Theology – Page 7 – LOVE | ACCEPT

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.

Scot Says I’m Conservative

I took the McKnight Hermeneutics survey and scored 51 (despite my Egalitarian answer) which places me in the Conservative Bible reader category. From Leadership Today this means that I am ( !right! )

First, the conservative hermeneutic group scores 52 or lower. The strength of this view is its emphasis on the authority, ongoing and normative authority, of all of Scripture. It tends to operate with the line many of us learned in Sunday school: “If the Bible says it, that settles it.” Such persons let the Bible challenge them with full force. Literal readings lead to rather literal applications. Most of the time.

The problem, of course, is that very few people are completely consistent here. At times one suspects something other than strict interpretation is going on when the conservative is willing to appeal to history to suspend the commandment to observe a Saturday Sabbath, but does not to appeal to history on other issues (e.g., capital punishment or homosexuality).

This is an interesting exercise and it returned to me the results that I expected. Where do you fall?

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.

Critiquing the Calvinist Critic

How an author treats the comments posted in response to something they have written tells the reader quite a bit about the strength of their convictions. In a dynamic forum such as a blog, one should be prepared to defend what has been written. If I voice an opinion or state something as fact, readers are free to disagree, point out the flaws in my thinking, correct what I interpret as fact, and generally call me to task if there are damages that result from my words. The comments tool that appears at the bottom of most blog postings gives the readers an opportunity to immediately make their thoughts known, not only to myself but to all of the others who might read the same piece. Blog software generally allows for a ‘moderation’ setting, giving the author the chance to review the comments before he or she displays them. Often, this is for the purposes of filtering the language, etc. so as to maintain a predetermined level of civility in the discourse. Occasionally, it is used to hide from opinions different than yours, to shield the weakness of your position from the buffeting of opposing arguments and facts. On most issues, we could dismiss this weakness as simple cowardice and not be too concerned with reading that writer again, but when the eternal destiny of the human soul is the topic being discussed, it is too important to let pass.

Recently I came across this piece, ‘Calvinism Analogy’ by ~~REDACTED~~ on her blog. I began reading with interest as a theologian but quickly saw the tenor of the post when she casually refers to Arminian believers as “duped” and “self-deceived”. Her exact words are:

Calvinism is a theological expression describing those who believe man, by his own “free” will, is not able to sincerely “accept Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and savior” and to confess Him as Lord. People who are duped in this way are called Arminians. The reason self-deception happens is because human nature is corrupted with pride and Arminian theology complements this.

The factual error here is simple but important: the assumption is that Arminian theology does not account for the total depravity of man [which of course it does] and the necessity of the sovereign grace of God [again, which it does]. Whether through malicious intent or ignorance of the facts, Ms. ~~REDACTED~~ sets up a straw man argument to support her attempt at analogy. She goes on to point out that Arminians are further guilty of misinterpreting the word ‘all’ and the ‘world’ throughout the Bible. Most of you who study theology are familiar with the Calvinist/Arminian arguments on these words so you already know the direction that her thoughts take.

She continues then, after presenting these incorrect arguments in favor of the Calvinist position, to give us her analogy:

I sometimes equate salvation to be a bit like we’re dogs at the pound awaiting our death sentence. God is the dog lover looking to adopt. He decides what dogs He wants, goes home to prepare a place for them, and then comes back to bring them home. I know it’s not quite like that (especially since God elects His children before they’ve even been conceived), but still in all, it describes love. Dog lovers don’t adopt every single dog that has ever been born and/or is alive; but yet one can still be a lover of dogs even if he never adopts more than just one dog.

Here is where Ms. ~~REDACTED~~ thoughts really run into trouble. Her scenario positions the dogs in the pound as though they were magically created or simply the products of biological interaction between other dogs. God, in her mind, is this distant observer of the kennel, graciously coming in and granting freedom to one or two of the creatures while leaving the rest to their destiny. The problem here is that God is not a distant observer but he is intimately involved in the creation of the creatures:

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. (Psalm 139:13)

“Your hands shaped me and made me.

Will you now turn and destroy me?

Remember that you molded me like clay.

Will you now turn me to dust again?

Did you not pour me out like milk

and curdle me like cheese,

clothe me with skin and flesh

and knit me together with bones and sinews?

You gave me life and showed me kindness,

and in your providence watched over my spirit. (Job 10:8-12).

Her analogy of the Calvinist supralapsarian position is better voiced (using the same language) portraying God as the breeder of the dogs. He purposely creates many dogs, some intentionally created for eternal torment and destruction while some are adopted and saved. Not only did he create them, He continues to create them centuries after the original genetic sin that infected their parents occurred.

What is most troubling about this posting is the not inaccuracy of the arguments (you can read similar threads every day) or the poorly constructed analogy (for which the author claims to have been praised) but the fact that when her facts and illustrations are challenged theologically she refused to engage. A lovingly worded response was posted in the comments of her blog asking for Scriptural and textual support to the various incorrect assertions made in her writing and gently providing an alternative view on her analogy which fell into “awaiting moderation” limbo. Apparently unwilling to support her thoughts are address the Scriptures, the author chose to simply delete the comment as thought it never happened, thereby cementing her notions as correct and worthy of praise.

Teaching about God and His ways is a risky endeavor and not one to be taken lightly like this (“Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.”) If you think that I have erred in discussing ideas that have eternal importance, I expect that you will correct me and likewise others who presume to teach should also stand ready to be challenged. The souls of men and women are at stake in these types of discussions as they read them and accept the ideas as fact and simply having your feelings hurt by a theological challenge is not an acceptable reason to avoid engagement. Blog authors are free to run their world however they like, but to speak of about God is another dimension altogether.

Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort toe keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. (Eph 4:2-3)

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.

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.

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

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.
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)

Once Saved, Always Saved

In the course of researching the topic of eternal security, one of the books I read was R.T. Kendall’s Once Saved, Always Saved. Kendall takes a unique position in the spectrum of opinion on this subject, a hybrid theological stance that comes to the conclusion indicated by the title. Once a Christian has been truly saved, he or she remains saved, unable through their own efforts or as a result of their behaviors to reverse this state. His pastoral concern is not focused on proving the truth of this doctrine as much as he is providing assurance of salvation to his congregation and his readers. In this effort he succeeds. Whether or not he makes his theological point requires further study and consideration because the chapters are based on sermons, not extensive theological arguments. There is rapid fire proof-texting that is often assembled into sentences in order to support a point and one must disassemble the grammar and examine each verse/passage in its context to ensure that it says what the pastor says it does.

Kendall emphasizes two requirements of salvation: 1) belief in Jesus Christ and His work and 2) the confession of His lordship. This is enacted through a ‘heart’ belief (as opposed to simple mental assent) in the resurrection followed by the act of confession of Jesus as Lord. It is people who are deficient in one or both of these conditions, whether they call themselves Christians or not, who are at danger of a false assumption of security. Though they may label themselves and appear to be Christians, without meeting these conditions, they have no salvation. On the other hand, if the Christian has met these conditions, Pastor Kendall finds not scriptures that threaten their eventual salvation.

When he examines the scriptures that appear to point to insecurity, Kendall’s view is that these verse and passages point to a loss of inheritance rather than salvation. This inheritance is revealed as reward in eternity. Thus, Christians who backslide are forfeiting their eventual reward but not their salvation. They may arrive in heaven and be secure there for eternity but find themselves devoid of reward as a result of their continued sinfulness while still in the world. God does not take a hands-off approach to those who move against the plan of holiness however. He actively pursues and chastens His children in order to continue their sanctification and gain the reward that He wants to award to them. When the heart hardens so that the voice of God is no longer heard is when the Christian’s assurance should falter.

Kendall presents a doctrine of assurance that appears to seek the center of the theological positions we looked at earlier. He does not allow for the salvation of God to be in any way conditional but he makes the case against Antinomianism, saying that our sin do have an affect into eternity that we should pay careful attention to.

The Year of Immanuel

The name Immanuel is familiar to almost all Christians, though it appears infrequently in the Bible. We first encounter the name in Isaiah 7:14, most recently heard as a part of the Advent readings:

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign; The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. (Isa 7:14)

Here we are generally provided with an explanatory note that the name given is actually a combination of words, important ideas, that spell out God is With Us. The fact that the young women will name her child so is either an expression of faith in the face of adversity or a prayer for mercy and help (God Be With Us). Of the coming of our savior satisfies this sign as Jesus becomes one of us and is with us. Is this ideal just a sentiment of is it a theological fact that remains true today? Theologically, God is with us as believers in the Holy Spirit but in a greater sense, God the Father is present with us intimately every moment of every day. Our response to this promise and its reality to large numbers of people is often quite different.

Many times we are guilty of living as though the Father was distant in heaven, tabulating our behavior from afar, listening to our prayers but not present. We do not consider His immediacy when we sin and we fail to acknowledge his presence surrounding those we do not minister too. Would we bypass the homeless man sprawled out on the sidewalk if the Father appeared as a specter, beckoning us to polish the imago dei for a fellow person? Would we casually continue our bigotry, divisive theological wars, oppression of gifted women, et. al. if we sensed that truly God was with us?

God with us is a profound theological truth that has many implications for our lives and ministry in our current day. It is our call to make it clear to the world at large that not only is God alongside and around us, but as Christian believers, He is in us! We live without condemnation for our past sins and we are empowered to turn from our daily temptation. We can walk into any situation as the Spirit leads without fear — God Is With Us. Why then, don’t we live this truth out in such a meaningful way that we change the world radically so that it nearly shimmers with kingdom values?

God with us has implications for our personal piety as well. Often we see the walls around us as come kind of shield between the God who is with us but not near us. If we truly sensed the presence of God, how would our pursuit of personal holiness be affected? Would we take sin more seriously? Would our devotion to personal and constant worship increase? Would we know in the depths our hearts that God is Truly With Us?

This can be our year of Immanuel, a year of radical change in ministry and a monumental transformation in holiness. I, for one, will be aligning my ministry with the burdens that God has placed on my heart. My pursuit of holiness will be an increased priority. God is With Me is going to be the most profound theological truth that I will pursue this year.

Join me.

Eternal Security: The Wesleyan View

To understand Wesley and the doctrines and theology that bear his name, one must keep in mind that in all things, John Wesley is a practical theologian. That is, he is concerned not with theology and the lofty scholastic ruminations that it often devolves into but rather, theology as it affects you and I in our daily life as followers of Christ. His order of salvation does not have the immediacy of the Calvinist perspective; it is a justification in which Christ’s righteousness is immediately imputed to the believer giving them a forensic status as ‘forgiven’ followed by a lifetime of sanctification, a full salvation measured by perfection of love and obedience. Faith, teaches Wesley, is not the cause of salvation but the condition of receiving it. Our faith does not save us, but we are saved only by Christ, in whom we have faith. (Wynkoop, Wesleyan-Arminian Theology)

To adhere to Wesleyan Christianity is to devote oneself to a life of obedience and ever increasing love for God and fellow man. To be sure, there will be moments in which both love and obedience falter, but the Spirit provides the impetus and strength to restore both and continue along the path of holiness. This continuance of the process of sanctification is rooted in continued faith in Christ. It is at those moments where one turns from the faith in Christ, that the believer is in danger of losing his or her salvation. It is important to note the logical connection between the conditional nature of the Wesleyan receipt of justification (when a human agent responds to God’s prevenient grace and accepts the gift of salvation) and its conditional security. If this same human agent should turn from this grace and reject the gift in favor of returning to their unregenerate life, the salvation status is lost. Wesley believed, given his high view of a merciful, grace-giving God, that people who found themselves in this state could remedy the situation by a return to repentance and belief.

In Wesley’s piece, ‘A Call to Backsliders’ he looks to the warning passages of Heb 6:4-6, 1 Tim 1:19-20, and 2 Pet 2:20 – 22 and sees that even these dire warnings could be repaired. They must return to the saving faith that they once held and produce the repentance of their sins to be restored. Does Wesley ever see a permanent loss of salvation? Certainly; men will turn away from Christ without any further desire to be restored. Apostasy is a very real possibility for the Wesleyan. Though humankind may fall from grace, we never fall beyond grace. The Spirit will not abandon the believer but may be silenced by an ever harder heart.

Summary

There is an expected similarity between the Arminian and Wesleyan positions as they both root in the conditional nature of salvation and the subsequent conditional nature of security. Where the classical Arminian and the Wesleyan depart ways on this topic is in the possibility of remediation when one has apostatized. The Arminian sees this condition as a ‘shipwrecked faith’, a condition in which there is no hope of reassembling the faith again and thus, all is lost. Wesley’s theology of love built around a God of mercy and grace saw this type of permanent apostasy as a possibility but also saw that the mercy of his God would allow time and time again for the sinner to return to the altar, seeking forgiveness and a restoration of his righteousness.