SANCTIFICATION PAPER

__________________

A Paper

Presented to

Dr. Heath Lambert

Boyce College

__________________

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for CN 350

__________________

by

Charlie Albright

October 31, 2010

SANCTIFICATION PAPER

Introduction

Sanctification is a fundamental aspect of the Christian’s life. Sanctification is the

doctrinal position which encompasses the believer’s life after initial justification. To talk about

sanctification is to talk about how a Christian grows more and more obedient to the teachings of

Jesus. But what does that look like? When one looks at the bible what picture is painted about

what growth in obedience looks like?

In this paper three major views of sanctification will be analyzed, critiqued, and worked

out practically, with one view being defended. This paper will look at the views of sanctification

espoused by the following theological traditions: Reformed, Lutheran, and Wesleyan. Each view

claims that it understands how the doctrine of sanctification is lived out. Yet, their biblical

backing will be tested in this paper with one position coming out of the refining fire as the most

biblically faithful position.

Body

In the body of this paper, each view will be analyzed. There will be a summary of each

view given at the beginning. The strengths of the view will be brought-up. Then the view will be

critiqued in its faithfulness to the Biblical witness. One position will be shown as being the most

faithful to the bible

1

2

The final outworking will be practically applying the view of sanctification to the life

situation of a made up character called “Ernie.”1 The situation with Ernie is that he has a habitual

struggle with lustful thoughts. In light of this problem Ernie has prayed many times to God that

he would be delivered from this sin. No answer to this prayer has been given. When he thinks of

God, Ernie knows that God cannot look upon sin. Thus, Ernie is beginning to think that God can

no longer forgive him of his sin. It is into this situation that each position will be brought to see

how they would instruct Ernie.

The Lutheran View

Summary. The simplified way to communicate the Lutheran view is to say that

sanctification is growing in understanding of how justified one is in Christ.2 In this view, it is not

as if sanctification is a process that takes place after one is justified. Instead, it is another aspect

of our justification.3 There are the ethical good works which a Christian will perform.4 Yet, these

good works are motivated by the faith which one has in work of God.5 Faith frees a person to

live a life of godly service and love.6 Works, however, are not to be used as being a clear basis to

1

?The character and the situation are taken from Donald L. Alexander, Christian Spirituality: Five Views of Sanctification (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 7.2

?Gerhard O. Forde, “The Lutheran View,” in Christian Spirituality: Five Views of Sanctification, ed. Donald L. Alexander (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 13. 3

?Oswald Bayer, Living By Faith: Justification and Sanctification, Trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 58-59.4

?Ibid., 56. This is where the break in categories happens. Lutherans would not equate sanctification with ethical/godly living. “Now living morally is indeed an important, wise and good thing…But it should not be equated with sanctification.” Forde, “The Lutheran View,” 14. 5

?Oswald Bayer, Martin Luther’s Theology: A Contemporary Interpretation, Trans. Thomas H. Trapp (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2008), 283.6

?Ibid., 289. Also compare Forde who uses the term, “spontaneous” to describe this. Forde, “The Lutheran View,” 14. The Christian accomplishes the work without a personal acknowledgment of the effort which accomplished the work. For instance, a Christian would just be generous when an opportunity arises. There would not be an internal effort in the person to push him to accomplish it.

establish the existence of true faith.7 There is no linear progression in one’s ethical development.8

It is not as if there is a goal which one is trying to attain in one’s ethical development.9 This does

not mean, however, that there are no advancements in ethical behavior.10 There is the fruit of true

faith which is spontaneous acts of good works;11 but this advancement is not caused by attempts

to attain it. The advancement the Lutherans would have us strive to obtain is grasping the

immeasurable amount of grace we live in.12 And it is by grasping this truth, how much we are

sanctified in Christ, that our heart begins to love the things of God.13

Benefits of this View. The primary benefit is the centrality of Christ within this

framework of sanctification. Everything is understood and lived within the finished salfivic work

of Christ. There is no hope of meriting one’s salvation here. People can slip a merit theology in

7

? Bayer, Martin Luther’s Theology, 291. Also, “But this process of sanctification cannot be assigned grades. Believing means that one is removed from being in charge of oneself and responsible for one’s own judgment.”8

?Bayer, Living By Faith, 62-65. Also, compare Forde, “It is not that we are somehow moving towards the goal, but rather that the goal is moving closer and closer to us…It is the coming of the kingdom upon us, not our coming closer to our building up the kingdom.” Forde, “The Lutheran View,” 29.

To contrast this view, other traditions would say that we are to attain to the image of Christ in our daily lives. So, let us say that that one is trying to be like Christ in regards to anger. Other traditions would say that you need to progress to the point where your use of anger matches the way Christ gets angry. There is a goal in this sanctification.

The Lutheran view, on the other hand, says that ethical living is not about the progression. There is no goal one obtains. One does not make an intentional effort to motivate themselves to not be angry. 9

?Ibid., 66. Also, compare Forde, “It is not that we are somehow moving towards the goal, but rather that the goal is moving closer and closer to us…It is the coming of the kingdom upon us, not our coming closer to our building up the kingdom.” Forde, “The Lutheran View,” 29.

To contrast this view, other traditions would say that we are to attain to the image of Christ in our daily lives. So, let us say that that one is trying to be like Christ in regards to anger. Other traditions would say that you need to progress to the point where your use of anger matches the way Christ gets angry. There is a goal in this sanctification.

The Lutheran view, on the other hand, says that ethical living is not about the progression. There is no goal one obtains. One does not make an intentional effort to motivate himself to not be angry.

10Bayer, Martin Luther’s Theology, 292.11

?Forde, “The Lutheran View,” 2912

?Ibid., 28.13

?Ibid., 29.

3

the back door when constructing a doctrine of sanctification, effectively saying, “Christ did

justify me, but now I have to keep the ship afloat with my works.” Such a danger finds no place

within the Lutheran view. From beginning to end the believer’s eyes are directed to Christ—His

work and His accomplishments. The believer never should slip into despair when considering his

own sinfulness and failures, for the believer’s salvation, from beginning to end, rests totally,

finally, and sufficiently in the work of Christ on his behalf.

Problems with this View. The central objection to this view comes at the issue of

motivation and action in dealing with sins. How does the bible instruct the believer to deal with

sin in his life? From what the Lutherans would say, true obedience springs from the amazement

of grace. As one grasps how justified they are in Christ, advancement in ethical living happens;

the Christian does not aim at making a progress toward a more sanctified position.

Forde defends this by appealing to the texts which state that sanctification is a present

possession for the Christian. In 1 Corinthians 1:2 Paul tells the Corinthians that they are

“sanctified in Christ Jesus.” In verses 28-31 of the same chapter, Paul says that Christ is our

“righteousness and sanctification and redemption.” Hebrews 10:10 says that Christians “have

been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”14

The question, however, cannot be settled just by referring to the biblical testimony about

definitive sanctification. Theologians outside the Lutheran tradition have recognized a definitive

aspect of sanctification.15 Definitive sanctification can be adequately worked into other models of

14

?Ibid., 16-17. He would also point to 2 Thessalonians 2:13 as basis for the Lutheran view.15

?“We are thus compelled to take account of the fact that the language of sanctification is used with reference to some decisive action that occurs at the inception of the Christian life, and one that characterizes the people of God in the identity as called effectually by God’s grace. It would be, therefore, a deflection from biblical patterns of language and conception to think of sanctification exclusively in terms of a progressive work.” John Murray, Collected Writings of John Murray: Volume II Select Lectures in Systematic Theology (Carlisle, PN: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1977), 278.

4

sanctification as well. So then, the evidence must move beyond the fact that believers are

sanctified in Christ. Thus, we must ask, does the bible limit sanctification to the definitive

understanding or should we see more to sanctification?

Many verses testify that there is a present striving to attain holiness for the believer.

Philippians 2:12 states, “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” The verb for

“work” (κατεργάζεσθε) clearly speaks of the believer making an effort in his sanctification.16

In 2 Corinthians 7:1 Paul admonishes the believers that by cleansing themselves of all

defilement they will bring “holiness to completion in the fear of God.” The words,

ἐπιτελοῦντες ἁγιωσύνην, speak of “a process of sanctification.”17 In Hebrews 12:14, the

author plainly communicates a linear movement in regard to growth in holiness: “Strive for

peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.” The word the

author uses for strive, διώκετε, “draws attention to an intensity and urgency that the

community needs to display in order to heed the exhortation.”18 The same verb is found in

Romans 14:19 when it gives a similar imperative about love, “So then let us pursue what makes

for peace and for mutual upbuilding.” Once again the verse speaks to an action the believers

must do.19 Such verses clearly communicate that there is more than a definitive aspect. What they

16

?“ἑαυτῶν σωτηρίαν κατεργάζεσθε is an exhortation to common action, urging the Philippians to show forth the graces of Christ in their lives, to make their eternal salvation fruitful in the here and now as they fulfill their responsibilities to one another as well as to non-Christians.” Peter T. O’Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek Commentary, ed. by I Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 280.

See Moises Silva, Philippians, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, ed. By Robert Yarbrough and Robert H. Stein (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic), 118-123, for a defense on why σωτηρίαν should been seen as sanctification and not total salvation.

17

?Murray J. Harris, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek Commentary, ed. by I Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 513.

18

?Peter T. O’Brien, The Letter to the Hebrews, The Pillar New Testament Commentary, ed. by D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010), 472.19

5

communicate is that Christians are commanded to make knowledgeable endeavors to be more

Christ like in their lives.20 “Everything [in the verses] points to a consistent and active

endeavor.”21 Merely letting faith produce fruit does not work with these verses.

Another question which can be raised is that if the Christian is only supposed to look

upon their justification, not attainment of obedience, why don’t the Apostles teaching reflect

such an emphasis? Paul, along with the rest of the Apostles, was a minister of the new covenant

(2 Cor 3:1-18). Yet, Lutherans would have us believe that Paul would teach as if he was under

the old covenant with regard to commands. In all of his epistles, however, there is not even a hint

that when Paul gives commands that he considers himself as speaking as if the old covenant is

still applicable for Christians. Namely, that the commands are only to drive people to trust in

Christ. Instead, imperatives flow out in indicatives. Paul will tell the Christians to do something

because of their present identity in Christ. There is no hint that Paul is solely driving Christians

to trust in Christ’s work on the cross;22 he knows that the Spirit is presently active in believers.

Thus, he speaks about his boldness about the success of his ministry with the Corinthians (2 Cor

3:1-6). He speaks as if obedience is attainable. If the Lutheran view is true, then we must ask

why Paul, along with the rest of the Apostles, speak this way. Why is there not clarity about the

believer just needing to see his need for Christ? The most obvious answer would be that the

Lutheran view is foreign to the teachings of the Apostles. They speak as if the commands can be

obeyed by those indwelt by the Spirit.

?C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Epistle to the Romans, The International Critical Commentary, ed. J. A. Emerton and C. E. B. Cranfield (Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1975), 721. 20

?Other verse which speak of active endeavoring of holiness: Rom. 12:2, Gal 5:25, 1 Thess. 4:3-5; 5:15, 1 Cor. 14:1, 1 Tim. 6:11.21

?G. C. Berkouwer, Faith and Sanctification (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1952), 101.22

?Though, as will be brought out in the Reformed view, it is an aspect with every command.

6

Such is the central problem in the Lutheran view of sanctification. In an attempt to avoid

legalism, the view has dismissed the biblical teaching about the Christian’s need to progress in

holiness. Yet, the bible clearly speaks of a growth in holiness that is linear, a movement toward a

goal.

Application to Ernie. The Lutheran’s counsel to Ernie would be to rest fundamentally in

the grace of God given to him through the sacrificial death of Christ. Christ is his righteousness,

thus, there is no fear as to whether or not he is accepted by God. He is justified before God

because all his present sins were placed on the Lamb slained. What he must grow in is the

knowledge of this grace, and as he grows in knowledge of it, he grows in love for the One who

has given him such grace. This is where Ernie grows: in the knowledge of how justified he is in

Christ. Will the lustful thoughts go away? Maybe, but Ernie will not be trusting in his adherence

to the law any longer. His faith will be rooted in Christ and he will grow stronger and stronger in

this faith. The Spirit may decrease the pattern of lustful thoughts in his life, but Ernie will be

unaware of such a work. What he will be aware of is how justified he is because of Christ.

Wesleyan

Summary. Wesleyans believe that Christians are to become what is theirs in Christ.23

Thus, the Christian’s purpose is to be renewed into Christ’s own image.24 This goal can be

23

?Laurence W. Wood, “The Wesleyan View,” in Christian Spirituality: Five Views of Sanctification, ed. Donald L. Alexander (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 96.24

?Melvin E. Dieter, “The Wesleyan Perspective,” in Five Views on Sanctification, ed. Donald L. Alexander (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1987), 15.

7

attained, and should be endeavored to be attained, in this life.25 This is accomplished by a

“second blessing” that comes upon the Christian after conversion.26 This second blessing has

been called “entire sanctification”27, which is the removal of rebellion from a Christian’s heart.28

This “entire sanctification” is not the removal of sin.29 It is, instead, the removal of willful sin by

this second work.30 One receives this second blessing by having faith in the work of Christ31 and

expecting God to do what He had promised.32 After this second blessing the Christian freely

loves God and his neighbor with all his heart.33 All his affections, heart, soul, and mind are

directed toward the things of God and love for Him.34

25

?R. Newton Flew, The Idea of Perfection in Christian Theology: An Historical Study of the Christian Ideal for the Present Life (London, Great Britain: Oxford university Press, 1934), 397. Also compare, Dieter, “The Wesleyan Perspective,” 15. 26

?Wood, “The Wesleyan View,” 97. See also Flew, The Idea of Perfection in Christian Theology, 317-323, who lists 6 characteristics of this second blessing.27

?Other terms for this doctrine would include, “Perfectionism,” “Perfection,” “Perfect love,” or others.28

?“Entire sanctification—a personal, definitive work of God’s sanctifying grace by which the war within oneself might cease and the heart be fully released from rebellion into whole hearted love for God and others.” Dieter, “The Wesleyan Perspective,” 17.29

?“[Perfection] does not mean freedom from ignorance, nor from mistake. Christians may fall into a thousand nameless defects, either in conversation or behavior—such as impropriety of language, ungracefulness of pronunciation. They are not free from infirmities such as weakness of understanding, heaviness of imagination.” Flew, The Idea of Perfection in Christian Theology, 325. A fuller understanding of what perfectionism does not mean can be read from Wesley, John Wesley, “Christian Perfection,” in The Works of John Wesley, vol. 6 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2002), 1-22.30

?Dieter, “The Wesleyan Perspective,” 15.31

?Ibid.32

?Wood, “The Wesleyan View,” 9733

?John Wesley, “On Perfection,” in The Works of John Wesley, vol. 6 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2002), 413.34

?Wood, “The Wesleyan View,” 96. See also Wesley, “On Perfection,” 413. Since such is the case, what is being communicated by those that hold perfectionism is that the Christian who has been entirely sanctified cannot commit willful or voluntary sin. The heart is in total devotion to the things of God. All identifiable sins have been rejected. See Flew, The Idea of Perfection in Christian Theology, 325-326. The issue with voluntary and involuntary sins will be discussed later.

8

Benefits of this View. One of the benefits of having this view is that one looks upon

one’s sanctification with optimism. Robert Flew correctly points out that the doctrine of entire

sanctification directs our minds to the wonders of what God can do in and with our lives.35

Personal sin is not seen as an unconquerable foe, but one that can be subjugated to the love of

Christ. The hope of victory can keep one pressing forward when frustrated with sin.

Another benefit is the zeal for the good life of holiness that comes with the Wesleyan

doctrine. Holiness is to be pursued with zeal because holiness is beautiful to obtain. Holiness is

not a cold lists of regulations. Instead, holiness is a blessing to partake in when we yearn for it

enough. Such a view can bring needed heat to cold views of holiness.

Problems with this View. A major problem with the Wesleyan view arises when it

comes to the definition of sin. Wesley’s definition of sin is that it is “a voluntary transgression of

a known law.”36 With this definition, “one may be blameless, even though far from being

faultless.”37 The problem with this is that it is making the existence of sin dependent on the

existence of the law. Romans 5:12-14 demonstrates such an assertion to be false. The first

section of verse 13 states, “for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given.” Even

though there was no law, “sin was present in mankind and men actually sinned.”38 Thus, a

Wesleyans view of sin is defective when viewed biblically. Death resides where there is no law.

35

?Ibid., 397.36

?Wesley, “On Perfection,” 417.37

?George Allen Turner, The More Excellent Way: The Scriptural Basis of the Wesleyan Message (Winona Lake, IN: Light and Life Press, 1952), 75.38

?C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Epistle to the Romans, The International Critical Commentary, ed. J. A. Emerton and C. E. B. Cranfield (Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1975), 282. See also Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1998), 277-279, who agrees with the over all conclusion of Cranfield and gives a good rebuttal to the idea that it is only the cooperate sin of Adam being identified here.

9

Ignorance about divine law does not remove the problem of death, and, since death is the

produce of sin, sin must come about even where no law is found.

Because it moves from biblical definition, the Wesleyans hold a weakened

understanding of sin. Sin is only a wrongdoing when the person recognizes it as such. Yet,

experience, as it correlates with the bible, stands against such a claim. Any Christian can testify

that they have walked in sin while not knowing it. “How easy it is not to recognize sin as sin!

Often what is called ‘sinful anger’ in others we deem ‘righteous indignation’ in ourselves.”39 Just

keeping the definition of sin at the Wesleyan level has one pass over the vast amount of sins in a

believer’s life.40

There are also several texts which are very problematic for the Wesleyan view. James

3:2 states that every believer stumbles in many ways41 (πολλὰ γὰρ πταίομεν ἅπαντες).

Thus, the reality for the believer is that they will continue to sin.42 In 1 Corinthians 4:4 Paul gives

a decisive blow against the Wesleyan view of sin. He says, “For I am not aware of anything

39

?Anthony A. Hoekema, Saved By Grace (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989), 220.40

?Stephen Neill makes this point beautifully when he writes, “In certain circles, perfection is interpreted as meaning no more than the avoidance of all known or conscious sin. This is by no means a contemptible ideal. But how far short it falls of an understanding of the depths and realities of our problems!…How often we find that we have done wrong, without at the time being aware that we were doing it!...To go one stage deeper yet, which of us will venture to claim that the motives which impel us to action are always free from an admixture of dross, perhaps unobserved at the time, but painfully evident to us when we have leisure to be completely honest with ourselves? Over nearly forty years there comes back to me a beautiful description of a preacher returning from the University Church at Oxford with a bulky manuscript under his arm, bursting with pride because he had just preached so excellent a sermon on humility.” Stephen Neill, Christian Holiness (New York, NY: Harper & Brothers, 1960), 37-38.41

?One could translate πολλὰ to speak to the amount of sins one commits as does the NKJV and the NRSV. But whether one translates it as speaking to amount or variety does not change the argument from the text. 42

?Wesley tries to explain the passage by saying that the subject of the verse is neither the Apostle or the Christians but false teachers. Wesley, “Christian Perfection,” 13-14.

However, verse two is clearly connected to verse one by the use of γὰρ. And the subject in verse one is plainly stated as the Christians (ἀδελφοί μου). Compare with Douglas J. Moo, The Letter of James, The Pillar New Testament Commentary, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 150-151.

10

against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me.” Paul’s lack of

knowledge of his actions does not acquit him of it. Since his final judgments of his actions are

fallible he must wait for God’s final verdict.43 Then, in Philippians 3:12; Paul’s denial of his own

perfection (Οὐχ ὅτι ἤδη ἔλαβον ἢ ἤδη τετελείωμαι). Paul discounts the possibility that

he had obtained the goal of gaining Christ and being made perfect.44 If Paul cannot reach

perfection, what Christian can? Such texts do not fit within the Wesleyan system.

The final problem is the contradictory meaning of sin that has to be crafted in thinking

about confession. An example of this can be seen in regards to confession. The question of the

need for the “perfect” believer’s confession was posed to him.45 Wesley’s answer had the

mistakes a “perfect” Christian committed needing the atoning blood of Christ since it was “a

transgression of the perfect law.”46 But how could it be a transgression if a transgression is only a

known transgression? As was quoted before, Wesley clearly defined sin as a known

transgression of the law of God. If one did not know about it, it was not sin. What we are faced

with is a contradiction.47 The Wesleyan view, however, has to hold this considering that the

Apostle John clearly states that confessing one’s sin is a staple part of the Christian’s life (1 John

43

?Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek Commentary, ed. I Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 340-341.

Wood tries to do away with this text by saying that it refers to a psychological problem Paul is having. Apparently, Paul can repress psychological “complexities” which would have him act out of wrong motives and still not sin. Wood, “The Wesleyan View,” 98.

Such speculations have nothing to do with the text which is before us, presents a host of complexities for understanding the meaning of sin, and relies on unbiblical psychological theories. With such being the case, his argument can be discounted. 44

? O’Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians, 420-423.45

?John S. Simon, John Wesley: The Master Builder (London, England: The Epworth Press, 1927), 50. 46

?Ibid.47

?Wood tries to make the argument that there is a difference between an ethical and a legal transgression of the law. Wood, “The Wesleyan View,” 112-113. Yet, such a distinction is nowhere found in the biblical witness. Unethical actions always bring the just condemnation of God.

11

1:9). Wesley would have to hold that “perfect” Christians would not need the blood of Christ

anymore. Thus, Wesley had to hold to a contradiction.48

Because of these problems, the Wesleyan system of sanctification should be rejected.

Within the system, there is a strong push to have real victory in the believer’s life, but the

biblical testimony speaks differently. There are too many problems spanning from wrong views

of doctrines of sin to problems with individual texts. Finally, contradictions ensue when trying to

live out the “perfect” life of a believer.

Application to Ernie. The Wesleyan’s counsel to Ernie would be for him to seek

Christ and the second blessing that comes from Him. Ernie will never win the battle by doubting

the love of Christ. Christ has completely forgiven him of all his sins and the Holy Spirit of God

resides in him. It is not his portion to remain defeated in his sin. Instead, if he seeks after Christ

and waits, the powerful second blessing will descend upon him. Ernie will find himself losing all

interest in the sin that once ensnared him. He will find, instead, that his heart is devoted to

pleasing the Lord and loving the people who surround him. Victory can be attained over his sin

and new love for Christ can pour out of his heart.

Reformed

Summary. The reformed view of sanctification has its basis in the believer’s union with

Christ and its means in the actions of the believer. The foundation and source of the believer’s

48

?Curtis, sympathetic to Wesley’s views, makes this statement about his research about contradictions of this nature in Wesley’s system, “I have found no way of harmonizing all of Wesley’s statements at this point; I am inclined to think that he never entirely cleared up his own thinking concerning the nature and scope of sin.” Olin Alfred Curtis, The Christian Faith: Personally Given in a System of Doctrine (New York, NY: The Methodist Book Concern, 1905), 378.

12

progress in holiness is in union with Christ.49 Any progress is a fruit of this union,50 for the

holiness of the progression is found in Christ and imparted to the believer.51 The One who works

the holiness of Christ into the believer is the Spirit.52 Every action of holiness by the believer is

energized by the Spirit.53 Thus, the attainment of holiness cannot be attributed to the workings of

the believer.54 Yet, this process of sanctification requires our responsible participation.55 We are

to participate by doing the appointed means God has given for men to do.56 By all of this, the

Christian is moved into greater and greater conformity with the image of Christ.

49

?“It is by calling that we are united to Christ, and it is this union with Christ which binds the people of God to the efficacy and virtue by which they are sanctified.” John Murray, Redemption: Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1955), 141.50

?Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 3rd ed. rev. (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1946), 532-533.51

?“The holy frame and disposition whereby our souls are furnished and enabled for immediate practice of the law, must be obtained by receiving it out of Christ’s fullness, as a things already prepared and brought to an existence for us in Christ, treasured up in him; and that as we are justified by a righteousness wrought out in Christ, and imputed to us; so we are sanctified by such a holy frame and qualifications, as are first wrought out, and complete in Christ for us, and then imparted to us.” Walter Marshall, The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification (London, England: Oliphants LTD, 1954), 27. See also 52

?Sinclair B. Ferguson, “The Reformed View,” in Christian Spirituality: Five Views of Sanctification, ed. Donald L. Alexander (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 62.53

?Murray, Redemption, 183. 54

?“men do not make themselves holy; their holiness, and their growth in grace, are not due to their own fidelity, or firmness of purpose, or watchfulness and diligence, although all of these are required, but to the divine influence by which they are rendered thus faithful, watchful, and diligent, and which produces in them the fruits of righteousness…The hand is not more dependent on the head for the continuance of its vitality, than is the believer on Christ for the continuance of spiritual life in the soul.” Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, vol. 3 (New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1906), 218.55

?Hoekema, Saved By Grace, 200.56

? “several means are appointed of God for the begetting, maintaining and increasing faith,” Marshall, The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification, 184. Marshall gives a thorough explanation of the different means in chapter 13.

Yet, we are not to see the function of means as making man co-operating with God in sanctification. “All working out of salvation on our part is the effect of God’s working in us…The more persistently active we are in working, the more persuaded we may be that all the energizing grace and power is of God.” Murray, Redemption, 185.

13

Benefits of this View. The benefits of the Reformed view are in its God-centeredness

and its call for human responsibility. From beginning to end salvation is of the Lord. No merits,

no boasting, no glory can be give to any believer. All glory, honor, and majesty can only be

attributed to the Lord. He and He only is center. From this, the believer can take absolute

assurance in the completion of His salvation; victory has been attained! This victory has not been

done by our own striving. Christ has come to be the champion of the believer’s salvation! It is in

His gospel that the believer is to remain stable and steadfast in their faith (Col 1:23). Yet, all the

while, Christ calls his disciples to engage in means by which the Spirit makes the image of Christ

real in their lives. Our humanness in engaged by commands to follow; there is no passivity. For

the Christian is called to make real steps after the way of Christ. It is inside this mysterious

capatibalism of God’s work bring forth our real works by which we are sanctified.

Rebuttal of Arguments. Since every facet of sanctification flows from the finished

work of Christ by the work of the Spirit there is absolutely no ground for human boasting in any

progress in one’s sanctification. The Lutheran’s worry that if the law is present then moralism

will follow is shown to be a wrong inference. The focal point of the Christian’s view is Christ.

Christ perfectly fulfilled the law, imputing his merits to believers (Rom 5:19). He removed the

curse of the law by becoming a curse himself (3:13). He secured justification by His resurrection

(Rom 4:25). He has obtained salvation for His people and no power can separate His children

from His salvific love (Rom 8:31-39).

It is by looking at this glory that the Spirit transforms the believer from one degree of

glory to the next (2 Cor 3:18). Being so encapsulated in the accomplished work of God the

believer can then fight to live according to the Spirit (5:16-22). Thus, the believer is never to

leave Christ. Instead, his sanctification is to be done at the foot of the cross.

14

The believer walks in a completed pilgrimage. There is no illusion of perfection. There

is the truth that everything for the believer’s salvation has been completed by Christ.57 At the

same time, “The Christian…lives in the tension between the now of living ‘by faith’ and the not

yet of knowing the full reality of the kingdom ‘by sight’.58 Thus, victory is a reality for the

Christian. The Christian has died, by Christ’s death, and thus able to put to death the sin that is in

his earthly members (Col 3:3-5). Hope is to be the bountiful possession of the Christian since he

keeps in view the redemption God has accomplished (Rom 15:8-13). We do not have to

construct a goal of perfection here on earth. The Perfect One has already run the course and sits

at the right hand of God to be the perfector of the believer’s faith (Heb 12:2).

Yet, the consummation of this reality has not been reached; it will be reached with the

second coming of Christ.59 So, for now the believer will stumble in many ways (James 3:2). The

war to walk according to the Spirit and not according to the flesh will be one of the

characteristics of his life (Gal 5:16-23). Yet, though he sins, he has an advocate with the Father,

Jesus Christ the righteous, who is the propitiation for his sin (1 John 2:1-2). So God comes to us

with the promise of victory by Christ while acknowledging our failures.

What the other two views say cannot be done are done in the Reformed view. We can

rest fully in the sufficient work of Christ while progressing towards greater degrees of holiness.

We can have the promise of victory while still living in the reality of our struggle with sin. The

57

?“The gospel—the first coming of Christ—wins for the believers all the riches of glory. The acceptance of the believer with God is perfect the moment he believes because Christ and his work are perfect…There is nothing the believer will possess in glory that he does not now possess in Christ.” Graeme Goldsworthy, Gospel and Kingdom: A Christian Interpretation of the Old Testament (Exeter, Australia: The Paternoster Press, 1981), 99.58

?Ibid., 99.59

?“For the believer the second coming of Christ will be the manifestation of his glory and of the glory of his kingdom, a glory which we already grasp by faith.” Ibid., 99.

15

reformed view more adequately takes the full biblical scope on sanctification and presents it

more faithfully than the rest.

Application to Ernie. Ernie would be directed to focus on what is his in Christ Jesus.

He should have no doubts about his salvation. Yes, his sin is grievous before God. Yet God

chose instead to put the wrath for Ernie upon His own Son—Jesus. Ernie must rest in this

salvation! Part of this salvation is not only the truth that he has been forgiven but that he has

been made anew! He is a new creation in Christ (2 Cor 5:17); therefore, he does not live under

the dominion of sin, and he can make progressive steps in defeating his lust. This will happen

when he starts applying the means of grace to his life that the Spirit may transform him into the

image of Christ in this area.

Conclusion

Having analyzed the Lutheran, Wesleyan, and Reformed views of sanctification we

have concluded that the reformed model is the most biblically faithful one. The Lutheran, while

having a commendable centrality on Christ, does not deal with all the biblical witness. The

Wesleyan view, while having an inspirational view on victory of the Christian, cannot hold up to

both the Bible and reality. Against both of these, however, the reformed view holds faithfully to

the full scope of biblical teaching on sanctification.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Commentaries

16

Cranfield, C. E. B. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Epistle to the Romans. The International Critical Commentary. Edited by J. A. Emerton and C. E. B. Cranfield. Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1975.

Harris, Murray J. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text. The New International Greek Commentary. Edited by I Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005.

Moo, Douglas J. The Letter of James. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Edited by D. A. Carson. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000.

O’Brien, Peter T. The Epistle to the Philippians: A Commentary on the Greek Text. The New International Greek Commentary. Edited by I Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000.

_____________. The Letter of Hebrews. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Edited by D. A. Carson. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010.

Schreiner, Thomas R. Romans. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1998.

Thiselton, Anthony C. The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text. The New International Greek Commentary. Edited by I Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000.

Books

Bayer, Oswald. Living By Faith: Justification and Sanctification. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003.

____________. Martin Luther’s Theology: A Contemporary Interpretation. Translated by Thomas H. Trapp. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2008.

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. 3rd ed. rev. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1946.

Berkouwer, G. C. Faith and Sanctification. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1952.

Curtis, Olin Alfred. The Christian Faith: Personally Given in a System of Doctrine. New York, NY: The Methodist Book Concern, 1905.

Flew, R. Newton. The Idea of Perfection in Christian Theology: An Historical Study of the Christian Ideal for the Present Life. London, Great Britain: Oxford university Press, 1934.

17

Goldsworthy, Graeme. Gospel and Kingdom: A Christian Interpretation of the Old Testament. Exeter, Australia: The Paternoster Press, 1981.

Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology, vol. 3. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1906.

Hoekema, Anthony A. Saved By Grace. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989.

Marshall, Walter. The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification. London, England: Oliphants LTD, 1954.

Murray, John. Collected Writings of John Murray: Volume II Select Lectures in Systematic Theology. Carlisle, PN: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1977.

___________. Redemption: Accomplished and Applied. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1955.

Neill, Stephen. Christian Holiness. New York, NY: Harper & Brothers, 1960.

Simon, John S. John Wesley: The Master Builder. London, England: The Epworth Press, 1927.

Turner, George Allen. The More Excellent Way: The Scriptural Basis of the Wesleyan Message. Winona Lake, IN: Light and Life Press, 1952.

Articles

Dieter, Melvin E. “The Wesleyan Perspective,” in Five Views on Sanctification. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1987, 9-46.

Ferguson, Sinclair B. “The Reformed View,” in Christian Spirituality: Five Views of Sanctification. Edited by Donald L. Alexander. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1988, 45-76.

Gerhard O. Forde, “The Lutheran View,” in Christian Spirituality: Five Views of Sanctification. Edited by Donald L. Alexander. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1988, 13-32.

Laurence W. Wood, “The Wesleyan View,” in Christian Spirituality: Five Views of Sanctification. Edited by Donald L. Alexander. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1988, 95-118

Sermons

Wesley, John. “Christian Perfection,” in The Works of John Wesley, vol. 6. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2002, 1-22.

18

Wesley, John “On Perfection,” in The Works of John Wesley, vol. 6. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2002, 411-424.

19