The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1879-06-19
Sanctifcation.
e Editor of the Standard ::

To the Editor of the Standard:
In your issue of April 14th, I see an ar
ticle signed Ego, in which he endeavors
to sustain the doctrine of entire freedom
from sin, by an effort to harmonic some
passages of Scripture which appeared in
an article-l0th issue of the Standard,
with the statement made by some M. E.
Bishop, and according to Bro Jones
statement sanctioned by the editor of the
Herald, in which he claimed entire free
dom from sin.
Having waited to hear from Bro. Jones,
and as yet to no purpose l feel it to be
my duty to defend the harmony of the
word of God
1t does seem to me that Bro. Ego was
little hasty in giving utterance to the
following: "In the literal sense Of the
quotation l am satisfied that it is SLAM
der against the Bishop, and the NJ. E
Church" Why? Simply because the
Bishop does claim entire freedom from
sin, and SO far as the church is concerned
all know that there are many of its mem
| bers, who, not only believe in the doc
| trine, but profess to be in possession OF
the same. Then how the SANDER But
the Bro. further says: For the quotation
would include the sins growing out of
our numerous mlSthkeS. w udG Sdllu IL!
In as much as all men are SO imperfect as
to be continually making mistakes, there
fore, all men are continually committing e
sins. The doctrine of entire freedom
from sin as defined, to the contrary not
withstanding.
My Bro. speaks of sins growing out OF
mistakes as though they were harmless,
and, therefore. ought not to be taken in
to an account. Evidently sins of all kind
implies four things. First The existence
of law for where there is no law there
can be no sin. Secondly: Means of know
ing the law; for where the means of
knowing the law are not possessed, there
can be no sin. Thirdly: The power of
obeying or disobeying the law; for where
y 'eis power does not exist, there can be
sin. Fourthly: An actual violation OF
W; for where law has not been actu-
ly violated, there is, and can be, no sin.
aMSHio illustrate Here is law prohibiting
dece committal of certain specified crime,
n; nd you are in possession of the means OF
r. moving that law, but from some cause
Colllfully or otherwise, you neglect, or
ntnake no effort to avail yourself of that
nowledge, and having the power to obey
disobey, as all men have, violate that
Ill w, would you not, according to reason
'ouhd the word of eternal truth, expect to
Ple,ffer the penalty
tI, ti1. This seems to me to be the idea Paul
W. esigned to convey in the words thus
,rsdressed to the Athenians: "And the
saihes of this ignorance God winked at
tot now commandeth all men every
'doaere to repent" The Athenians were
worshipers they were not in
etfssession of the means of knowing the
olloHe God-were living in times of dark
ooh.. ..ss, ignoropce, and superstition, fol
al hich reason God did not impute that
sin to them. But now, having revealed
Himself more fully and clearly by His
messenger, holds them responsible.
But why not before? Simply because
they had not the means of knowing the
true God. Hence they ignorantly wor
ship Him. For Paul thus ADDRESSED him
self to them: II perceive that in all thin gs
ye are too superstitious. For as l passed
and beheld your devotions, l found ar
altar with this inscription: To THE UN
KNOWN GOD, whom therefore ye ignor
antly worship, Him declare | unto you
The great Apostle to the Gentiles was
prior to his conversion a malignant foe tc
the Gospel. He was an infuriate leader
in the general persecution, making havoc
of the church, entering into every house
and haling men and women committed
them to prison. Paul after his conver
sion frequently refers to this declaring
that he did it ignorantly. Now, accord
ing to Bro Ego's argument as his sins
were sins growing out of mistakes, ig
norantly actuated to commit them, they
were not sins for which God would pun
ish him, and therefore he needed nc
forgiveness. The words of Ananias -
And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and
be baptized, and wash away thy sins, call
ing on the name Of the Lord" to the
contrary Notwithstanding
We will now proceed TO notice my
Bros exposition of certain passages Of
Scripture. First: There is none that
doeth good, no not one" Bro. Ego then
proceeds thus "Y ou ask, If none can dc
good, how can any one be perfect ?" Tc
this | would say, that it does not neces
sarily follow that good man is perfect
man, by any means. Neither does it fol
low that he is Christian man even, fol
man may be good man and yet be 8
very imperfect man. But we are told
that this passage is misunderstood-that
the reference here, is to mans moral con
dition without q Savior To confirm that
idea he emphasizes the words IN one
| Good"
In Mark 1O-1S Christ said to certain
young man, who called Him good mas
ter" why callest thou me good there
is none good but one, that is God" The
words1 None good" uttered by Christ, in
cludes all, regardless of their moral con,
dition. But according to my Bro S
explanation, the None good" has no
reference to the Christian, but to the un-
believers only; so you see there is a want
of harmony here-that is, between my
Bro. and Christ. The Bro further says :
But in the fifth verse of the same psalm,
he informs US what we may be with a
Savior" the quoting For God is in the
generation of the righteous" Let US
remember that it is generation" and
not ICON oreoation F" as NV BRO has it,