What About Progressive Sanctification?

[RickReads]

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.

emojis entertain me as do you. I got a pile of commentary I wrote for my Yahoo group some years back. I got another folder full of commentary written by others. I could cut and paste with the best of them if I wanted.

I type slow and I just want to relax and enjoy conversation. My posts take a little time to accumulate and I put quite a bit of substance on this topic in this thread before you came here. You did a good job of burying it.

 

[RickReads]

What verse are you talking about?

The verse that defines the trinity.

 

[JAL]

The verse that defines the trinity.

Well I'm a Trinitarian so there isn't really much there for me to "admit myself wrong" about.

 

[RickReads]

Well I'm a Trinitarian so there isn't really much there for me to "admit myself wrong" about.

That doesn`t stop you on other issues. You are a Calvinist who attacks Calvins. You believe in irresistible grace yet rail because salvation is by election.

 

[JAL]

That doesn`t stop you on other issues. You are a Calvinist who attacks Calvins. You believe in irresistible grace yet rail because salvation is by election.

Unclear objections. Ignored.

 

[RickReads]

Well I'm a Trinitarian so there isn't really much there for me to "admit myself wrong" about.

You claimed the verse didn`t prove trinity er something, you got pretty upset about it.

 

[RickReads]

Unclear objections. Ignored.

Yes, ignore what you can`t handle. A common tactic.

 

[JAL]

You claimed the verse didn`t prove trinity er something, you got pretty upset about it.

I don't recall getting upset about it. I do recall objecting to your complex of logic - but I don't even remember what it was.

 

[JAL]

Yes, ignore what you can`t handle. A common tactic.

I can't address something if I'm not sure what is being said. Can you clarify where my system has failed?

 

[RickReads]

I don't recall getting upset about it. I do recall objecting to your complex of logic - but I don't even remember what it was.

You said trinity isn`t in the Bible and I showed you that it was. Before trinity became a word they talked about the trinity in the manner of the verse. I could say the verse shows the real trinity.

 

[RickReads]

I can't address something if I'm not sure what is being said. Can you clarify where my system has failed?

Pointing out all your flaws would take a while, maybe months, a lotta work it would be.

 

[JAL]

You said trinity isn`t in the Bible and I showed you that it was. Before trinity became a word they talked about the trinity in the manner of the verse. I could say the verse shows the real trinity.

You're dredging up that tired old debate again? Really? What I SAID was that the word "Trinity" isn't in the Bible. Trinitarianism is a logical construct - a correct one in my view.

 

[JAL]

Pointing out all your flaws would take a while, maybe months, a lotta work it would be.

Unsubstantiated remark. Ignored.

 

[RickReads]

You're dredging up that tired old debate again? Really? What I SAID was that the word "Trinity" isn't in the Bible. Trinitarianism is a logical construct - a correct one in my view.

I really don`t care, I was just making conversation. I was curious why you said it didn`t prove God is a trinity.

I looked it up,
This is what you said
"Baloney. Where in that verse does it say that all three of those elements are God? And even if it DID say that much, how is that any "closer" to your conclusion than all the sanctification passages are to my conclusion - what kind of biased measuring stick is in use here?"

 

[JAL]

I really don`t care, I was just making conversation. I was curious why you said it didn`t prove God is a trinity.

I looked it up,
This is what you said
"Baloney. Where in that verse does it say that all three of those elements are God? And even if it DID say that much, how is that any "closer" to your conclusion than all the sanctification passages are to my conclusion - what kind of biased measuring stick is in use here?"

Right. As stated there, Scripture does not EXPLICITLY teach Trinitarianism. That doctrine is a logical construct - and a correct one in my opinion.

And?

 

[RickReads]

Right. As stated there, Scripture does not EXPLICITLY teach Trinitarianism. That doctrine is a logical construct - and a correct one in my opinion.

And?

You implied you didn`t think the three elements were God. You also said some other things that make me think you have an unorthodox view of the Godhead.

 

[JAL]

You implied you didn`t think the three elements were God. You also said some other things that make me think you have an unorthodox view of the Godhead.

No I never said that. I was disputing degrees of evidence and arguing that the degree of evidence for progressive sanctification is very high in many verses, and cumulatively higher in fact than the degree of evidence for the Trinity. Thus my implied argument was this:
(1) If you accept the Trinity based on a fairly small amount of evidence.
(2) You should therefore accept progressive sanctification, since it has more evidence.
Not sure that argument is watertight but it seemed worthy of consideration.

 

[JAL]

But sure I do have some unorthodox views of the Godhead - and I make no bones about it. I'm the only one I know of who has provided real solutions to the Incarnation, The Problem of Evil, the nature of creation, divine merit, divine freedom, and divine agency (well a couple of these could be attributed to Tertullian as well, also Andrew Murray except Murray wasn't explicit so I could only draw tentative conclusions when trying to read between the lines).

 

[JAL]

Oh - and the nature of the Trinity, the nature of regeneration, the nature of God's holiness, reconciling divine freedom with immutable holiness - All this is a cinch to explain in my metaphysics.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

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

In Bible verses where the term sanctify appears it is always an action God is taking. The human requirement is to avoid fornication and to believe the truth. Apart from those two things it`s all God.

Verses that have been used to try and rebut me do not use the word sanctify, rather I observed that those scriptures use other terms which my critics allege to mean sanctification.

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.

I don’t see that at all.
It is written...

John 17:17
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."

Ephesians 5:25-27
25 "...even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish."

1 Thessalonians 4:3
"For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:"