On-going Sanctification

Sanctification

Definitive or positional sanctification: 1 Cor 1:2 & 6:11. Is this all there is to sanctification? Why does this matter?

There are some Christians who teach that saints are totally depraved, with no difference in our being than before we were redeemed. Some of these seem genuinely concerned that we do not hold to infusion of grace into our flesh; and that is a legitimate concern. There are others who think positional sanctification (which is ours when we are born from above) is all there is. Some of these seem genuinely concerned about people who think on-going or progressive sanctification is the perfection of the flesh – as the personal holiness movement teaches. The truth is on the narrow path the runs between these two ditches.

In the first place, it's not our flesh that has been made new by our new life in Christ. It's our soul that has been made alive. The soul of the unregenerate is dead - unable to move his flesh in a way pleasing to God. The saint has a soul that is alive to God, with the Spirit of God willing and making him able to do things that ARE pleasing to God (Phil 2:13). This is what I think we are taught in various places, including Romans 12:1-2 (HCSB) Therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, I urge you to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God; this is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may discern what is the good, pleasing, and perfect will of God.

Note this: the way we avoid being conformed to this age is by being transformed by the renewing of our minds. The soul of the saint has been translated from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of His glorious light (Col 1:13) and we are seated with Christ in the heavenlies (Eph 2:6). Obviously this is not speaking about our physical being, but our spiritual being.

It should also be obvious that our mind, which is part and parcel of our soul, controls our thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. We are not told that our flesh gets better with time, but we are told to control our thoughts, words, and deeds; we are not to walk as reprobates do, but as children of God:

Ephesians 5:6-11 (HCSB) Let no one deceive you with empty arguments, for God’s wrath is coming on the disobedient because of these things. Therefore, do not become their partners. For you were once darkness, but now ⌊you are⌋ light in the Lord. Walk as children of light— for the fruit of the light ⌊results⌋ in all goodness, righteousness, and truth— discerning what is pleasing to the Lord. Don’t participate in the fruitless works of darkness, but instead expose them.

Did you notice: a command to walk as children of light, which will bear fruit of that light which will reveal itself in goodness, righteousness, and truth – which means we can discern what’s pleasing to the Lord. Why would He give us such discernment if we have NO ability to influence our thoughts, words, and deeds? Why tell us NOT to take part in works of darkness if we are depraved and unable to say no to sin?

None of us will be without sin while we inhabit these bodies of death; but none who have been born from above by the Spirit of God are without a Helper who wills and equips us to do that which is pleasing to Him. We have an Intercessor who will make a way of escape (1 Cor 10:13) so that sin will not have dominion over us, but allow us to run away from it, as Joseph did so long ago. This is the consistent teaching of Scripture.

Romans 6:16-23 (HCSB) Don’t you know that if you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of that one you obey—either of sin leading to death or of obedience leading to righteousness?  But thank God that, although you used to be slaves of sin, you obeyed from the heart that pattern of teaching you were transferred to, and having been liberated from sin, you became enslaved to righteousness.  I am using a human analogy because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you offered the parts of yourselves as slaves to moral impurity, and to greater and greater lawlessness, so now offer them as slaves to righteousness, which results in sanctification.  For when you were slaves of sin, you were free from allegiance to righteousness. So what fruit was produced then from the things you are now ashamed of? For the end of those things is death. But now, since you have been liberated from sin and have become enslaved to God, you have your fruit, which results in sanctification—and the end is eternal life!  For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

That transforming renewal of our minds works its way out in our patterns of what we think, what we speak, and what we do. We have been liberated from sin and enslaved to God, which results in sanctification – the end of which is eternal life. Sort of sounds like sanctification is one of those essential things God works in us that we cannot do without.

2 Corinthians 7:1 (HCSB) Therefore, dear friends, since we have such promises, let us cleanse ourselves from every impurity of the flesh and spirit, completing our sanctification in the fear of God.

We work at completing this sanctification by cleansing ourselves from impurities of the flesh and our fleshly desires. We should not think we can cleanse ourselves by our effort and we should not think God will sanctify us no matter what we do; both are ditches we need to avoid. It’s analogous to being so afraid of works righteousness that we do not tell people to repent and believe or being convinced we can save sinners by our clever words. Both are wrong thinking.

1 Thessalonians 4:3-8 (HCSB) For this is God’s will, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality, so that each of you knows how to control his own body in sanctification and honor, not with lustful desires, like the Gentiles who don’t know God. This means one must not transgress against and defraud his brother in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger of all these offenses, as we also previously told and warned you. For God has not called us to impurity but to sanctification. Therefore, the person who rejects this does not reject man, but God, who also gives you His Holy Spirit.

Here is a very specific area of sanctification – sexual purity. Ouch! But look what we’re told: God wills our sanctification so we will know and be able to control our bodies in an honorable way. How anyone can say we are no different from unregenerate people confounds me. There is no teaching of perfectionism, but there is clear teaching that we are to grow in grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus so we won’t be led astray by lawless people (2 Pet 3:17 & 18).

Read the qualifications of elders and deacons in 1 Tim 3 and see sanctified life described in action terms: sensible, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, not a drunkard, not quarrelsome or greedy. No different from depraved reprobates?

2 Thessalonians 2:13-15 (HCSB) But we must always thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God has chosen you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and through belief in the truth. He called you to this through our gospel, so that you might obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions you were taught, either by our message or by our letter.

We are chosen by God for salvation through sanctification. Not that we are sanctified and then saved, but that just as repentance and faith are separate but inseparable, so is salvation and sanctification. And this sanctification is the work of Spirit through the Word of Truth. And we finish this passage with the exhortation to behave rightly and think rightly, as taught by the apostolic records in Scripture. The Christian’s life IS DIFFERENT than the unregenerate’s life.

I have come to the conclusion that while justification (salvation, redemption) is monergistic, sanctification (perseverance, preservation) is not. But it’s not synergistic, either. That term conveys the notion that both elements or parties are required for the process to function. Even a casual read through the Bible will reveal the fact that God bids us to obey (Galatians 6:9) and enables to do so (Hebrews 13:20 & 21), He commands us to press on for the prize that will not tarnish and sustains us in the doing (Hebrews 12:1 & 2), and reminds us that apart from Him we do nothing (John 15:5). This is the essence of Augustine’s famous prayer that ignited the controversy with Pelagius: “God, command what you will, grant what you command.” The Christian will want to obey God and trust Him to bring it to completion. Yet He also works to conform us to His Son when we rebel and are not careful to walk as children of the light (1 Corinthians 5:9-13; Hebrews 12:3-11; James 1:2-4 & 12). Brothers, this should not be the case, we should not kick the goads; but it is comforting (and convicting) to embrace a God Who is not dependent on us!

So I conclude that God can work to sanctify us without our active participation, yet we cannot work towards growing in likeness to Christ without His active participation (John 15:5). We take 100% responsibility for the sin in our lives, we give God 100% of the credit for the good thoughts, words, and deeds we do. His Spirit in us works so that we pray effectively (Romans 8:26), without Him we can do nothing.

Sanctification. If it’s not part of your life, you need to examine yourself to see if you be in the faith (2 Cor 13:5). 

Genesis 26:18-35 When Others Draw Near

People draw near to us for many reasons - we must be wise in the ways of God to respond properly. 

In this passage, envious herdsmen draw near to Isaac, YHWH draw near to Isaac, the Philistine king draws near to Isaac, and Esau does likewise. How should we respond to these types of encounters?

Genesis 26:1-17; Like Father, Like Son.

Here's the message from Genesis 26:1-17; Like Father, Like Son.

The takeaway: we sin as we've been taught, we sin as we've learned on our own. We often fail to see sin for what it is: Rebellion against Holy God.

Sin and Law

This puzzles me.

So many properly recognize that the big problem with sin is not the various actions, but the nature of sin - rebellion against God.

So many who recognize that, fail to understand the same aspect about law.

What makes a law "moral" is not the content of the law or the actions prohibited by it, but the character of the One Who gave the law.

There is at least one religion that categorizes sin into several buckets. I guess it's the same logic that others use to categorize law into several buckets. Both are a way to reduce what God has revealed into something more manageable by man. 

Genesis 25:1-18 The Family

A look at the family as God designed it, from Genesis 25:1-18.

Natural man rebels against God and our culture is a classic example of this biblical truth.

We must not compromise.

Genesis 24:1-27 - The Servant

Abraham had just buried his wife. Isaac is near 40 years old and needs a wife. How will this old widower take care of his family? Who is this obscure man that is so trusted? What I hope to show this morning is the role and character of a godly servant, a man who foreshadows a greater Servant – the One who was a servant to us and calls us to be servants one to another.

 

The Body of Christ is not "the church"

The Body of Christ is not “the church”

Since YHWH began forming a people for Himself, how man perceives and describes God has been important. In the early post-apostolic years, heresies cropped up regarding the nature of God and the person of Christ. Today, it is settled orthodoxy within the Christian faith that God is a holy trinity and Christ is fully God and fully man.

The doctrine of the trinity was the reason for the Nicaean creed of 325. The Creed of Nicaea (A.D. 325), was written mainly to refute Arianism; the teaching that Jesus was not eternal, but created. The doctrine of the Holy Trinity was at the heart of the Creed of Nicaea. This creed was the product of what was called the First Ecumenical council of Nicaea, convened by Emperor Constantine. The council met to deal with the schism created by Arianism, an over-reaction to the heresy of Sabellius, who believed in a divine nomad which presented itself as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Arians saw the Son distinct from God entirely, claiming he was a creature having a beginning: "There was when he was not." The Son was God's first creation Sabellius taught, yet out of nothing and hence has preeminence over the rest of creation. Arianism was an early form of the heresy of Modalism, still favored and taught by One-ness Pentecostals.

The hypostatic union was the doctrine developed by two major creeds, in response to gross errors taught by men who denied Jesus was eternally God and fully man since His incarnation.

The First Council of Constantinople, (A.D. 381), modified the Creed of Nicaea by adding a phrase in support of the eternality and deity of Christ; refuting Apollinarism, which taught that Jesus had but one nature. Apollinaire taught that Jesus did not have a human spirit. His views were based on the platonic tripartite view of human nature. The council condemned this view in order to show that Christ, as truly human as well as truly God, could redeem the whole person.

The filioque clause (clarifying that the Holy Spirit proceeded from both the Father and the Son) is one of the major disagreements between the Eastern Orthodox religion and others which profess Christ. This creed is still recited by some Christians, and is still needed.

The Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451) met to resolve the Monophysite controversy, which Eutyches stirred up by denying the existence of two natures in Christ. The two natures of Jesus, fully man and fully God, is a mystery not fully revealed to nor comprehended by man. That we cannot fully understand something given to us in Scripture is no excuse to deny it. The Definition document issued by the council summarizes the Church's teaching on the natures of Christ, and rightly specified the scope of Mary being the "God-bearer" - only as regards Jesus' humanness. Even so, the dispute about the two natures of Jesus continued until The Second Council of Constantinople in 533.

There is another aspect of the nature of God that has not generated the interest that the trinity and hypostatic union have: the body of Christ.

Body of Christ is described in Scripture as “heavenly Jerusalem” (Galatians 4:26; Hebrews 12:22; and Revelations 21:9-27), “living stones … a spiritual house for a holy priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5); “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His possession” (1 Peter 2:9); “saints” and “faithful brothers” (Colossians 1:2). The list goes on; the point is the body of Christ, with its varied members all purchased by the Lord Jesus; and Christ is the head (Colossians 1:18).

We’ve been duped by the state-church into accepting “church” as the word describing the saints of the living God. The word "church" is not a translation of the Greek word, ekklesia; it’s not even a transliteration of that word. There does not appear to be a clear record of why “church” was chosen, nor of the meaning of this word. The first known use of this word in English Bibles is found in Wycliffe’s Bible, spelled “chirche.” His work was translated from the Latin Vulgate and we have no clear reason for his use of this word. English Bibles after Wycliff translated “ekklesia” as “congregation” – until the Geneva Bible, which gave us “church.”

The Greek word commonly presented as “church” is “ekklesia”. Strong’s Concordance defines “ekklesia” as “compound of <G1537> (ek) and a derivative of <G2564> (kaleo); a calling out, i.e. (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both), assembly, church.”

In Smith's Bible Dictionary from 1884, page 452, we read:

the derivation of the word 'church' is uncertain. It is found in the Teutonic and Slavonic languages and answers to the derivatives of ekklesia, which are naturally found in the romance languages and by foreign importation elsewhere. The word is generally said to be derived from the Greek kyriakos, meaning the lord's house. But the derivation has been too hastily assumed. It is probably associated with the Scottish kirk, the Latin circus/circulous, the Greek klukos, because the congregations were gathered in circles.

Ebenezer Cobham Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase and Fable of 1898 agrees:

The etymology of this word is generally assumed to be from the Greek, Kuriou oikos (house of God); but this is most improbable, as the word existed in all the Celtic dialects long before the introduction of Greek. No doubt the word means "a circle." The places of worship among the German and Celtic nations were always circular. (Welsh, cyrch, French, cirque; Scotch, kirk; Greek, kirk-os, etc.) Compare Anglo-Saxon circe, a church, with circol, a circle.

The first definition in Daniel Webster’s 1828 dictionary defines “church” as “A house consecrated to the worship of God, among Christians; the Lord's house. This seems to be the original meaning of the word.”

When work on the King James Bible began, the king provided 15 rules that the translators had to follow. Rule 3 is of particular interest to this topic:

3. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept; as the word church, not to be translated congregation, &c.

King James was separating from Rome, establishing his own state-church and translating “ekklesia” as “congregation” or “assembly” would have worked against the theology embraced by the state-church, providing us a clearer picture of what God was communicating. Ekklesia rendered as "congregation" or "assembly" shows we are talking about people, not places. Advocates of the state-church have a history of building geo-political empires with ostentatious buildings for their gatherings and sprinkling infants rather than baptizing disciples. Presbyterians equate Old Covenant Israel with the New Covenant saints, providing "cover" for having unconverted children as "junior" members of the local "church." Without the word "church" being properly interpreted as the called ones (or something similar), people can easily be led astray in believing a "church" is something other than the assembly of the redeemed – like a building. Missing completely the meaning intended by God.

As a bare word, “ekklesia” doesn’t describe the purpose for which people are gathered. In Act 7:37-38, Heb 2:11-12, and the gospel accounts (such as Matthew 18:17), “ekklesia” is used to describe God’s covenant people in the Mosaic Covenant community.

In Acts 19:21-41, ekklesia is used three times to refer to townsfolk in Ephesus, showing up in English as “assembly.”

In numerous passages, “ekklesia” refers to the saints, the redeemed in Christ, those translated from the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of His glorious light. And we see it English as “church.”

Do professing Christians grasp the meaning of “church” rightly? It’s common for people to talk about “going to church,” or “filling up the church,” or point out “look at that beautiful church!” These and many similar phrases betray a lack of understanding of “ekklesia.” The state-church has succeeded, we have largely lost sight of what constitutes the body of Christ.

Why does this all matter? The ekklesia of Christ is the people of God. Christ gave Himself for His sheep - all and each of them, whether they belong to a local congregation or are awaiting the resurrection of their bodies. He did not give Himself for any building. We who are still in our tabernacles of flesh are to love one another; in this way the world will know we are His disciples. This brotherly love within the local assembly is lost in most, as they have reduced worship to mere traditions and reduced biblical fellowship to a superficial "meet & greet" with an occasional meal. John would accuse us - how can you say you love God, Whom you cannot see, if you do not love the brother you can see? (1 John 4:20) I would add - how can you say you love your brothers and sisters in Christ if all you love are those far away, but not those with whom you rub up against and have disagreements? Jesus did not die only to provide eternal life for us; He also provided His Spirit to guide us in all truth, and in love for one another. We have been bought at a price by the One Who said:

John 15:12 (ESV) This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. John 15:17 (ESV) These things I command you, so that you will love one another.

After all, the Bible is all about the Lord Jesus and we ought to be, also. We rightly argue for and defend the Holy Trinity and the hypostatic union, even though these are difficult mysteries. We should no less careful or concerned about rightly and properly describing His Body. It’s not a building, it’s a redeemed people gathered into a local ekklesia.