While discussing the word sanctify and holiness on another thread, we have stumbled upon a novel doctrine brought to light by DHK. It is a doctrine that basically is evidently expressed by the following words. It is sin not to sin. Although I have known for some time that some must believe in such a notion I had never seen it so plainly stated until DHK made the following comment: : HP: If sinlessness is sin, it is a sin for Christ to cleanse one from all sin? Do some really consider what they are espousing seriously before they make such a comment? Are we purified and made holy at salvation, or does our sin remain? Are we purified by faith, the blood cleansing us from all sin at salvation, or it the blood unable to do what Scripture says it does. Is the efficaciousness of death greater than the blood of Christ? If it is we should all be praising death, but Scripture calls it the last enemy, not ones savior from sin. Does death save us from our sins or does the blood of Christ cleanse us from all unrighteousness? Where in Scripture does it say that one coming to Christ has to wait until death to be made holy and pure? When the apostle Paul made a reference to being made free from sin, was he speaking in the present or past tense forms, or was he speaking of some 'after death' experience? If to say one is without sin is sin, were the accusers of Christ wrong or right when they called him a blasphemer? Where is the explanation of Christ to those accusers, that indicated that they really were expressing truth for a man, but He could not have and was not a man, for if a man claims to be without sin, according to DHK, that is sin in and of itself?