What About Progressive Sanctification?

Bible Highlighter said:

I disagree. The KJB actually refutes Calvinism and or Reformed thinking in many places. The NASB and ASV come from Westcott and Hort's corrupted Greek text like all Modern Translations. Their work was a departure from the Textus Receptus.



I don't see how this is in favor of Calvinism. They both say the same thing except the KJB includes the writer or other body of believers. Actually, Calvinists originally favored the Geneva Bible when coming over here to the States. In creation of the KJB: I believe God used two different groups of imperfect believers (despite their own wrong beliefs) to create a perfect work (i.e. the KJB). The king checked their work and they had to peer review each other's work in smaller teams or groups. The result in time of the KJB eventually led to the fruit of John Wesley (who rekindled the fires of revival for the teaching on Sanctification).

Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the KJV was largely influenced by the Geneva Bible. I admit it’s hard to say because there are many different stories about its translation but I have seen clear cases where the KJV does not have accurate translations from the Greek texts.

RickReads said:

Suggesting that Paul and Timothy might consider doing the things they were talking about in those passages was just too ridiculous of an assertion to comment on. Anything I would have to say about that would only insult you. I avoided commenting on that angle of your questions because I have nothing but contempt for it. Very useless question IMO.

Click to expand...

Paul’s statement to Timothy validates the possibility of it happening otherwise it is a useless statement. Not only that Paul also said “IF we endure with Him we will also reign with Him.” Which is another indication that they are capable of failing to endure otherwise there would be no “IF” in that statement.

RickReads said:

Suppose I am teaching a Sunday school class and I say, if I murder someone then I will go to prison.
The class might learn something from hearing it. It`s a big stretch to say it means I might commit a murder. That`s the kind of logic you are using. It just doesn`t work.

Click to expand...

That’s not the situation here. The situation is, is it possible for someone to lose their salvation. The question isn’t will you commit murder the question is are you capable of it. It’s the same situation with Paul and Timothy, it’s not a question of whether or not they will deny Christ it’s a question of we’re they capable of denying Christ. Paul is using a hypothetical situation as a warning to Timothy. If a believer is incapable of denying Christ and losing his salvation what’s the point of the message? There’s absolutely no point in that message if they are incapable of denying Christ. That statement would not be teaching anyone anything and would be completely pointless.

RickReads said:

I saw an original King James once, it was very old and belonged to a friend of mine. I could barely read it, the language was so different.

Click to expand...

Agreed it was written for another time/era for those of Elizabethan decent. We do not speak like this today which is why there are many better word for word translations such as the ESV, NASB and even the NKJV which is much improved over the original KJV.

Jesus is YHWH said:

I'm not watching your videos

Click to expand...

I can understand. I don't watch things that I normally do not strongly agree with. However, they are like little mini movie clips (that have a good production quality) that are very short. So they are not painstaking to watch by any means (even if you may not agree with the content). If you watch them, at least you will be informed about why KJB folk believe the way they do. You know, see things from your opponents perspective so you may better respond to them.

RickReads said:

Ok, back to the topic.

People keep trying to sell me Progressive Sanctification as a performance-based doctrine. Sanctified by works and if I object, then well, I just want to sin I am told.

Someone said Progressively Sanctified by getting better at being a Christian.

Another said perfect holiness, then lists a bunch of works verses to justify that

It`s back door works for salvation and I flatly reject it.

Perfect Holiness comes from within. Holiness is based on the condition of your heart.

Progressive Sanctification isn`t a doctrine of the Bible but if it was, it would look like this:

1 Corinthians 2:16

"For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ."

The purpose of our salvation is to conform us into the image of Christ. It`s largely a matter of the heart.The condition of our heart determines our holiness.

That holiness based on works thing, what works do you believe will make you holy? It`s ridiculous.

In Christianity, it`s all about the condition of our heart towards God, anything else is just religeon.

Click to expand...

There are two views of Progressive Sanctification.

#1. The Eternal Security and or sin and still be saved view (that says one will always commit mortal sin in this life).
#2. It not just about meeting the bare minimum level requirement of holy living alone (i.e. putting away mortal sin), but it is also about perfecting or maturing our walk with the Lord.

Bible Highlighter said:

I can understand. I don't watch things that I normally do not strongly agree with. However, they are like little mini movie clips (that have a good production quality) that are very short. So they are not painstaking to watch by any means (even if you may not agree with the content). If you watch them, at least you will be informed about why KJB folk believe the way the do. You know, see things from your opponents perspective so you may better respond to them.

Click to expand...

Look I've been around the block a few times as a believer for over the past 5 decades. I'm aware of all the pros and cons with translations.

RickReads said:

I saw an original King James once, it was very old and belonged to a friend of mine. I could barely read it, the language was so different.

Click to expand...

There is the Defined King James Bible.
Click on the spoiler button to learn more.


There is also the KJVER translation that updates the thees and the thous (although it's definitions are not always accurate). I have down a critique of the KJVER translation here:

Comparison Between: The KJV vs. the KJVER (The King James Version Easy Read)

Jesus is YHWH said:

Look I've been around the block a few times as a believer for over the past 5 decades. I'm aware of all the pros and cons with translations.

Click to expand...

I would say you really don't know if you are unaware that the majority of your Modern Translations come from Westcott and Hort (who were into the occult) and Rome. I would also say that if you actually did the study and compared the differences, they are for the worse, and not for the better. I was aware of these changes early on in my faith. So for me, this is kindergarten stuff. But this is a spiritual issue, and many just want to doubt that there is a perfect Word of God in existence today. Why? Because who wants to be under a perfect and final Word of authority? Most do not want to be under God's Word entirely.

RickReads said:

I have no interest in your works for salvation theology.

Click to expand...

The Word of God will not return void. If you will not hear the truth of God's Word, somebody coming across this website will.

I can show you from the Bible that we are saved by Sanctification (After we are saved by God's grace).

Anyways, I believe we are saved initially and foundationally saved by God's grace through faith, and that believers are then saved by entering the second phase of the salvation process (i.e. Sanctification). The works we do is not our own work alone, but it is the work of God done through the believer. So there is no boasting in any work that we do. For the kind of work that is condemned by Paul in Ephesians 2:9 is Man Directed Works. In Ephesians 2:10, Paul refers then to an entirely different kind of work (i.e. God Directed Works). For Ephesians 2:9 is the kind of work that a man would boast in himself in doing. Ephesians 2:10 is the kind of work that we are created in Christ Jesus to do. Whenever Paul condemned the Works of the Law, he was primarily referring to the 613 laws of Moses as a package deal and not individual laws that were carried over into the New Covenant (that began with Christ's death). Things like, Do not murder, do not covet, do not steal, etc. are the kind of laws that have carried onto the New Testament. But things like the Saturday Sabbath, the dietary laws, and circumcision have not carried over into the New Covenant.

You said:

You are one of the worst theologians I ever met.

Click to expand...

Now, who is the one who will not address or explain verses that are put forth to you? I would say that is you, dear sir. I am more than happy to explain things with Scripture if you are not getting it.

RickReads said:

I have no interest in your works for salvation theology. You are one of the worst theologians I ever met.

Click to expand...

After we are saved by God's grace, here is a short list that shows how Sanctification (God's work done through the believer) plays a part in the salvation process.

1. We are justified by works and not by faith alone (James 2:24).
   
   
2. Faith without works is dead (James 2:17).
   
   
3. A person can deny God by a lack of works (Titus 1:16).
   
   
4. Jesus agreed with the lawyer that to love God, and to love your neighbor is a part of inheriting eternal life (Luke 10:25-28).
   
   
5. Those who have done good, shall come forth unto the resurrection of life; and those who have done evil, shall come forth unto the resurrection of damnation (John 5:29).
   
   
6. We have to continue in His goodness, otherwise we can be cut off [just like the Jews were cut off] (Romans 11:21-22).
   
   
7. Helping the poor, and the unfortunate relates to inheriting the Kingdom (Matthew 25:34-40), and not helping the poor, and the unfortunate relates to going away into everlasting punishment (Matthew 25:41-46).
   
   
8. Whoever does not righteousness or does not love his brother is not of God (1 John 3:10).
   
   
9. Whoever does what Jesus says is likened unto a wise man who built his house upon the rock, and when a storm came, it did not fall, (Matthew 7:24-25), but the person who does not do what Jesus says is likened unto a fool who built his house upon the sand, and when a storm came, great was the fall of that house (Matthew 7:26-27).
   
   
10. Abiding in Jesus will bear much fruit, but if a person does not abide in Jesus [thereby being unfruitful], they are cast out [or cut off] like a branch to be burned in the fire (John 15:5-6).
    
    
11. If the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing (1 Peter 4:18-19).
    
    
12. Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14) (NKJV).

Now, dear sir, you can either explain them and be a good Theologian, or you can ignore or twist these verses above and be a bad one. The ball is in your court.

Bible Highlighter said:

I would say you really don't know if you are unaware that the majority of your Modern Translations come from Westcott and Hort (who were into the occult) and Rome. I would also say that if you actually did the study and compared the differences, they are for the worse, and not for the better. I was aware of these changes early on in my faith. So for me, this is kindergarten stuff. But this is a spiritual issue, and many just want to doubt that there is a perfect Word of God in existence today. Why? Because who wants to be under a perfect and final Word of authority? Most do not want to be under God's Word entirely.

Click to expand...

you are entitled to your "opinion" and so am I.

Jesus is YHWH said:

you are entitled to your "opinion" and so am I.

Click to expand...

But beliefs or opinions should be supported by evidence. I see the table top as a belief, and the legs of that table as the reasons why we believe that particular belief. I see a ton of reasons that keeps growing to defend the KJB as the pure Word of God, and I see zero reasons to believe in Modern Translations or the OAO (Original Autograph Only) viewpoint. In fact, there are tons of reasons against placing one's authority in Lexicons and or Modern Translations.

Bible Highlighter said:

But beliefs or opinions should be supported by evidence. I see the table top as a belief, and the legs of that table as the reasons why we believe that particular belief. I see a ton of reasons that keeps growing to defend the KJB as the pure Word of God, and I see zero reasons to believe in Modern Translations or the OAO (Original Autograph Only) viewpoint. In fact, there are tons of reasons against placing one's authority in Lexicons and or Modern Translations.

Click to expand...

you are far from an authority on the biblical text and manuscript evidence for the TR or the Majority.

I suggest you read an expert on the biblical text below

The Majority Text and the Original Text: Are They Identical? | Bible.org