Category: Sanctification

Who’s Up (today) for An Honest Reading? John 6:37-40

image Theological discussion in various venues often pits one position of belief against its opposites. Supporters of one position or another like to issue proposition statements of the form ‘If they would give _____ an honest reading’, ‘once I gave ______ an honest reading’,’ you can’t read _________ honestly and still believe’ or various other permutations that are meant to couch the idea that your position is unsupportable in the light of clear interpretation. In other words, the veiled inference is that theological presuppositions have colored your interpretation of the text and if you would put them aside and engage an honest reading of the text, you would certainly see the validity of the opposing position. Let’s see if that’s a valid argument…

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”  (Jn 6:37–40)

It’s All Greek to Me

Yesterday we looked at the various contextual levels in which the reader encounters a bible passage. To avoid mishandling a text or inappropriately proof-texting out of context we need to recognize the material that surrounds the passage to varying degrees of immediacy. We close by turning our attention to the language used by the original author and how well our modern translations accord to the original meaning of the words used. This will come as a shock to some but the Bible was not delivered in Elizabethan English. God elected to transmit His truth through authors in Hebrew and Greek for the most part and if we are going to delve beyond our English (or whatever translated language we read) we need to dive into the original texts. Caution is advised here; words in Greek and Hebrew often have ranges of meaning just like their English counterparts and it is easy to manipulate the interpretation of a passage

Continue reading “Who’s Up (today) for An Honest Reading? John 6:37-40”

Who’s Up (again) for An Honest Reading? John 6:37-40

image Theological discussion in various venues often pits one position of belief against its opposites. Supporters of one position or another like to issue proposition statements of the form ‘If they would give _____ an honest reading’, ‘once I gave ______ an honest reading’,’ you can’t read _________ honestly and still believe’ or various other permutations that are meant to couch the idea that your position is unsupportable in the light of clear interpretation. In other words, the veiled inference is that theological presuppositions have colored your interpretation of the text and if you would put them aside and engage an honest reading of the text, you would certainly see the validity of the opposing position. Let’s see if that’s a valid argument…

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”  (Jn 6:37–40)

A Text Without a Context May Be a Pretext

We closed our discussion yesterday with a brief discussion of the necessity for recognizing context in interpreting biblical texts. In all cases, we want to avoid the interpretive error of proof texting which, unfortunately, has become a substitute for sound exegesis. In our pursuit of an honest reading, let’s have a look at the context in which this passage occurs, starting from the immediate and moving outward.

Continue reading “Who’s Up (again) for An Honest Reading? John 6:37-40”

Who’s Up for An Honest Reading? John 6:37-40

image Theological discussion in various venues often pits one position of belief against its opposites. Supporters of one position or another like to issue proposition statements of the form ‘If they would give _____ an honest reading’, ‘once I gave ______ an honest reading’,’ you can’t read _________ honestly and still believe’ or various other permutations that are meant to couch the idea that your position is unsupportable in the light of clear interpretation. In other words, the veiled inference is that theological presuppositions have colored your interpretation of the text and if you would put them aside and engage an honest reading of the text, you would certainly see the validity of the opposing position. Let’s see if that’s a valid argument…

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”  (Jn 6:37–40)

Given the earlier promise of Jesus recorded by the Evangelist John in 3:16-17, the power of the good news that brought many to believe in Samaria recorded in 4:39, and his repetition of the earlier promise for any who believe spoken in 5:24, an honest reading of this passage leads the reader to two conclusions.

Continue reading “Who’s Up for An Honest Reading? John 6:37-40”

Psalm 7 – Acquit Me O Lord

The psalmist expresses his innocence against all charges in this prayer by casting his fate completely into the hands of the Lord. We are not told what the charges are, but they must rise above the level of even human judgment. David cries out his appeal;

O Lord my God, I take refuge in you; save and deliver me from all who pursue me, or they will tear me like a lion and rip me to pieces with no one to rescue me.

O Lord my God, if I have done this and there is guilt on my hands – if I have done evil to him who is at peace with me or without cause have robbed my foe – then let my enemy pursue and overtake me; let him trample my life to the ground and make me sleep in the dust. (vv 1-5)

Only the pure of heart can make this bargain for we who approach the throne must know that God searches our hearts and knows what a human judge could not decipher without proof. This becomes even more critical if we follow the psalmist in crying out for satisfaction in judgment against our accuser.

O righteous God, who searches minds and hearts, bring to an end the violence of the wicked and make the righteous secure. (v 9)

Before this becomes our prayer, we too must walk the path of light. If any portion of us remains in the shadows we will be tempted to hypocrisy in accusing others of similar guilt. The Spirit searches us day and night and, if we listen, will exert a pull to us out of the dark and convict us when we choose to stay. We are thankful for the imputed righteousness that we have received as believers but our task is to be transformed so that we reflect to a higher and higher degree the source of the righteousness.

I will give thanks to the Lord because of his righteousness and will sing praise to the name of the Lord Most High. (v 17)

Leaving the past behind

Last night as our family gathered to study the word we looked at one of my favorite passages of encouragement, Philippians 3. There are many verses that are especially meaningful in this passage but the two that really caught my attention last night were 3:13 – 14:

Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.

I am confronted by Paul’s model (and I’m sure I’m not alone) in forgetting what is behind, good or bad. Putting the past behind in return for the newly generated hope in what lies ahead should be an easy thing given the overwhelming greatness of our destination. A newly reborn heart that holds nothing but promise can be stubborn though. I don’t have a problem trading what I thought was really great about my life before Christ renewed me for a different but greater life now. My struggle lies in releasing old injuries, real or supposed, and moving forward.

Why is this such a challenge? Do we hang on to a grudge because we still lack sufficient faith to trust that God works all challenges for good? This might be a partial explanation. Some human notion of fairness pervades our lives and if we interpret an action to have wronged us, our hearts cry out for reprisal in some form. Our souls are turned inside out though and we being forgiven creations are to be forgiving creations. Do we hold on to hurts because it gives us an excuse for our own hurtful behavior? This could also be a remnant of our old being, something to be gotten rid of as we mature. The trouble is the difficulty in doing so.

Perhaps today, as the sun begins to brighten the eastern horizon, I can leave the past behind and commit fully to moving on towards the prize for which God redeemed me. I can only pray.

The Dispensational Perspective on Sanctification

Does the dispensational believer hold a unique view of sanctification that differs from those we have examined thus far? Not particularly. For those not familiar with Dispensational theology, it is an interpretive system that separates the interaction of God and His creation into various economies or ‘ages’. In each of the ages, God placed man under a specific trust, the periods delineated by major crisis events. The system maintains that there is a thread of unity that weaves through the Scriptures and proclaims the glory of God. These theologians arrive at this system by a consistently literal interpretation of the Bible.

As with any theological discussion, we must remember that within any group there are a variety of view, and within Dispensationalists it is no different. Many hold a view of Sanctification that is consistently Reformed in its definition. It is seen in two parts, a positional change occurring at the moment of justification and continuing progressively through the life of the believer by the Grace of God. Unique to the Dispensational view is an idea often credited to theologian Lewis Perry Chafer in which the believer’s sanctification is viewed through the filter of their two natures. The progressive sanctification occurs as the believer yields to the work of the Holy Spirit in their lives. This progressive action is separated from the initial justification, requiring a separate act of faith for its initiation.

This view of humankind and its two natures has its roots in Augustinian thought. Used in discussing sanctification, it is presumed to explain why the Christian continues to sin after their justification by God. Moreover, if this powerful influence remains in humankind, how much sanctification can be reasonably be assumed? The old nature, referred to as the ‘flesh’ is not eradicated by the new birth; it exists side-by-side with new nature that is desirous of holiness. As Charles Ryrie succinctly describes,

The moment one accepts Jesus Christ as his personal Savior he becomes a new creation (2 Cor 5:17). The life of God within him begets a new nature which remains with him along with the old as long as he lives. Understanding the presence, position and relationship of the old and new within the life of a believer is essential to experiencing a wholesome and balanced spiritual life. [Balancing the Christian Life, Ryrie]

He argues against the use of nature to visualize two men living side by side as this give opportunity to assign blame for one’s sinful behavior to ‘the little man’ that lives inside of the new creation. Ryrie instead recommends that the word nature be replaced by capacity.  In doing so, we see that despite our new birth, we retain the capacity for sin. The goal of sanctification then is to reduce this capacity by a commensurate increase in one’s capacity for righteousness. The regeneration and new birth leads us to another important concept in understanding Dispensation sanctification and that is the filling of the Holy Spirit. Regeneration coincides with the baptism in the Holy Spirit for the Dispensationalist and it is not seen as a subsequent crisis event. The filling of the Holy Spirit is altogether a separate matter.

In this perspective, all Christians are regenerated, baptized, and indwelt by the Holy Spirit but not all Christians are filled with the Spirit. This vital concept is the explanation for the wide difference in the spiritual power and experience exhibited by the members of the Church. The Dispensationalist states that the infilling of the Spirit, the power for all ministry and the source of sanctification of the believer is a work of God subsequent to the regeneration. It occurs repeatedly throughout the life of the Saint and is the source of fruitfulness. Pointing to Eph 5:18,

Do not get drunk on wind, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.

leads back to the twin capacities suffered by man. Just as wine changes ones capacity to act, the infilling of the Spirit changes one’s capacity and enables him or her to fulfill the will of God. Putting the verse to the grammatical test, it is well known that the verb “be filled” is in the present tense, giving it the meaning to “keep on being filled.”  This filling is not automatic however. The believer must be fully surrendered to the Holy Spirit in order to receive these fresh infusions, making progress in sanctification conditional and sometimes halting.  (Here the Dispensationalist departs from their generally Calvinistic view to realize that human will affects plays a role in this process of the Sovereign God. They would not go so far as to commend Arminian theology but rather, they refer to this a more moderate Calvinism.)

Conclusion

Dispensational sanctification views the process as a twofold occurrence in the life of the Christian. It is at once positional, placing the sinful human being into a righteous relationship with God and progressive, changing the new creature over the span of their life. There is no perfection in this life with that event only occurring when the believer moves into the next life in the presence of the Lord. Uniquely Dispensational is the view that one must act a second time in faith to initiate this progressive pattern of change.

The Pentecostal Perspective on Sanctification

Summarizing the Pentecostal doctrine on sanctification is either very easy or extraordinarily complex. The reason for this is the wide range of Christians that congregate under this umbrella and the corresponding wide range of application for this important aspect of the believer’s life. The doctrinal range extends from the very conservative two step positional-progressive sanctification to holiness as a second work of grace to be followed by baptism in the Holy Spirit.

Myer Pearlman (Knowing the Doctrines) provides the most general definition of the Pentecostal doctrine as including separation from sin and the world and dedication or consecration to the fellowship and service of God through Christ. This may translate into different practices among the believer groups; some will abstain from ‘wordly’ thing (e.g. tobacco, drink, short dresses) while others interpret this more liberally as simply the search for holiness according to specific biblical standards. In general however, the Pentecostal observes sanctification as occurring in the three familiar events. It is instantaneous at the moment of belief, where the new Christian is immediately set apart from sin. Sanctification is progressive as well, continuing throughout the term of one’s life as we are transformed into the likeness of Christ. Finally, using a term that can have a variety of definitions, there is entire sanctification. This final state is almost universally seen as occurring only at glorification when the believer passes into the immediate presence of the Lord.

Progressive sanctification is viewed as a tri-cooperative effort. Our progress comes through the work of the Holy Spirit, our cooperation as we surrender to His work, and through the Word of God (John 17:17). The Word of truth comes alive only through the intervention of the Spirit as He interprets for each believer how that truth applies to our lives. All of this combines to attain a maturity that God desires for us, continuing in this process until we return to our heavenly home.

Controversy arises when the doctrine of Baptism in the Spirit enters the discussion. Many of the Oneness (Jesus Only) Pentecostals take the extreme position that one cannot be saved (thus be sanctified) until receiving the baptism in the spirit and giving evidence through the gift of tongues. Trinitarian Pentecostals view the Baptism as a secondary event subsequent to regeneration. The Assemblies of God for example, sees the progressive sanctification and the visible change in their life as evidence of the infilling of the Spirit.

Conclusion

As stated in the initial paragraph, there is a wide range of belief in the Pentecostal congregations regarding sanctification and its application. For the most part, the combined instantaneous and progressive nature of this doctrine can be found in the statement of belief of nearly all of the churches. Ultimately, there is a common goal of holiness in the believer that is standard to all of the doctrines, something held in common with the Calvinist and Arminian doctrines as well.

The Wesleyan Perspective on Sanctification

Perhaps no doctrine of sanctification has undergone so many and varied permutations as the Wesleyan view. The Wesleyan’s view is best known by either of the two names given to the process: entire sanctification or Christian perfection. As Holiness churches have grown away from the Methodist beginnings of this theological idea, they have often radically transformed it to the point where an accurate definition is required to state what the idea is and is not. According to Wesley, sanctification is that part of God’s plan in which He renews the hearts of men and women in His own image. By His grace humanity would be turned from all willful sin and restored to the holiness that had been lost in the Fall. John Wesley’s words from a sermon serve to summarize:

Ye know that all religion which does not answer this end, all that stops short of this, the renewal of our soul in the image of God, after the likeness of Him that created it, is no other than a poor farce, and a mere mockery of God, to the destruction of our own soul…By nature ye are wholly corrupted. By grace ye shall be wholly renewed. [ Wesley, Works]

Far from a fabrication of Wesley’s intellect, he points to numerous passages of scripture in support of this doctrine, each one, he says, should bring the reader to a similar conclusion. Here are a pair of examples:

The Lord your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live. Deuteronomy 30:5-6

For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. Romans 8:3-4

Since we have these promises, dear friends, let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence for God. 2 Corinthians 7:1

Taken in whole, Wesley sees in these and other passages the promise of freedom from the dominion of sin for every Christian. He states that God’s grace is ever at work in the heart of the believer progressively sanctifying the entire life of the Christian releasing the heart to fully love God and others. It is critical to note the difference here between Wesley and some later Holiness doctrine. He views entire sanctification as a continuum of grace and response, God giving and the believing transforming, with no conclusion prior to glorification. In other words, while the believer increases in holiness, there is no point of perfection this side of heaven in which every scintilla of sin has been removed and the believer is perfect, as a nominal definition of the word would have the reader understand. Some Holiness movement doctrine has evolved to this conclusion but it never originated with Wesley.

Some are also tempted to link Wesleyan sanctification to works. This can perhaps derive from Wesley’s insistence that the Christian faith is experiential; it is not simply head knowledge in which one believes, it is also practice that is a product of the transformed heart. As the believer was further and further sanctified, the new zeal for loving the Lord and others would be demonstrated through the interactions of the Christian. These actions are not quantitative measures of belief but products of the transformative power of that belief.

Conclusion

Though it has been modified considerably through the years, linked by Charismatic believers to a second baptism, taken to ultimate measures by some Holiness doctrine, Wesley’s idea of entire sanctification is thoroughly rooted in the Bible and the Royal Law of Love. Jesus serves to summarize the objective of this doctrine in his words of Matthew 22:

Jesus replied: “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Mt 22:37-40

Despite the name that is often attributed to it – Christian Perfection – Wesley foresaw no moment in which we would be entirely free from the possibility of sinning, only that our love of God and others would lessen our desire.

The Calvinist Perspective on Sanctification

Sanctification as viewed by historical Calvinists can be summarized quite simply: Putting off the Old and putting on the New Man. As voiced by the preeminent American Calvinist Charles Hodge:

Such being the foundation of the Scriptural representations concerning sanctification, its nature is thereby determined. As all men since the fall are in a state of sin, not only sinners because guilty of specific acts of transgression, but also as depraved, their nature perverted and corrupted, regeneration is the infusion of a new principle of life in this corrupt nature. It is leaven introduced to diffuse its influence gradually through the whole mass. Sanctification, therefore, consists in two things: first, the removing more and more the principles of evil still infecting our nature, and destroying their power; and secondly, the growth of the principle of spiritual life until it controls the thoughts, feelings, and acts, and brings the soul into conformity to the image of Christ. (Hodge, Systematic theology.)

This definition of sanctification emphasizes the progressive nature of the process inherent in the Calvinist doctrine. [ It should be noted that sanctification as discussed here is less a Calvinist only perspective and can be more correctly term Reformed, as many Arminian theologians would agree with the tenets presented.] Calvin himself agrees with the sequence of Christian event placing it after justification and prior to the perfection of glorification.

The reformed picture of the process is that of a progressive increase in the believer’s holiness replacing the inherited corruption that marks all of humanity. This progress continues from the moment of regeneration until the believer returns home to the Lord, rarely without struggles and temporary setbacks. An important distinctive between Calvinists and Arminians (though by no means should it be considered universal to their doctrines) is the idea of perfectionism. The idea that a believer can become perfect, that is completely without sin, in this life is not held within general Calvinist doctrine. Two points in scripture support this postion:

If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives. (1 Jn 1:8-10).

And Paul’s well known discussion of our struggles:

What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from law, sin is dead. Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death. So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.

Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it produced death in me through what was good, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful.

We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin. (Rom 7:7-8:1)

Conclusion

The view of sanctification as a lifelong process through which the Christian will be gradually transformed in holiness, steadily moving in image towards the likeness of our Savior Jesus Christ. It is generally accepted that perfection in holiness will not be achieved until the moment of glorification in the Lord’s presence. This is representative of the majority view of the Protestant Church (Calvinist and Arminian together) and finds it way into the belief systems of most identifying as Christians.

Being Set Apart: Sanctification

Our recent exploration of the variety of views that Christians hold regarding eternal security found that the topic of sanctification arose in many of those discussions. The Christian is led to wonder, when evaluating the different views, whether sanctification is a one time event, a lifelong process, or simultaneously both. I’m going to move on with this post into a series on the variety of Christian views on this topic. We’ll start today by defining the idea before branching out to see how it is viewed in different theological systems.

In its broadest meaning, sanctification is the process by which a person (or another object of the process) is brought into relationship with or attains the likeness of the holy. In the case of a Christian, our goal is to become more Christ-like while in the case of an object– an altar, a sacrifice –the process makes the object appropriate for the presence of God. Sanctification has three aspects that help us to divide our study and comparison.

  1. Sanctification is Positional: The first aspect of sanctification indicates that, as believers who have placed their full faith in Christ and His redeeming work, we are set apart by God and named as saints. It will be important to note theologically the differences between justification and sanctification.
    2. Justification Sanctification
    Legal standing Internal condition
    Once for all time Continuous through life
    Entirely God’s work We cooperate
    Perfect in this life Not perfect in this life
    The same in all Christians Greater in some than in others

    *Grudem, Systematic Theology

  2. Sanctification is Experiential: The second aspect begins with the first; being set apart as holy, our lives are increasingly transformed as we shed our old ways and take on the new of image of our savior. Sanctification viewed as a process finds the Christian gradually ( and not without possible setbacks ) becoming further and further set apart from others in the world who have not trusted Christ.
  3. Sanctification is the Ultimate Condition: This future aspect of sanctification points to the day in which the Christian will be the beneficiary of the final transformation into the full likeness of Christ.

One of the most important components of our exploration of the variety of ideas about sanctification is the extent of human cooperation with the work of God in the process. It is important to ask first if any cooperative action of human and divine threatens the ultimate security of the believer, that is, is failure to attain a specific level of holiness a possible condition by which salvation may be lost. To lean to one side is to add an impediment to the Christian’s assurance as we worry and fret over what infractions might cause the ultimate loss. On the other hand, to lean the other way and to place the entire process on God’s shoulders is to invite a passivity on the part of the Christian with regard to the steady improvement in their state of holiness.

We conclude our introduction with the words of St. Paul:

In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.  (Romans 6:11-14)