What About Progressive Sanctification?

[JAL]

Heb 10:14 "For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified."

And what is perfect isn't sinning. Thanks for confirming.

In Bible verses where the term sanctify appears it is always an action God is taking.

Otherwise known as monergism. Thanks for confirming.

As I'm sure you know, "sanctify" is actually the word holy-fy (holy and sanctify do not come from two separate words). Sanctify thus means "make holy". So God has monergistically made us holy and yet:

The human requirement is to avoid fornication and to believe the truth.

So this holy heart is fornicating, in your view? Therefore if Jesus had been a fornicator, we could still say he lived 100% holy life ? Wow. That makes a lot of sense.

It seems that many Christians consider sanctification to be good deeds, moral behavior, advancement in knowledge of God etc. For them performance improvement is progressive sanctification.

I don`t think it`s Biblical to believe that.

Agreed. Sanctification isn't a series of self-initiated good works. It is a monergistic cleansing insuppressibly culminating in good works.

 

[RickReads]

Newsflash - no one's happy about someone like me who pokes holes in most traditional views.

The only one who thinks you poke holes in traditional views is you.

 

[JAL]

The only one who thinks you poke holes in traditional views is you.

Your state of denial is between you and God. Nothing I can do about it. It's your prerogative.

 

[JAL]

No one would claim to agree all of my theology - I'm not sure anyone is even familiar with it all. However, this statement is wildly inaccurate:

The only one who thinks you poke holes in traditional views is you.

You haven't participated on my threads. Judging by the number of likes and agreements awarded to my posts, I'm clearly not the only one.

 

[RickReads]

And what is perfect isn't sinning. Thanks for confirming.


Otherwise known as monergism. Thanks for confirming.

As I'm sure you know, "sanctify" is actually the word holy-fy (holy and sanctify do not come from two separate words). Sanctify thus means "make holy". So God has monergistically made us holy and yet:

So this holy heart is fornicating, in your view? Therefore if Jesus had been a fornicator, we could still say he lived 100% holy life ? Wow. That makes a lot of sense.


Agreed. Sanctification isn't a series of self-initiated good works. It is a monergistic cleansing insuppressibly culminating in good works.

I think you show your knowledge comes from sources outside the Bible. Avoiding fornication and believing the truth are Biblical requirements for sanctification. The Bible directly states these two things are required.

Monergistic would mean it is forced, so no, I didn`t confirm it.

 

[JAL]

The only one who thinks you poke holes in traditional views is you.

A good example is my theory of Adam. Recall that I cited Millard J. Erickson as postulating the same basic theory. He made that statement in Christian Theology, a book which J.I. Packer asserted to be the most widely used Systematic Theology textbook in use today. It is a standard textbook in probably every evangelical seminary in the world - even Catholic seminaries.

 

[JAL]

I think you show your knowledge comes from sources outside the Bible. Avoiding fornication and believing the truth are Biblical requirements for sanctification. The Bible directly states these two things are required.

Monergistic would mean it is forced, so no, I didn`t confirm it.

You haven't shown any relevant distinctions. Feel free to explain in precisely what sense you think my view of it is forced, and yours is not.

 

[JAL]

I think you show your knowledge comes from sources outside the Bible. Avoiding fornication and believing the truth are Biblical requirements for sanctification.

That is not a rebuttal of my position. The terms are nuanced according to what aspect of the process is being referred to. I'll explain. I'm a regenerated believer, I am holy - or as I clarified, part of me is regenerated/holy. How am I now to progressively become more holy?

By going out and fornicating? Is that the best way to elicit, incrementally, more sanctifying outpourings from on high? Clearly not. Thus avoiding fornication is a precondition of my progressive sanctification. Which has nothing to do with my monergistic regeneration/sanctification that is already in place and, hopefully, permanent.

 

[RickReads]

You haven't shown any relevant distinctions. Feel free to explain in precisely what sense you think my view of it is forced, and yours is not.

Look in the dictionary. It`s another word for irresistible grace. I have to leave now, thank you Jesus.

 

[JAL]

Look in the dictionary. It`s another word for irresistible grace. I have to leave now, thank you Jesus.

No specific distinctions clearly established between your view and mine - another case of a distinction without a difference.

 

[JAL]

Look in the dictionary. It`s another word for irresistible grace. I have to leave now, thank you Jesus.

I'll clarify why your point is moot. Consider again my theory of sanctification - waiting on the Lord for power from on high. Is that process monergistic? Or synergeistic? Initially it is synergistic. I participate. I choose to wait upon the Lord. This is NOT a process, therefore, of irresistible grace. My position doesn't necessitate that capitulation. However, WHEN the Lord has consented to my petition, when He has finally agreed to send me an outpouring, NOW things become one-sided (monergistic). In other words, He doesn't need my help to sanctify/regenerate me.

Thus MY understanding of monergism allows for the possibility of free will both during the conversion process and the subsequent maturation. Irresistible grace is not a mandate except, perhaps, for the "elect particles" (as I have earlier defined them). Thus my system allows for dynamics involving both free will and, in some cases, irresistible grace. It is flexible - and if your system is less flexible, I do not regard it as something to boast about.

It is so flexible in fact, that I will never be able to fully decide whether I am more of a Calvinist or an Arminian. The precise ratio of freedom to grace is something known to God alone.

 

[JAL]

If anyone here lacks a biblical reference for what I mean by waiting on the Lord for power from on high, just take a look at Pentecost. Or consider this example:


When Solomon finished praying, fire came down from heaven and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices, and the glory of the LORD filled the temple. The priests could not enter the temple of the LORD because the glory of the LORD filled it. (2 Chron 7).

 

[JAL]

Actually the case for waiting for power from on high is FAR more strong in light of modern redaction criticism of Luke-Acts, in its effort to surface distinctively Lukan themes. Luke has been exposed as the theologian of prayer - he wrote 25% of the NT, and more about prayer than anyone else. The phrase "filled with the Spirit" occurs about 14 times in the NT, but only in Luke-Acts save one reference by Paul (Eph 5:18). Luke is the ONLY writer to record this statement by Christ:

"How much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those that ask him" (Lk 11:13).

Thus prayer is the ONLY instruction given in the NT on how to receive outpourings - and the CONTEXT of that verse was Jesus advising His disciples on how to pray DAILY.

Luke was the ONLY writer to record that the Transfiguration occurred by prayer (the other accounts omitted that detail).

Luke was the ONLY writer to record that Jesus received power from on high by prayer (the other accounts omitted that detail), when the Holy Spirit descended on Him like a dove.

Luke was the ONLY writer to record that Jesus received power from on high by prayer during His passion, when an angel came and strengthened Him.

And Acts is literally prolific with examples of prayer leading up to outpourings and revivals.

 

[RickReads]

I'll clarify why your point is moot. Consider again my theory of sanctification - waiting on the Lord for power from on high. Is that process monergistic? Or synergeistic? Initially it is synergistic. I participate. I choose to wait upon the Lord. This is NOT a process, therefore, of irresistible grace. My position doesn't necessitate that capitulation. However, WHEN the Lord has consented to my petition, when He has finally agreed to send me an outpouring, NOW things become one-sided (monergistic). In other words, He doesn't need my help to sanctify/regenerate me.

Thus MY understanding of monergism allows for the possibility of free will both during the conversion process and the subsequent maturation. Irresistible grace is not a mandate except, perhaps, for the "elect particles" (as I have earlier defined them). Thus my system allows for dynamics involving both free will and, in some cases, irresistible grace. It is flexible - and if your system is less flexible, I do not regard it as something to boast about.

It is so flexible in fact, that I will never be able to fully decide whether I am more of a Calvinist or an Arminian. The precise ratio of freedom to grace is something known to God alone.

I see, so you make up your own interpretations for terms as well as scriptures

 

[JAL]

I see, so you make up your own interpretations for terms as well as scriptures

Said the guy who played word games with me earlier on this thread in regard to the use of the term "trinity".

 

[JAL]

Why is it that you rely so much on emojis? It seems your posts are too lacking in substance to make a real impact based on pure content.

 

[RickReads]

Said the guy who played word games with me earlier on this thread in regard to the use of the term "trinity".

I actually think that verse could be a forgery. No way to prove though. I didn`t really understand your objection to it except to see that you aren`t the kind to admit when your wrong.

 

[JAL]

I actually think that verse could be a forgery. No way to prove though. I didn`t really understand your objection to it except to see that you aren`t the kind to admit when your wrong.

Luke 11:13 ?

 

[JAL]

I'm curious. How many scholars are of the same mindset?

 

[JAL]

What verse are you talking about?