| Author | Message | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 82 Registered: 11-2005 |
I have a question. How does justification and sanctification relate? I know we're justified by our faith through God's grace, and not by works. And I know that sanctification is a result of continuing on in faith (2 Peter 1:5-9). And from my new understanding, we are given the assurance of salvation through justification by faith. Having said that, how do you mesh that understanding with Hebrews 10:26, 27: "For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries." I'm confused. It seems as if our actions (continuing on in sin) can cause us to lose that justification status, but then if that were so, then it's an issue of works again. I don't really understand what we are judged according to. Under my new thinking, I had thought that at judgment, God would look at me (despite all of my MANY sins) and see Jesus' righteousness. But where does sanctification (developing a righteous and holy character) fit into that? Are we also judged according to our efforts towards sanctification? Does sanctification just come naturally to a Christ-follower? Or do we have to choose to daily strive towards it? What about when we fail at it? Or is it impossible to fail at it if we're in Christ? I guess my bottomline question is this: Justification results in sanctification, but does lack of sanctification cancel out the justification? This is what I get for watching/hearing an Adventist sermon today--I'm confused. I've been thinking about it all day, and the more I think about it, the more confusing it becomes. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3910 Registered: 12-2003  |
Grace, good question. The purpose of sanctification is quite different from what we were taught. First that warning in Hebrews is not addressing people who have surrendered to the new birth. Perhaps the best example of the sort of person this warning is for is Judas. He knew Jesus intimately and went out on the missionary journeys with the disciples, when they went two-by-two, healed, cast out demons, and preached the kingdom of God. Judas experienced the power of the Holy Spirit, but he did not submit His life to the claim of Jesus. The parable of the seeds in Matthew 13 tells of seeds that landed on rocky ground and on weedy ground. Plants grew, but they withered or were choked and died. They did not take root, or they were choked out by the cares of the world. The point is, many people are attracted to the gospel and give intellectual assent to it. They even function in the body of Christ, but they are not truly surrendered and converted. Wayne Grudem, in Bible Doctrines (and also his Systematic Theology) compares the people in the Hebrews warnings with the Pharisees in Matthew 12 who committed the unpardonable sin. He stressed that the unpardonable sin must include four conditions: 1) a clear knowledge of who Christ is, 2) knowledge that the Holy Spirit is working through him, 3) a willful rejection of these facts, and then 4) slanderously attributing the work of the Holy Spirit in Christ to theh power of Satan. I believe Grudem's matching the unpardonable sin with the Hebrews warnings is apt. The passage you quoted above clearly describes a sin from which there is no repentance. Jesus Himself told the Pharisees in Matthew 12 that "every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit wiill not be forgiven." The author of Hebrews is describing willful sin in the face of a clear knowledge of Jesus and of the Holy Spirit 's power connected with knowing and serving Christ. Here are some texts about sactification: "But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." 1 Cor 6:11 "I have written you quite boldlyÖbecause of the grace God gave me to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles with the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit." Romans 15:15-16 "They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. . For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified." John 17:16-19 Jesus speaking to Saul/Paul, "I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me." Acts 26:17-18 "To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christó" 1 Cor 1:2 "May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. the one who calls you is faithful and he will do it." 1 thess 5:23-24 "I thank my God every time I remember youÖbeing confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus." Phil 1:3, 6 The Bible speaks of two "kinds" of sanctification, often called "positional" and "progressive". When we accept Jesus with saving faith and receive the seal of the Holy Spiritó the new birth, we are justified, sanctified, and even glorified (see Romans 8:30). We are fully in Christ, and in God's eyes, we are perfect at that moment. That is positional sanctification. The Bible also exhorts us to live by the Spirit, to put away fleshly desires, etc. In fact, the Corinthian church had MANY problems, yet Paul called them sanctified (1 Cor 1:2). His letters, however, were exhorting them to holy living. This ongoing growth in the Spiritólearning to live by the Spirit (see Romans 8:1-15) continues until we die or the Lord returns, whichever happens first! This ongoing growth in holiness and submission to the Holy Spirit is "progressive" sanctification. The good news, though, is that even this growth is the work of God! (Phil 1:6). We are actively involved in making choices to yield to the Spirit or to succumb to the flesh, but our power to yield to the Spirit is IN HIM. We are fully sanctified positionally in God's evaluation when we are hidden in Christ. God looks at us in Christ and accounts us Perfect, Sanctified, Worthy, spotless, blameless, etc. Secure in our salvation, we continue growing in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit at work in us who is faithful NOT to leave us enslaved to sin. He systematically and persistently shows us the things in our lives He wants to heal and over which He wants us to become victorious in Him. He gives us the wisdom and the power to surrender our "stuff" to Him, and He gives us His power to become completely "set apart" (the real meaning of "sanctification") entirely for His service and His glory. All of sanctificationóboth positional and progressiveóis the work of God in Christ through the Holy Spirit. We are eternally secure when we are born from above. Once we are secure, the Holy Spirit gradually brings out minds and habits and tastes into alignment with the truth and reality of Jesus. He knows what we need to deal with, and He disciplines us (Hebrews 12:1-12) for our growth in holiness. Our "progressive sanctification" is related to the work and spiritual maturity which God gives us once we belong to Him. Does this help? Colleen | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 499 Registered: 7-2004  |
SDAism confuses and combines sanctification and justification. This is one of the fundamental errors in their gospel. Salvation by progressive sanctification teaches that if we cooperate sufficiently then God can make us into beings that are righteous and fit for heaven. The righteousness that qualifies us for heaven is that which is exhibited in our own lives. This is diametrically opposed to the Gospel of grace. That Christ's righteousness is freely credited to us in place of our own. My personal views on progressive sanctification differ slightly from what Colleen stated. I contend that progressive sanctification is more monergistic (it is God's work) than synergistic (it is our cooperation with God). But either way, the key message is that the degree of progressive sanctification attained in a person's life is not a determining factor of their salvation. That is obtained and secured in Jesus. | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1619 Registered: 3-2005 |
I agree Ric. Grace, you have asked a great question. The doctrine you heard taught by that SDA is what protestants and Catholics have been arguing for centuries. Does our standing with God, and the eternal verdict of JUSTIFIED! have anything to do with some standard of Christian living? The answer must be no, or we deny the good news of the gospel. This is the key concept which Martin Luther, and affirmed by John MacArthur, that must be the dividing line between true Christianity and false. This is the heart of the gospel--the doctrine of justification by faith alone. But, it is true, that if we are truly born of God, we are given new natures, and the desire to sin is monergistically removed as Ric pointed out. But it can also be said, that Justification does not make sanctification unnecessary. Because the book of Hebrews does say, without holiness, none will see the Lord. Sanctification--the fruit of justification--must never be confused with justification, but as Luther said, "the faith that justifies is never alone". Stan | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 83 Registered: 11-2005 |
Thanks everyone. That does help. Hearing Hebrews 10:26, 27 in the context of the SDA sermon made me just assume that those people described as having the "knowledge of truth" were born again Christians. That's what caused most of the confusion. After reading what you wrote Colleen, and re-reading the text, I don't know why I assumed that. I guess it's just my old Adventist thinking creeping in again. And, another thing that was clarifying was the two types of sanctification. I never heard the terms "positional" and "progressive" sanctification. I thought all sanctification was progressive. I remember my SDA Bible teacher having us memorize the definition: Sanctification is the work of a lifetime, it's the result of lifelong obedience. Is "positional sanctification" pretty much the same thing as justification just in a fast forward sense (as in God sees us as having been sanctified already and even glorified like you said Colleen)? In other words, in God's eyes, is it as if we've already become victorious in becoming holy? If I'm understanding it right, then it is REALLY different from SDA thinking. Actually, it's close, but not really. One view is that it's still an ongoing process where we don't know the final result yet, and the other view is we already know what the final result will be (although it's still an ongoing process) because our strength to overcome comes from being in Him, and with Him, we can't fail. Wow, that is pretty amazing. It's like being on the winning team. You can just enjoy playing, without having to constantly worry about the score. I think I get it!! Thanks! | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 84 Registered: 11-2005 |
If I'm understanding it right, then this changes my whole way of looking at things. Although I knew now and believed my salvation was secure because I have been born again, there is something about understanding that our whole Christian walk is spoken for in God too. He just doesn't own us, but He owns everything about us (our time, experience, attitude, etc.) God REALLY IS sovereign, because our whole experience is already planned out and a done deal. It's finalized, and He works in us to accomplish that. Wow, I can't get over that. I knew I was saved, but yet I still didn't really understand it being a done deal. This really impacts my understanding of God's sovereignty! Wow, I'm just in awe... I could go on and on about this. This is such a huge epiphany for me. | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1622 Registered: 3-2005 |
Grace, What a great epiphany! What a huge difference the Roman Catholic/SDA view of justification is vs. what Paul taught, and what was re-affirmed by Martin Luther. Here is a link to an article by Martin Luther on Justification you might like. www.presenttruthmag.com/archive/III/3-4.htm Also, there is a great book you must read, and that is Geoffrey Paxton's book "The shaking of Adventism". I will find a weblink so that you can download it for free on the internet. This book was a shocker to me when I found out SDA doctrine was identical to Catholic doctrine--and they have the mark of the Beast! Stan | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1623 Registered: 3-2005 |
Grace, I found the link on the same website posted above so you can read Paxton's book. This book probably had the singularly greatest influence to open my eyes as to why historical SDA taught a false gospel. www.presenttruthmag.com/7dayadventist/shaking/index.html Stan | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3913 Registered: 12-2003 |
Grace, I understand your epiphany. You've seen it correctly; all of our salvation and growth and sanctification are already DONE in God's eyes when we are in Christ, and our growth inside time is because of His Spirit in us. As Phil 1:6 says, He is faithful to complete what He begins in us. It doesn't say he's faithful to give us extra power to perfect ourselves; it says He's faithful to complete what He begins. It is overwhelming. This understanding is so close in WORDS to the Adventist understanding, but in reality and practice it is 180 degrees different. God is sovereign! Colleen | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1625 Registered: 3-2005 |
Wow, I just went back and read those Luther quotes above in that link--it is still just amazing, how profound he could be. "The Christian church could not last one hour if the article of justification is removed." "All who reject this doctrine are idolaters" Tonight on the White Horse Inn www.whitehorseinn.org I heard that a survey of pastors showed that 70% of pastors don't think this doctrine is important. This is why the evangelical church is becoming apostate as J. Vernon Mcghee predicted 30 years ago. The doctrine of the imputed righteousness of Christ is the message--without it there is no Christian church. Stan | ||
| Brian3 Registered user Username: Brian3 Post Number: 39 Registered: 8-2005 |
Wow! "The crux of the problem in modern Adventism lies in understanding the relation of justification and sanctification. It was their proper relationship which stood at the heart of the Reformation. No doubt those Adventists who insist that righteousness by faith means justification and sanctification do so out of a sincere desire to honor the law of God and avoid the antinomian pitfall. But it is equally true that those who have included sanctification in the article of righteousness by faith have done so against the better judgment of Paul and the Reformers. Further, inclusion has resulted in fusion. The height of this approach to righteousness by faith is found in the theology of H. E. Douglass and the Review and Herald leadership of the church. Here the gospel is equated with the believer. (Rome and much neo-Protestantismóe.g., Schleiermacheró have done the same thing.) This is the inevitable result of mixing justification and sanctification. In this theology the medium (the believer) is the message. The infinite qualitative distance between the God-man Saviour and those whom He saves is qualified so that there is only a quantitative difference. Instead of being the unique Saviour, Jesus becomes the "Model Man." Imitation of Christ swallows up faith in His God-man achievement as well as ethical conduct motivated by that achievement. Anyone with the slightest grasp of the Reformation gospel will not fail to see that Douglas' theology is more consistent with Rome than the Reformers." | ||
| Mrsbrian3 Registered user Username: Mrsbrian3 Post Number: 46 Registered: 8-2005 |
SBMom, In case you're interested, James McDonald (walkintheword.com) actually preached on this very verse (Hebrews 10:26,27) on this morning's broadcast. Kim | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1232 Registered: 10-2004  |
Grace, Actually, positional sanctification is what Jesus accomplished for us on the Cross, and is not just God looking forward to the end of an ongoing process. It has everything to do with Jesus Christ's once for all sacrifice and nothing to do with God's work in or through us (that would be "practical" or "progressive" sanctification). Positional sanctification refers to us being "set apart" to/for God and being made holy, by Christ's sacrifice on the Cross. "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (Hebrews 10:10 NASB.) "For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified." (Hebrews 10:14 NASB.) "Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God." (1 Corinthians 6:11 NASB.) The above verse also seems to refer to being born again--our dead spirits being raised to eternal life and connected to God, by the Holy Spirit. The following chapter from David Cloud's book (Avoiding the Snare of Seventh-day Adventism), may be helpful, especially the section towards the end entitled "Salvation is secure because sanctification has two parts": http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/avoiding/avoiding03.htm By the way, Hebrews 10:14 (quoted above) is proof that we can never lose our salvation--He has perfected us for all time! Regarding the last part of Hebrews 10, continue reading to the end of the chapter--especially take note of the last verse.  Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on May 08, 2006) | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1233 Registered: 10-2004 |
Just to clarify further (hopefully not confuse further ), when the SDAs say that we are saved by both justification and sanctification, they would be correct except for the fact that they are replacing "positional sanctification" with "practical sanctification." (And, of course, they also twist what practical santification actually is.) In other words, the Biblical truth is that we are saved by justification and positional sanctification. Practical sanctification is a result of having already been eternally saved. Jeremy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3918 Registered: 12-2003 |
Thanks for the clear explanation, Jeremy. Colleen | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2519 Registered: 3-2004  |
When I was in SDA schools the only words we used were "justification" and "sanctification". Even then I was confused by what each was. I really like the explanation of positional sanctification Jeremy did above. I have never heard these terms. Diana | ||
| Bmorgan Registered user Username: Bmorgan Post Number: 81 Registered: 7-2000 |
Jeremy, thanks for the link. I am posting some excerpts from two other links. You may want to read the whole thing for yourselves. Quite interesting! http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/whywalter1.htm http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/whywalter2.htm One error here is in Martinís use of the man-made term "cult." It can be defined in numerous ways. By Martinís definition, perhaps, Seventh-day Adventism was not a cult. By Dr. Hoekemaís definition, Seventh-day Adventism is a cult. Whether or not Seventh-day Adventism is a cult, though, is not as important as whether or not Seventh-day Adventism is faithful to the Bible and the New Testament faith. The warning of Romans 16:17 is to mark and separate from those "which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned." Paul does not say to mark and avoid those which cause divisions contrary to only some of the doctrines we have learned. The Seventh-day Adventist denomination teaches many doctrines that are contrary to those taught by the Apostles. Godís Word commands that we mark them as false teachers and separate from them. That is not what Walter Martin did, though. Walter Martinís chief error about Seventh-day Adventism was his refusal to practice biblical separation. He had a New Evangelical type ministry that focused on unity based on a lowest-common denominator of doctrine. This is why he also did not separate from the Roman Catholic Church. WALTER MARTIN CONTENDED THAT MODERN SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISM IS DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF ITS EARLIER DAYS. The truth is that Seventh-day Adventism today does not differ in any significant doctrinal way from the Seventh-day Adventism of Ellen Whiteís day, except that it presents its doctrines in a more subtle manner today. If the Seventh-day Adventist leaders were to change their major distinctive doctrines as outlined by Ellen White, they would be denying their prophetess and pulling the pillars from under themselves. The Adventist Church admits this in the following statement from one of their recent publications: "Since Mrs. White and the Adventist Church teach that their major doctrinal platform was finalized in their early days (and since the Adventist Church tells us that Mrs. White was an inspired prophetess), there is no need for re-evaluation of this group. A study of recent Seventh-day Adventist publications confirms this judgment, since they continue to teach the same heresies promulgated by Ellen White and other early Adventist leaders. As a group, the Seventh-day Adventists today are the same divisive heretics they have been from their origin. To deserve a re-evaluation and re-labeling, they would have to denounce and turn away from every one of their heresies, including the foundational heresy that Ellen White was a prophetess of God. Until such time as the Adventist Church denounces its heresies, Christians who follow the faith of the New Testament must mark avoid this group in obedience to Romans 16:17. On an individual basis, only those Adventists who reject the heretical distinctives of the Adventist Church and hold only to pure New Testament doctrine can properly be accepted as brethren. No doubt there are some genuinely saved people within the Adventist Church, but they are saved in spite of Adventism and not because of it. Even so, they are living in disobedience to Godís Word by being affiliated with an unscriptural organization. 2 Thessalonians 3:6 and 2 Timothy 2:24-26 are our guidelines for dealing with such people. "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us" (2 Thessalonians 3:6). "And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will" (2 Timothy 2:24-26). The Adventist denomination is the same heretical entity that was so plainly and firmly condemned by Bible-believing churches in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It is the Bible-believing churches that have changed. Popular evangelicalism today has become too blind to discern truth from error and too weak to condemn error when it is found. Just a few decades ago men such as A. Hoekema, John R. Rice, and M.R. DeHaan, who considered Seventh-day Adventism a dangerous false group, were in the overwhelming majority among those who professed to be evangelical Bible-believing preachers. This is not so today. Most major evangelical publishing houses, for example, will no longer publish material derogatory toward Adventism or Catholicism. It is not that the Adventist Church has moved closer to the Bible in the past 50 years, it is that the evangelicals have moved farther away from the Bible in that period. | ||
| Bmorgan Registered user Username: Bmorgan Post Number: 82 Registered: 7-2000 |
Sorry, I posted this on the wrong thread. |
