Bible Proofs of a Second Cleansing

There are a number of theories which are opposed to the doctrine of a second cleansing. The leading ones may be stated as follows:

1. The common Pelagian theory held by modern Unitarianism and the Socinian theology generally that man is not depraved and consequently is not cleansed except from committed sins.
2. The theory supported by several of the older church creeds that depravity remains in the believer and will remain until death.
3. The Zinzendorf view that depravity is entirely removed in regeneration, and, as some adherents of the theory suppose, that the baptism of the Holy Ghost is received at the same time.
4. That sanctification is contemporary with conversion, and the baptism of the Spirit is subsequent.
5. That we are first converted, subsequently sanctified, and still later baptized by the Spirit. (This is a theory held by some branches of the “tongues” movement; some of them even teach a fourth work.)

These are all sufficiently refuted in the following proofs of a second cleansing.

The Nature of the Proofs

No normal or scientific statement of this doctrine is to be found in the Bible. Those critics of the doctrine who require such statement seem to forget that the Bible is not a work of systematic theology, and that no doctrine is so stated. The Bible reveals truth, not scientifically, but historically, and it might almost be said incidentally. To the objection that a formal statement of a second cleansing finds no place in church history from the early centuries until two hundred years ago, it may be answered that other vital spiritual truths were obscured during the apostasy only to be restored in recent years. An illustration of this is the doctrine of the Holy Spirit organization and government of the church.

It is also a mistake to oppose this doctrine on the ground that our own reasoning does not require that there be a double cleansing. Other vital truths of Christianity are not supported by rational proofs, examples of which are the doctrine of the Trinity, the resurrection of the body, and the general judgment. We accept these because they are taught by revelation. That tendency to reject all that may not be known by reason is the false position held by the destructive Bible critics in relation to the supernatural in the Bible. If the Bible is shown to be God’s Word, then it is reasonable to accept what it teaches even though it is beyond human comprehension. It should be remembered, however, that since sanctification and the other doctrines mentioned are revealed, they are found to be according to reason though they cannot be known by reason alone. Reason even supports them in connection with the Bible.

Unfortunately for the doctrine of entire sanctification, some, in trying to support it with a multitude of texts, have used a number that have no application to the subject. The result has been that some persons, upon finding that those texts do not apply, fall into the error of rejecting the doctrine completely, in spite of sound proofs elsewhere. The best proof of this or any other doctrinal truth is not a large multitude of proofs, nor yet one seemingly clear proof, but a variety of kinds of proof. These we have in support of the doctrine of a second cleansing. At least six main classes of proofs of this doctrine may be given, four of which are complete in themselves, and the remaining two, though incomplete, are strong when connected with the others.

Two Incomplete Classes of Proofs

These two classes of proofs have already been considered somewhat in a preceding chapter. They are, first, the proofs of two forms of sin as a ground for two works of grace; second, remaining sin in the regenerated as a ground for a second cleansing. Though they are not complete proofs in themselves and need to be used with other proofs, yet they are valid as far as they go, and to many minds, who from familiarity with the Scriptures are enabled readily to supply the missing links, they are convincing.

The Scriptures clearly recognize sin in two forms, committed sin and inherited sin. Formal proof of these is scarcely necessary here. It is assumed that every believer in the Scriptures recognizes the actuality of committed sin. Inherited sin, or native depravity, is also quite generally recognized as Scriptural. Definite proofs of native depravity have already been given. Though it does not necessarily follow that these two forms of sin must be overcome in us at two different times, yet their existence does positively prove the possibility of two works of grace.

Remaining depravity in believers, which has already been sufficiently shown, is, to the minds of those who believe in the completeness of Christ’s salvation, proof of a second cleansing. And when the Bible proof is given of a complete purifying of the heart in this life, it is conclusive; but without this proof it might be assumed, as is often done, that one may not be freed from depravity until death.

More Direct Scripture Proofs of a Second Cleansing

This is a third main class of proofs of a second cleansing. Under this, as under the other classes, various individual proof texts might be given, but for lack of space and to give more definiteness to the argument we shall consider but three, which will serve as examples of other such proofs.

Sanctification for Disciples

In Jesus’ notable prayer for His disciples offered at the close of the last supper, on the eve of His betrayal and crucifixion, He prayed, “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.”* (John 17:17) That this sanctification is important to His disciples is evident from the fact that He prayed for it on this solemn occasion, when the gloom of Gethsemane and the horrors of Calvary were so near. This was a cleansing of the heart and not of the life, it is certain, from the fact that it was to be done by the Father and not by themselves. As we have shown in a previous chapter, men are always instructed to cleanse their own lives; but God’s sanctification of men described in the New Testament is always a cleansing of the heart, and not of the life. Also it should be noted that this sanctification was in order that they might be “[kept] from the evil.”* (John 17:15) It was a cause, and the holy living was the effect. Some have argued that this is a cleansing of the life because it was to be done by the “word”; but they seem to forget that we are said to be regenerated also by the “word.” Just as it is said, “Being born again… by the word of God,”* (1 Peter 1:23) so it is also said, “Sanctify them through thy truth.”

These disciples for whose cleansing Jesus prayed were already justified, as is evident from several expressions in the same chapter as well as from other texts. They belonged to God and were obedient to His word (John 17:6), were not of the world (John 17:9,14,16), were kept from sin (John 17:11-12,15), had been sent to preach (Matthew 10:7), and their names were written in heaven (Luke 10:20). It has been objected that although they were justified, they had not been regenerated, and that this was the sanctification for which Jesus prayed. But that they were regenerated, or converted, can also be shown.

Regeneration sets one apart from sin. It is that which makes one “not of the world,”* (John 15:19) or it is a being crucified to the world (Galatians 6:14). It is that which, from its very nature, keeps from sin (Ezekiel 36:25,27), and these men were “kept,” and were obedient to or kept God’s word (John 17:12,17:6). Can anyone believe that these men, sent to preach the kingdom of God, were themselves strangers to it through lack of regeneration, without which one “cannot see the kingdom of God”* (John 3:3)? These men had believed on Christ (Matthew 16:16), which is the necessary condition for regeneration, as is shown in these words, “he came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born… of God.”* (John 1:11-13) This is conclusive. But let us notice another proof that they were regenerated at this time.

Regeneration makes one a member of the church. The kingdom and the church are practically identical, so regeneration is essential to entrance into the kingdom of God (John 3:3). “The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it”* (Luke 16:16) , therefore men were regenerated from the time John began to preach, or from the time the law dispensation ended and the gospel dispensation began. The disciples had believed (Matthew 16:16), and were in Christ (John 15:2-4), therefore were born again, for “if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature.”* (2 Corinthians 5:17) Christ’s kingdom or church existed before Pentecost, but not until after the Holy Ghost came was it fully organized. Jesus’ prayer for the sanctification of His disciples is undeniable proof of a cleansing of the regenerated.

Sanctification for the Church

“Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it [the church] with the washing of water by the word.”* (Ephesians 5:25-26) Here is described a sanctification, not of sinners, but of the church or those already saved. That this sanctification is a cleansing is evident from the argument already given in this chapter, that in the New Testament the sanctification done for man by God is always a cleansing of the heart. It is not consecration. Also it may be stated here that cleansing is always the end sought in the use of sanctification or consecration of men or things in the Old Testament.

That this sanctification is of the church and not for the purpose of constituting her the church is clear from the reading of the common King James Version. And it is even more definitely stated in the Revised Version, which is also borne out by the original, where the Greek participle is used in the aorist tense. And this cleansing of the church here described by Paul is in perfect harmony with Jesus’ prayer for the sanctification of those who have already become His disciples.

An Entire Sanctification

“The very God of peace sanctify you wholly [entirely]; and I pray God our whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.”* (1 Thessalonians 5:23) This text teaches a sanctification to be done by God, therefore a sanctification of the heart, not of the life. The keeping them blameless in the latter part of the verse is the keeping from evil in John 17. It is an entire sanctification, which may reasonably be taken to imply that there is a sanctification that is not entire. Also it is to be done for those who were a church “in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ,”* (1 Thessalonians 1:1) those who were “brethren,”* (1 Thessalonians 1:4) a very spiritual church, who a short time before this letter was written were converted through Paul’s labors, and from whom he was driven by persecution and to whom he now wrote praying for their entire sanctification. Read the account of their conversion in Acts 17.

Sanctification Contemporary with Holy Ghost Baptism

We now come to a fourth main class of proofs of a second cleansing. Our purpose is to show that a second cleansing is accomplished at the time of Holy Ghost baptism and then to show that this baptism is subsequent to conversion. It is said of Cornelius before Peter came to him, that he was devout, feared God, gave much alms, prayed always (Acts 10:2), that his prayers were heard (v. 4), and that he was a just man (v. 22). There can be little doubt about his being a truly saved man. Some would object that he was justified, but not regenerated. To this it may be answered that the work of justification and regeneration are contemporary, and the baptism of the Spirit is subsequent. There is no proof that Cornelius’ experience was abnormal, and from the fruits of his life that are mentioned we have reason to believe he was born again. Not many who are regenerated have a better record than that given of Cornelius. Also many of the critics of a second cleansing, especially Pentecostal people and some others, find themselves in a corner in taking this position that Cornelius was simply justified, because a vital point in their doctrine requires that the Holy Spirit baptism be subsequent to regeneration. To allow that Cornelius was not regenerated before requires them to allow that he received the baptism at the time of conversion, which they do not care to admit and which would be contrary to Scripture, as already shown.

After Cornelius had received the Holy Spirit baptism through Peter’s ministry and Peter had returned to Jerusalem, the apostle was called in question for going to these Gentiles. In his defense he said, “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 15:8-9) That Peter is talking about what occurred when he was there is evident. He states that God gave them the Spirit and purified their hearts. This must be sanctification as a second cleansing. He said it was “even as he did unto us,” the apostles on Pentecost. Therefore the apostles must have received a heart-cleansing at Pentecost, which agrees with Jesus’ prayer for their sanctification in John 17:17.

We have already shown conclusively that sin exists in two forms; that one form is overcome in the first work of grace, while depravity still remains in the hearts of the regenerated. Native depravity cannot be regarded as something minor or unimportant; for both Scripture and human experience testify that sin in the heart is the main cause of sin in the life, hence salvation cannot be said to be complete until sin in both forms is overcome.

It is evident that sin in the life is not overcome by some indefinite process or by a gradual evolution in human character; for according to the teaching of Jesus it is accomplished only by a sudden revolution in the moral nature, a revolution produced by the Spirit of God in the new birth. And if sin in the life can be overcome only by a definite act of God’s grace, it is not to be expected that that sin which is basic in depraved human nature will gradually fade away and disappear. If it is to be overcome at all it will have to be done by the power of God, and there will also have to be a definite time when it is done. In this case also the remedy will have to be equal to the disease, and nothing short of a definite, sin-killing act of God’s grace can dispose of this inward malady.

Since it is a fact, as already shown, that native depravity does remain in the heart of the converted, a subsequent cleansing is necessary. There is no Scripture proof of any time or place where depravity is removed except at the time of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Since receiving Christ in the first work of grace has a negative phase (deliverance from the guilt and power of sins committed), as well as the introduction of a new life in Jesus—thus disposing of one form of sin—it is only reasonable to suppose that the personal coming of the Spirit to the individual believer will also have its negative result, disposing of the second form of sin, as a necessary preparation for the indwelling and special work of the Comforter.

The Scripture text already cited, Acts 15:8-9, identifies heart-cleansing with the baptism of the Spirit, hence the Spirit baptism provides a definite remedy for a very definite need. To this agrees also the words of Paul in Titus 3:5-6, where the apostle affirms that Christ “saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which he shed on us abundantly.” Salvation is therefore twofold, because there is a twofold need, occasioned by the two forms of sin. It is not complete until the baptism of the Spirit is received. In Matthew 3:11-12, Jesus also associates a purging, destructive work with the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

This also agrees with the Old Testament types. The coming of the Holy Spirit is described as being an anointing. The anointing of Aaron and his sons for the priesthood was typical of this anointing of the Holy Ghost which prepares us for God’s service today. And it is remarkable that after the sin-offering was offered, the oil with which those ancient priests were anointed was mingled with the blood of a second offering from the altar and sprinkled upon them (Exodus 29:21-22), thus beautifully typifying a cleansing from depravity at the time of the Holy Ghost anointing. Also it is worthy of mention here that the coming of God’s presence always hallows (Leviticus 22:32; 1 Kings 9:3), but cleansing always precedes and prepares for God’s presence (Exodus 19:10-11; 29:1,21). Whether or not critics are pleased to allow that Romans 15:16 teaches it, yet the fact remains that we are “sanctified by the Holy Ghost.”

Many examples of the Holy Ghost baptism after conversion might be given. We have already shown that the apostles and Cornelius were first converted then received the Spirit. The Samaritans were converted under the ministry of Philip (Acts 8:8,12), and at least some days later received the Holy Ghost at the hands of Peter and John (vs. 15-16). The Ephesians were disciples and had believed (Acts 19:1-2), and when Paul came to them later they received the Holy Spirit (v. 6). Paul was converted on the road to Damascus and was there called to preach (Acts 26:18), prayed (Acts 9:11), was the chosen vessel (v. 15), and was addressed by Ananias as brother (v. 17), after which he received the Holy Spirit.

We have now given briefly a few of each of the four classes of proofs of a second cleansing in this chapter. In our next chapter we shall set forth one of a much different nature. This very variety of proofs, as has been mentioned, constitutes the strongest proof of any doctrine.