Is Sanctification a PROCESS?

[The Times]

Some "definitions" are based on human reasoning, but some human reasoning is carnal.

What I have found, as I said in the OP, that in the NT the references to sanctification are past tense. In other words, they were done, so the theory that it is a life long process wouldn't be true. So that made me go back to the word, not man, and see.

The 1 Corinthians 6:11 and Hebrews 10:!0 use the same term hagiazo, which is a verb "to make Holy", implying that it is a process past, present, and future at the moment of spiritual conversion/birth.

The Hebrews writer draws a contrast between the old covenant sacrifices and the blood of the Lamb of God sacrifice once and for all.

"By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."
"The which will" is God's will according to the previous verse, "Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second."

So is the Hebrews author saying that we are 100% with God's will at the moment of our conversion? or is he implying that the will of God works in prisoners of Christ, as a verb in progressive action that is sanctifying us through a process, that is in making us complete/Holy in the fullness of Christ?

The "he may" establish the second is pointing to a sanctification works in progress to arriving at the will of God, by delivering once prisoners of Christ to be the sanctified vessels of His Holy Temple.

If we consider how the context reveals why a past tense term as sanctified is being used to serve as a reminder, to warn believers in Christ to not wavering away to the old carnal man of sin, the man whose concerns are of the flesh. So the past tense verb serves as a reminder in context to keep the faith, without wavering from it.

Here is the context

Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised 24And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: 25Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Seeing or witnessing the day of our completion in Christ approaching is directly connected to the term sanctified, which is imperative to continue in the race and to finish it onto death, thereby implying that it is a progressive process of making us Holy/complete in Christ.

26For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, 27But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. 28He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: 29Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? 30For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. 31It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

1 Corinthians 6:11 will have the same exegetical reasoning as to why the verb sanctified is used in the past tense. Read the context before jumping to conclusion in forming your own private interpretation of what sanctification is, whilst ignoring the solid foundations of sanctification as a process throuhgout scripture.

◄ 37. hagiazó ►
Strong's Concordance
hagiazó: to make holy, consecrate, sanctify

Original Word: ἁγιάζω

Part of Speech: Verb

Transliteration: hagiazó

Phonetic Spelling: (hag-ee-ad'-zo)

Short Definition: I make holy, sanctify

Definition: I make holy, treat as holy, set apart as holy, sanctify, hallow, purify.
HELPS Word-studies

Cognate: 37 hagiázō (from 40 /hágios, "holy") – to regard as special (sacred), i.e. holy ("set apart"), sanctify. See 40 (hagios).

[37 (hagiázō) means "to make holy, consecrate, sanctify; to dedicate, separate" (Abbott-Smith).]

 

[dms1972]

.

 

[dreadnought]

You just used them, they come from the Bible. I suppose you're well meaning but what you just said is a stunningly truncated, if not lazy explanation the God's Gospel of Grace and Truth, and such an explanation can only leave people in difficulties. Understand how the Bible writers used them first please.

I think people make things far more complicated than they are. If we repent of our sin, we do well.

 

[dms1972]

.

 

[dreadnought]

Some may, but the Apostles didn't, you want things simple for you, but really, you have made the repentance and salvation a work - "we do well" - You clearly have little comprehension of Biblical Truth and are probably intellectually lazy.

Which is lazier - keeping things simple or refusing to repent of our sin?

 

[dms1972]

One thing I like about the United Methodist Church I go to is they don't teach false doctrine. It is one of the first churches that believes the same as I've come to believe through much study and meditation on "what does this mean, Lord." Before I found this church, I was getting very frustrated with the lack of knowledge I found in the AOG church. But then God gave me a dream about them, and I left them.

I'm not surprised though about my present church as I especially loved John Wesley when researching church history.

I am not sure what you are saying, are you saying you think we are sanctified fully at our christian conversion and sin no more after? I don't think so! You are only beginning to get an idea of sin in your life at conversion. A child who simply believes the Gospel at ten will have new possibilities for sin at 16, at 25, after they are married and have children, if they become a pastor, and after they retire as a Pastor - all these stages in life and new positions open up new tests that a ten year old could never understand!

By the way Wesley never maintained his entire sanctification doctrine in the sense that one could not fall back into sin, he came to see he was in error there.

https://www.craigladams.com/Books/styled/page36/

 

[dms1972]

.

 

[dms1972]

Total sanctification?


"Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall." 1 Corinthians 10:12

 

[1stcenturylady]

The 1 Corinthians 6:11 and Hebrews 10:!0 use the same term hagiazo, which is a verb "to make Holy", implying that it is a process past, present, and future at the moment of spiritual conversion/birth.

The Hebrews writer draws a contrast between the old covenant sacrifices and the blood of the Lamb of God sacrifice once and for all.

"By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."
"The which will" is God's will according to the previous verse, "Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second."

So is the Hebrews author saying that we are 100% with God's will at the moment of our conversion? or is he implying that the will of God works in prisoners of Christ, as a verb in progressive action that is sanctifying us through a process, that is in making us complete/Holy in the fullness of Christ?

The "he may" establish the second is pointing to a sanctification works in progress to arriving at the will of God, by delivering once prisoners of Christ to be the sanctified vessels of His Holy Temple.

If we consider how the context reveals why a past tense term as sanctified is being used to serve as a reminder, to warn believers in Christ to not wavering away to the old carnal man of sin, the man whose concerns are of the flesh. So the past tense verb serves as a reminder in context to keep the faith, without wavering from it.

Here is the context

Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised 24And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: 25Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Seeing or witnessing the day of our completion in Christ approaching is directly connected to the term sanctified, which is imperative to continue in the race and to finish it onto death, thereby implying that it is a progressive process of making us Holy/complete in Christ.

26For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, 27But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. 28He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: 29Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? 30For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. 31It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

1 Corinthians 6:11 will have the same exegetical reasoning as to why the verb sanctified is used in the past tense. Read the context before jumping to conclusion in forming your own private interpretation of what sanctification is, whilst ignoring the solid foundations of sanctification as a process throuhgout scripture.

◄ 37. hagiazó ►
Strong's Concordance
hagiazó: to make holy, consecrate, sanctify

Original Word: ἁγιάζω

Part of Speech: Verb

Transliteration: hagiazó

Phonetic Spelling: (hag-ee-ad'-zo)

Short Definition: I make holy, sanctify

Definition: I make holy, treat as holy, set apart as holy, sanctify, hallow, purify.
HELPS Word-studies

Cognate: 37 hagiázō (from 40 /hágios, "holy") – to regard as special (sacred), i.e. holy ("set apart"), sanctify. See 40 (hagios).

[37 (hagiázō) means "to make holy, consecrate, sanctify; to dedicate, separate" (Abbott-Smith).]

The scriptures you show still prove my point - that of being past tense. "you WERE sanctified."

 

[1stcenturylady]

I am not sure what you are saying, are you saying you think we are sanctified fully at our christian conversion and sin no more after? I don't think so! You are only beginning to get an idea of sin in your life at conversion. A child who simply believes the Gospel at ten will have new possibilities for sin at 16, at 25, after they are married and have children, if they become a pastor, and after they retire as a Pastor - all these stages in life and new positions open up new tests that a ten year old could never understand!

By the way Wesley never maintained his entire sanctification doctrine in the sense that one could not fall back into sin, he came to see he was in error there.

https://www.craigladams.com/Books/styled/page36/

Let's put your question another way. "...are you saying you think that once we have the Holy Spirit in us and guiding us, and have a new nature, we sin no more after?" The answer is yes. Sin has lost its appeal. It doesn't call to us. We are no longer its slave.

But it is a question of what type of sin is being spoken of. And that would be willful sin. Willful sin are sins unto death. So what are sins not unto death. They are called trespasses. Those we will always commit, but as in 1 John 1:7 says, the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin - trespasses are this type that you can commit WHILE walking in the Spirit.

 

[dms1972]

I recently got understanding, I believe, that what we call "sanctification" as a process, is not a process at all.

When I see "sanctified" mentioned in the New Testament about a Christian it is always past tense, the same as "justified." Sanctified means to set apart for a holy work. Regarding objects in the temple, they were first cleansed, and then blessed and were ready for use. That is justified and sanctified. As soon as we were justified, we were sanctified. Sanctification is not a process.

Hebrews 10:29 "Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?

The modern day version of sanctification is a life long process of 'getting sin out of your life.' The implication is crippling, and I now believe a false doctrine or false definition. If we believe in our mind that we are not yet free from sin, that it is a lifelong process, we become apathetic about sin, have our guard down, and quench the Spirit (if that person even has the Spirit), believing everybody willfully sins. "Ill work on that tomorrow - I have time." (Remember, willful sin is lawlessness, and known, as in breaking one of the Ten Commandments). That was not my experience when I received the Holy Spirit 41 years ago. The disabling desire to commit willful sin was gone immediately. In particular, mine was adultery. Where I had been completely weak and defenseless, I was now strong and powerful overnight. All that was left was faults in my fruit.

Therefore, I see justification as when we repented from our sin unto Jesus. And sanctification of when we received the Holy Spirit.

So what then do I see as the process? I see it as "glorification," becoming like Christ. The desire to willfully sin is taken care of and we are no longer slaves to sin, so are free to develop spiritually to the fullest over a lifetime.

2 Peter 1:5-7
5 But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, 6 to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, 7 to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love.

I can't agree with you if you are saying glorification is a process and the same as growing in Christlikeness. Justification, sanctification, glorification, yes - but the NT uses another term which may help you if you introduce it to your theology - transformation - "be transformed by the renewing of your mind..." Romans 12:2 and "we who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory are being transformed into his likeness" 2 Corinthians 3:18.

We can of course glorify, or give glory to God.

As I understand it Jesus was not glorified Himself until after he had predicted Judas' betrayal and what followed, ie. through His crucifixion, and resurrection etc. (see John 13:30-32)

I have always taken glorification for a believer to happen when they die, or immediately following or whenever they receive their resurrection body patterned after Jesus' glorified body. I could be mistaken, but that is generally the Protestant view as I understand it.

 

[dms1972]

Let's put your question another way. "...are you saying you think that once we have the Holy Spirit in us and guiding us, and have a new nature, we sin no more after?" The answer is yes. Sin has lost its appeal. It doesn't call to us. We are no longer its slave.

But it is a question of what type of sin is being spoken of. And that would be willful sin. Willful sin are sins unto death. So what are sins not unto death. They are called trespasses. Those we will always commit, but as in 1 John 1:7 says, the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin - trespasses are this type that you can commit WHILE walking in the Spirit.

So can you give me one example of each, a willful sin, and a trespass, so I understand you? The NT epistles also speak of Mortification of sin (see Colossians 3:5-10) which is something we do, though by the Holy Spirit, its not something God does for us while we are passive, neither is it something we do all on our own (see Romans 8:13) John Owen wrote an entire book explicating these verses.

As I understand you, you seem to be saying sin, willful sin is dealt with by God in sanctification and I would say the scriptures say otherwise, that it is the believer who by the Spirit mortifies willful sin.

But our attitudes also need transformed, and I can't see how all that is dealt with in conversion. Every teaching can be abused, or twisted, people can say "oh God isn't finished with me yet" which is true, but they may also be conveniently ignoring that they may be slothful and grieving the Holy Spirit. Others as Leanne Payne has said deny there is "the bad guy within" altogether and become proud and may torment other christians.

 

[1stcenturylady]

So can you give me one example of each, a willful sin, and a trespass, so I understand you? The NT epistles also speak of Mortification of sin (see Colossians 3:5-10) which is something we do, though by the Holy Spirit, its not something God does for us while we are passive, neither is it something we do all on our own (see Romans 8:13) John Owen wrote an entire book explicating these verses.

As I understand you, you seem to be saying sin, willful sin is dealt with by God in sanctification and I would say the scriptures say otherwise, that it is the believer who by the Spirit mortifies willful sin.

But our attitudes also need transformed, and I can't see how all that is dealt with in conversion. Every teaching can be abused, or twisted, people can say "oh God isn't finished with me yet" which is true, but they may also be conveniently ignoring that they may be slothful and grieving the Holy Spirit. Others as Leanne Payne has said deny there is "the bad guy within" altogether and become proud and torment other christians.

A willful sin is one that we KNOW we are committing in rebellion against God's holiness. A trespass is not even known to us while we are committing it, so cannot be rebellion. It is unwittingly committed. Leviticus 5:15.

I would say that Colossians 3:5-10 is more don't resurrect what is dead "wherein you once walked" - past tense.

In the Old Testament even picking up sticks on the Sabbath was a willful sin (Numbers 15). They killed them. Notice there was no sacrifice to cover a willful sin.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I can't agree with you if you are saying glorification is a process and the same as growing in Christlikeness. Justification, sanctification, glorification, yes - but the NT uses another term which may help you if you introduce it to your theology - transformation - "be transformed by the renewing of your mind..." Romans 12:2 and "we who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory are being transformed into his likeness" 2 Corinthians 3:18.

Good word. I think transformation is the same as glorification. But not in the sense we are still having to struggle with sin. That is over when the Spirit entered, and we WERE sanctified. Just being dead to sin doesn't make us completely like Christ - that was only one of His attributes. Now comes the process of being turned into his likeness.

What I'm most concerened about is the misnomer that we will always sin as we are sanctified. That sanctification is ongoing because we will always sin. That is anti-christ to the apostles teachings that we are dead to sin by Paul, and John saying a Christian cannot sin. But this teaching is one of the most prevalent in the post 1st century church.

 

[DeaconDean]

What I'm most concerened about is the misnomer that we will always sin as we are sanctified. That sanctification is ongoing because we will always sin. That is anti-christ to the apostles teachings that we are dead to sin by Paul, and John saying a Christian cannot sin. But this teaching is one of the most prevalent in the post 1st century church.

And yet, two of the best known Apostles "sinned", willingly I might add, after the point of salvation.

I love Wesleyan theology. It enables us to do and become something nobody but Christ could do.

How was it John Wesley put it?

"Moving on to perfection."

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[1stcenturylady]

And yet, two of the best known Apostles "sinned", willingly I might add, after the point of salvation.

I love Wesleyan theology. It enables us to do and become something nobody but Christ could do.

How was it John Wesley put it?

"Moving on to perfection."

God Bless

Till all are one.

I don't believe any apostle committed sins unto death after they received the Holy Spirit. To say otherwise is reckless and ignorant of types of "sin."

It appears you may love Wesleyan theology but don't believe it from your first statement. Or were you just being sarcastic and are actually making fun of Wesleyan theology? You either believe it or you don't.

 

[DeaconDean]

I don't believe any apostle committed sins unto death after they received the Holy Spirit. To say otherwise is reckless and ignorant of types of "sin."

It appears you may love Wesleyan theology but don't believe it from your first statement. Or were you just being sarcastic and are actually making fun of Wesleyan theology? You either believe it or you don't.

I will address your post backwards.

No, I do not accept Wesleyan theology.

Unless I'm mistaken, sin is sin. Period.

Your statement made no distinction of "sins unto death". Is looking "in lust" a more serious sin than "stealing"? No, sin is sin.

Fact: after the point of salvation, Peter sinned "willingly" at least twice. He disobeyed God, (cf. Acts 10), then "hypocrisy" in Galatians 2.

Fact: after the point of salvation, Paul sinned by disobeying the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 21) In fact, several times.

In Acts 23, he was guilty of reviling the High Priest.

"Moving on to perfection" as John Wesley put it, is a mark that absolutely nobody has reached or achieved.

If they have, I would ask you to point them out to me. Because if they have, it was a mark that at two of the Apostles who saw, walked, and talked with Jesus, could not achieve.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[dreadnought]

Look, you came on here giving your take, bandying these terms about like you understood them, then you backtracked, said they were too complicated. I guess the Bible is too complicated then, and the Apostles under divine inspiration were making things too complicated. You'd settle for REPENT!!! Well that's only half the Gospel, people need to know the basis on which they are forgiven - what it means to live and move in Jesus' Kingdom. That cannot all be reduced to REPENT.

I've run into these terms before. Like I say, repent and you will do well (Matt 4:17).

 

[drich0150]

The "two verses" I used are not both on sanctification as you assumed.

The one in Hebrews 10 about "sanctification" I used to show it is not a process referring to the future, but is past tense. Therefore, at the time of justification/cleansing.

The second verse I used in 2 Peter 1 was to show an unnamed process, I think is not "sanctification," but "glorification."

The rest of your post on our own merit I never implied.

but again... heb 10 is what I quoted and the word sanctification is not used but a process that describes how we are saved through atonement and not by merit. You bible instead of describing this process apparently used the word sanctification here. I am pointing out that if it does then the word you are using is used differently in the bible than stated in your op.

 

[dms1972]

A willful sin is one that we KNOW we are committing in rebellion against God's holiness. A trespass is not even known to us while we are committing it, so cannot be rebellion. It is unwittingly committed. Leviticus 5:15.

I would say that Colossians 3:5-10 is more don't resurrect what is dead "wherein you once walked" - past tense.

In the Old Testament even picking up sticks on the Sabbath was a willful sin (Numbers 15). They killed them. Notice there was no sacrifice to cover a willful sin.

I think "wherein you once walked..." is from Ephesians. But the message is the same. There is something the Christian does by the Holy Spirit, based on the fact that in their conversion they died with Christ and their lives are now hid with Christ in God. This is twofold and the believer is to do it by the Holy Spirit, they "put to death...sexual immorality, lust, evil desires, greed..." the list goes on.


John Owen on this I find helpful (again I can't help if people twist his pastoral counsel)

"To mortify a sin is not utterly to kill, root it out, and destroy it, that it should have no more hold at all nor residence in our hearts. It is true that is that which is aimed at; but this is not in this life to be accomplished. There is no man that truly sets himself to mortify any sin, but he aims at, intends, desires its utter destruction, that it should leave neither root nor fruit in the heart or life. He would kill it that it should never move nor stir anymore, cry or call, seduce or tempt, to eternity. It's not being is the thing that is aimed at. Now, though doubtless there may, by the Spirit and grace of Christ, a wonderful success and eminency of victory against any sin be attained, so that a man may have almost constant triumph over it, yet an utter killing and destruction of it, that it should not be, is not in this life to be expected. This Paul assures us of: "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect" (Phil. 3:12)

Then it says "as God's chosen people holy and dearly loved", "cloth yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.", "and over all these virtues put on love which binds them all together in perfect unity." (Col. 3:12-15).

I know I still have a way to go, and it does seem we can stall our progress towards Christian maturity, through sloth, lack of humility, lack of magnanimity etc.

John Owen wrote a whole book explaining Mortification of Sin, it is now available in a new edition titled Overcoming Sin and Temptation.