Scriptural Sanctification - Media Sabda Org

different and distinct works, occurring at different times. Others say that all three of them are
substantially the same, and are reached simultaneously and instantaneously. Another says that entire
sanctification and perfect love are substantially the same, but are gradually reached after
regeneration. Still another says that regeneration, sanctification, and perfect love are nearly or quite
the same, but that they do not involve being saved from all depravity -- rather, that we are gradually
saved from depravity till death, growing "toward perfection;" but never reaching it in this life.
Dr. Mudge seems to agree with Whitefield that "there must be some Amalekites left in the
Israelite's land to keep his soul in action," etc. -- some remaining depravity in the believer's heart all
the way through life as the condition of the soul's "growth in holiness," while Drs. Crane and Boland
and others hold that the soul's most rapid growth is after it is saved from depravity in regeneration
or afterwards. Dr. Tillett thinks we may not know when depravity reaches the "zero point," and the
soul is made perfect in love, while Dr. Barbee thinks we may.
A writer quoted and endorsed by Dr. Boland says: "Sanctification is not a doctrine, but an
experience, and when it is presented simply as purity of heart and life before God, it finds none to
oppose it, none to cavil at it." Yet Dr. Barbee does oppose such presentation of the subject, teaching
that sanctification is a state, and not an of purity of heart, or any other experience. Hear him as to
experience: "Of one fact he may be certain, and distinctly testify it -- namely, that he has not obtained
an experience of sanctification, or the 'second blessing,' for such an experience is not possible to any
man."
It seems, then, that some others than the advocates of the Wesleyan theory of sanctification have
made a "muddle," and that some other "modern fathers" are "in trouble." And yet we have not lost
hope that good and earnest and thoughtful men on both or all sides of this many-sided question may
yet find a common and scriptural ground on which all may stand -- may unite in an interpretation of
God's word that will include most or all that is vital in these different theories.
3. It is objected to the testimony from experience that one's "experience may be colored by his
theory, and that there is testimony from experience against the theory of entire sanctification in this
life."
(1) The answer to the first part of this objection has already been given by noting that many of the
leading witnesses to this experience inherited the idea and were trained to believe that this full
salvation is not possible to us in this life. This is notably true with such men as President Finney and
Drs. Mahan and Upham, of the Congregational Church; Drs. Earle, Gordon, and Levy, of the Baptist
Church; Miss Frances Ridley Havergal, of the Church of England; and many others whose names
might be given. And we could turn this testimony against the objector. The teaching of the Bible,
confirmed by the testimony of others from experience, so overcame this traditional faith and
prejudice as to have them make experimental tests of this, to them, new theory, by which they
became firmly established in their later views.
(2) The fact that so large a proportion of professed Christians do not enjoy this blessing, and that
some have earnestly sought without obtaining it, is urged against this theory. Dr. Whitehead and
others have pressed the alleged fact that Mr. Wesley did not make an explicit profession of it against