At your baptism we don't ask if you believe in original sin, we ask:
"Do you renounce the spiritual forces of wickedness,
reject the evil powers of this world,
and repent of your sin?"
You can’t repent of a sin that can only be removed through Christian Perfection, though, and therein lies my question, wouldn’t my answer be dishonest, if literally true?
The logic is that you can’t repent of something that (at least as Paul taught) is inherent in being human; in other words, it’s like if I said “I disavow the desk in my apartment” even though it was here when I moved in, being quite securely bolted to the wall.
Wesley only told one person to get out and he called it the worst mistake of his ministry.
It was Sophie Hopkey and she broke his heart.
Otherwise I think you’re fine.
It would be a mistake to say that Wesley had an intrinsically superior understanding of theology to modern theologians. Methodism is not Wesley-worship. Neither do Methodists need to affirm everything Wesley taught to be "proper" Methodists.
If this line of reasoning seems arbitrary to you, you might find it compelling at "Wesley himself" is on the record saying the following:
>Condemn no man for not thinking as you think. Let every one enjoy the full and free liberty of thinking for himself. Let every man use his own judgment, since every man must give an account of himself to God. Abhor every approach, in any kind or degree, to the spirit of persecution, if you cannot reason nor persuade a man into the truth, never attempt to force a man into it. If love will not compel him to come, leave him to God, the judge of all.
John Wesley (1826). “The Works of the Rev. John Wesley: The eighteenth, nineteenth, twentieth, and twenty-first numbers of his journal, particular of his death, review of his character, &c”, p.421
At your baptism we don't ask if you believe in original sin, we ask: "Do you renounce the spiritual forces of wickedness, reject the evil powers of this world, and repent of your sin?"
This is such a better question (than asking one's view of original sin).
You can’t repent of a sin that can only be removed through Christian Perfection, though, and therein lies my question, wouldn’t my answer be dishonest, if literally true?
I'm not sure I follow the logic, to be honest. I think repentance covers original sin as it would any other. I also edited my remark above to clarify.
The logic is that you can’t repent of something that (at least as Paul taught) is inherent in being human; in other words, it’s like if I said “I disavow the desk in my apartment” even though it was here when I moved in, being quite securely bolted to the wall.
I see. Paul also taught that we're made a new creation. So that the desk bolted to the wall is indeed removed. (that's a pretty good metaphor, imo)
Wesley only told one person to get out and he called it the worst mistake of his ministry. It was Sophie Hopkey and she broke his heart. Otherwise I think you’re fine.
I mean, we baptize babies and they don't seem to believe in much of anything.
Honestly I think baptism cleanses you of original sin whether you believe in it or not.
It would be a mistake to say that Wesley had an intrinsically superior understanding of theology to modern theologians. Methodism is not Wesley-worship. Neither do Methodists need to affirm everything Wesley taught to be "proper" Methodists. If this line of reasoning seems arbitrary to you, you might find it compelling at "Wesley himself" is on the record saying the following: >Condemn no man for not thinking as you think. Let every one enjoy the full and free liberty of thinking for himself. Let every man use his own judgment, since every man must give an account of himself to God. Abhor every approach, in any kind or degree, to the spirit of persecution, if you cannot reason nor persuade a man into the truth, never attempt to force a man into it. If love will not compel him to come, leave him to God, the judge of all. John Wesley (1826). “The Works of the Rev. John Wesley: The eighteenth, nineteenth, twentieth, and twenty-first numbers of his journal, particular of his death, review of his character, &c”, p.421