complete in Christ. In Christ David Pace
November 30th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Hi Pete,
The salvation that I was talking about is here and now. Today is the day of salvation but only those that endure to the end will be eternally saved.
Thanks!
Bob.
November 30th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Hi David Pace,
I think the term sinless perfection is not a good term to use. I like the Bible term “free from sin”. As you see in the above article “sinless perfection” means different things for different people. Sinless perfection is not a term that has every been used by “holiness scholars”. John Wesley preferred to use Christian perfection and here is why.
“(5.) The best of men still need Christ in his priestly office, to atone for their omissions, their short-comings, (as some not improperly speak,) their mistakes in judgment and practice, and their defects of various kinds. For these are all deviations from the perfect law, and consequently need an atonement. Yet that they are not properly sins, we apprehend may appear from the words of St. Paul, `He that loveth, hath fulfilled the law; for love is the fulfilling of the law.’ (Rom. 13:10.) Now, mistakes, and whatever infirmities necessarily flow from the corruptible state of the body, are noway contrary to love; nor therefore, in the Scripture sense, sin.
To explain myself a little farther on this head: (1.) Not only sin, properly so called, (that is, a voluntary transgression of a known law,) but sin, improperly so called, (that is, an involuntary transgression of a divine law, known or unknown,) needs the atoning blood. (2.) I believe there is no such perfection in this life as excludes these involuntary transgressions which I apprehend to be naturally consequent on the ignorance and mistakes inseparable from mortality. (3.) Therefore sinless perfection is a phrase I never use, lest I should seem to contradict myself. (4.) I believe, a person filled with the love of God is still liable to these involuntary transgressions. (5.) Such transgressions you may call sins, if you please: I do not, for the reasons above-mentioned.
Q. What advice would you give to those that do, and those that do not, call them so?
A. Let those that do not call them sins, never think that themselves or any other persons are in such a state as that they can stand before infinite justice without a Mediator. This must argue either the deepest ignorance, or the highest arrogance and presumption.
Let those who do call them so, beware how they confound these defects with sins, properly so called. But how will they avoid it? How will these be distinguished from those, if they are all promiscuously called sins? I am much afraid, if we should allow any sins to be consistent with perfection, few would confine the idea to those defects concerning which only the assertion could be true.”
Christian love and prayers,
Bob.
November 30th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Hi Dennis Wells,
This article was not written by Finney. The definition of “Sinless Perfection” was taken from the back of Finney’s Systematic Theology but was added by the editor as far as I can tell. That definition was written by either a person how had little understanding of the holiness position on sin free living or by a person that has no problem misrepresenting others.
Christian love and prayers,
Bob.