Justification - Rome versus Baptists

[The Biblicist]

I would agree with that a person would desire to walk with him and become like him however you still make santification an option.

No more than you do!

1. Do dying infants go through progressive santification?

2. Do deaht bed conversion go through progressive sanctification like the theif on the cross?

3. Do all saints experience the same length or maturity of progressive sanctification?


The answer to all the above is NO! So the quantity and quality is up to God in each case isn't it?

 

[The Biblicist]

No more than you do!

1. Do dying infants go through progressive santification?

2. Do deaht bed conversion go through progressive sanctification like the theif on the cross?

3. Do all saints experience the same length or maturity of progressive sanctification?


The answer to all the above is NO! So the quantity and quality is up to God in each case isn't it?

The Catholic Church Catechism expressly and clearly states that Old Testament circumcision was sacramental in the same sense of New Testament baptism and I can requote the CCC if necessary to prove this.

Romans 4:9-11 completely repudiates circumcision as sacramental. Romans 4:9-11 explicitly teaches that Abraham is being set forth as the "father of all who believe" in regard to the relationship between justification by grace and its direct connection with the only divine ordinance existent in his day and the verdict is that ALL who are justified are justified WITHOUT and APART from such divine ordinances.

The whole Roman Catholic ecclesiology and soteriology is built squarely upon their doctrine of sacramentalism and if that doctrine falls the whole Roman Catholic Theology crashes and burns in its totality.

So, TS can interpret the "law" and "the works of the law" any way he pleases in Romans 2-5 but the CCC refuses to allow him to interpret circumcision and its relationship to baptism any way he pleases AND Romans 4:9-11 refuses to allow him to defend circumcision as sacramental in its relationship to the grace of justification.

 

[OldRegular]

the bib



Thats error, your position is the same as rome. For the Elect are Justified before God simply based on the obedience of one Rom 5:19

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

So this occurred before they had faith. If Christ Justified everyone before God , that He died for, and that occurred in 33 ad, then how can those that He died for decades and centuries later not be already Justified before God because of the Obedience of one ?

You misunderstand the Scripture you quoted. It says so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Shall is future tense.

Jesus Christ through Apostle Paul tells us:

Romans 3:28. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Romans 5:1. Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Galatians 3:11. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Galatians 3:24. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Justification by Faith alone. That was the cry of those who wanted to reform the Roman Communion, to no avail, and so became the rallying cry of the Reformation.

And of course Scripture tells us that righteousness is imputed:

Romans 4:11. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

Romans 4:22. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

Galatians 3:6. Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

James 2:23. And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

 

[The Biblicist]

You misunderstand the Scripture you quoted. It says so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Shall is future tense.

Jesus Christ through Apostle Paul tells us:

Romans 3:28. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Romans 5:1. Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Galatians 3:11. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Galatians 3:24. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Justification by Faith alone. That was the cry of those who wanted to reform the Roman Communion, to no avail, and so became the rallying cry of the Reformation.

And of course Scripture tells us that righteousness is imputed:

Romans 4:11. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

Romans 4:22. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

Galatians 3:6. Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

James 2:23. And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

Well said! And it is imputed "by faith" !

 

[OldRegular]

Well said! And it is imputed "by faith" !

I can amen that!:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Thinkingstuff]

No more than you do!

1. Do dying infants go through progressive santification?

2. Do deaht bed conversion go through progressive sanctification like the theif on the cross?

3. Do all saints experience the same length or maturity of progressive sanctification?


The answer to all the above is NO! So the quantity and quality is up to God in each case isn't it?

The difference between your thinking and mine is that its not optional for those catholics not immediately killed. It is optional for your theology for not only those who are immediately killed but those who jouney through this land. According to you there is nothing that holds a believer to sanctification apart from a guilty feeling. but that's about it. A believer under your view only needs to believe and no matter what they do with their lives for as long as they have it (even habitual sin or sanctification) they have the option to or not to live sanctified lives. And thats where your house of cards crumble.

 

[savedbymercy]

or

It says so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Shall is future tense.

That does not matter, for it is still because of the obedience of One that the result occurs ! Just as it was by the disobedience of one the result occurs ! Rom 5:19

For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

 

[The Biblicist]

The difference between your thinking and mine is that its not optional for those catholics not immediately killed. It is optional for your theology for not only those who are immediately killed but those who jouney through this land. According to you there is nothing that holds a believer to sanctification apart from a guilty feeling. but that's about it. A believer under your view only needs to believe and no matter what they do with their lives for as long as they have it (even habitual sin or sanctification) they have the option to or not to live sanctified lives. And thats where your house of cards crumble.

You simply do not know what you are talking about! You may be fighting someone's elses point of view but certainly not mine.

I believe that progressive sanctification always occurs regardless how short a life that may be lived or how long a life that may be lived.

I believe that the rate of progression varies from person to person. For example, the difference between a man like Abraham versus his nephew like Lot. I believe that ultimately God determines the measure of faith and grace provided every believer (Rom. 12:3,7).

I deny a person can be justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without regeneration and good works also in its accompaniment.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

You simply do not know what you are talking about! You may be fighting someone's elses point of view but certainly not mine.

I believe that progressive sanctification always occurs regardless how short a life that may be lived or how long a life that may be lived.

I believe that the rate of progression varies from person to person. For example, the difference between a man like Abraham versus his nephew like Lot. I believe that ultimately God determines the measure of faith and grace provided every believer (Rom. 12:3,7).

I deny a person can be justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without regeneration and good works also in its accompaniment.

Yep, that's pretty good.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You simply do not know what you are talking about! You may be fighting someone's elses point of view but certainly not mine.

Now we get to it. Any time I speak about Sanctification in the Catholic context you immediately jump to works. Lets break down our discussion a bit.
1. You claim that your soteriology is not forensic which means that 1. it is not just a legal declaration but something that is a fact. 2. and it is not just a one point in time event. BTW I find most born again christians speak of their salvation in forensic terms. However, I will give you that you claim not to believe that.
2. You've also claimed that your soteriology is inclusive of all activities from the point that the spirit "quickens" the believer. I choose quicken rather than regeneration because I mean a specific point in the Chrisitian life where they are brought to faith by the Holy Spirit being able at that point to understand it. Whereas you've already said that regeneration is progressive. So to mean the starting point of regeneration I will use the term "quicken".
3. In the above post You've just said

I deny a person can be justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without regeneration and good works also in its accompaniment.

As much as I've spoken about the Catholic view of soteriology it seems that these points are in agreement with the catholic view.

Which means we only disagree (in soteriology) in two aspects. 1. whether or not Justification is forensic and 2. whether or not participation in the sacraments are participation in the divine life.

So lets get back to what you claim the heart of the matter in difference between the Catholic view and your view. The subject of works. If you hold that

I deny a person can be justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without regeneration and good works also in its accompaniment.

then you hold no different a stance then what the Catholic Church believes about works. If the entry point to salvation is the quickening of the heart (regeneration) by the Holy Spirit into 1st believing and 2nd then accepting faith in Jesus Christ and everyting there on is salvation then the Christian "walk" must be expressed in the transformation (regeneration or for us divinization which is theosis) into the image of christ where good works is part of the accompaniment. Then we've said nothing different with regard to good works. And your key point of dissention then really isn't good works or a "works" based doctrine but rather is Justification Forenesic and whether or not Sacraments are part of participation of the sanctification process which is participation in the divine life.

For if you say as you have so often in the past, and which Michael Wren does not understand the constant discussion between you and I of the Catholic View of Works, That you depart from the Catholic "doctrine of works" where that must lead my belief, since we hold to the same teaching of works as expressed in your statement above, that you believe good works to be nothing more than an excessory to salvation rather than part of the salvation process. Which lead me to the more specific question of sanctification. If by the same reasoning that "good works" are no more than an excessory then by definition so is the process of sanctification. However, now that you clarified your position with regard to sanctification where good works must accompany the process which is regeneration that is started in Christ then we do not disagree on this and the point of seperation lies elsewhere as I've expressed. Considering that it is not the Catholic "doctrine of works" or "salvation by works" which the catholic church does not teach, with which you disagree but truelly it boils down to the two topics I've already mentioned with regard to soteriology.

 

[The Biblicist]

Whereas you've already said that regeneration is progressive.

Where have I ever said that regeneration is progressive????? I do not believe regeneration is progressive. I never have believed regeneration is progressive. I have always pointed out that regeneration and justification both are punticillar completed actions in the past that stand completed. It is sanctification that has its roots in regeneration that is progressive.

Which means we only disagree (in soteriology) in two aspects. 1. whether or not Justification is forensic and 2. whether or not participation in the sacraments are participation in the divine life.

My oh my, that is just the beginning of where we disagree in soteriology.

If you hold that then you hold no different a stance then what the Catholic Church believes about works.

Whooooaaaa horsey!!! My view of works and the Roman Catholic view of works is the difference between night and day.

If the entry point to salvation is the quickening of the heart (regeneration) by the Holy Spirit into 1st believing and 2nd then accepting faith in Jesus Christ

No such TWO stage animal! No such thing as faith in faith. Believing has for its object Jesus Christ. Justifying faith is RECEIVING and RESTING in the promise of God's sufficient provision in Christ. Moreover, regeneration is only the entry point in time and space to salvation but salvation has its root in the eternal elective purpose of God before the world began. Neither do we agree on the nature of regeneration as your next comment demosntrates.

and everyting there on is salvation then the Christian "walk" must be expressed in the transformation (regeneration or for us divinization which is theosis) into the image of christ where good works is part of the accompaniment.

The inward man has been created by regeneration. Our "walk" or progressive sanctification which is the working out of the inward man, the new creation and thus the putting on of the new man in our life has its source in what God created/regenerated/quickened in us. Regeneration is not progressive but a one time punctillar creative act of God that produced a new nature/inward man created in true holiness and righteousness within us from whence progressive sanctification has its source and from the Indwelling Spirit of God from whence progressive sanctification has its power.

Then we've said nothing different with regard to good works. And your key point of dissention then really isn't good works or a "works" based doctrine but rather is Justification Forenesic and whether or not Sacraments are part of participation of the sanctification process which is participation in the divine life.

We disagree on so much here. Regeneration is not progressive but punctillar creative act of God. Sanctification and regeneration are in a cause and effect relationship and sanctification is "good works" or the righteousness of Christ being imparted progressively by the power of the indwelling Spirit of God. And so "good works" = progressive sanctification empowered by the Holy Spirit so that "good works" have their source of goodness in the new nature and their manifestation in the Christians life by the power of the indwelling Spirit of God.

since we hold to the same teaching of works as expressed in your statement above, that you believe good works to be nothing more than an excessory to salvation rather than part of the salvation process.

The difference between you and I here lies in your constant use of the term "salvation" in the above sentence. The term "salvation" is far too broad when speaking about a subject which is so specific and which is far more restrictive than the broad unbrella term "salvation." The truth is that "good works" is one aspect WITHIN the larger unbrella term of "salvation" but specifically restricted to one aspect of "salvation" called "progressive sanctification" which is NOT regeneration but the effect of regeneration as regeneration is not progressive but punctilliar creative act of God that produced a new nature and sanctification is the working out of that new nature into the life of the believer progressively and incremently by the power of the indwelling Spirit of God.

So to describe my view that "good works" is an "excessory part of salvation" is incorrect. Salvation is inclusive of many aspects and "good works" is found WITHIN one specific aspect of "salvation" which without there is no "salvation" in its broadest sense.

Which lead me to the more specific question of sanctification. If by the same reasoning that "good works" are no more than an excessory then by definition so is the process of sanctification.

Again, let me spell my position out in clear terms. The term "salvation" is synonymous with the eternal redemptive purpose of God which INCLUDES election, foreknowledge, predestination, the representative work of Christ, regeneration, justification, progressive sanctification, glorification. The subject of "good works" are found and restricted in the aspect called "progressive sanctification." Progressive sanctification is not a synonym with regeneration but is the EFFECT of regeneration and the indwelling Spirit of God in the life of the believer (righteousness originating from the new creation within/new man/inward man; and power to manifest it in the life of the believer originating from the indwelling Spirit of Christ).

However, now that you clarified your position with regard to sanctification where good works must accompany the process which is regeneration

Here is the crux of our disagreement. Catholicism confuses regeneration with progressive sanctification. Catholicism insists that regeneration is a "process" when it is not and Greek grammar proves it is not a process as it is never presented in the present tense or tense of incompleted action but it is always presented in the tense of completed action (Aorist) and confirmed by verbs that demand a completed action ("created" "quickened" etc.).

The church and ordinances, prayer, etc., all have their place in progressive sanctification as instrumental means used by the indwelling Holy Spirit to mature us or bring us along in progressive sanctification. They have no place in election, foreknowledge, predestination, regeneration, justification or glorification. The larger unbrella term "salvation" can be subdivided into three tenses (1) Saved; (2) being saved; (3) shall be saved and the various aspects within salvation can be divided as follows:

1. Saved = elective purpose, foreknowledge, predestination, representative work of Christ; regeneration, justification/adoption

2. Being Saved = fruits of the Spirit, church membership, ordinances, prayer, redeeming the time; filled with the Spirit, walking after the Spirit; good works

3. Shall be saved = glorification of the body, removal of indwelling sin; removal of corruptive principle; rewards; position in heaven; etc.

CONCLUSION: Regeneration is not a progression but a completed act that produced an inward NEW NATURE. This New nature is not being completed or in progression to be completed but has been completed. This new nature is created in true holiness and righteousness. The IMPACT or EFFECTS of this new nature is determined by the Indwelling Spirit of God in whom exists the POWER to APPLY the righteous and holy desires of this new INWARD MAN to our thoughts/affections and will which in turn makes it manifest by our attitudes and actions which IS progressive sanctification or redeeming the time by our works.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Where have I ever said that regeneration is progressive????? I do not believe regeneration is progressive. I never have believed regeneration is progressive.

No wonder you're difficult to understand. You keep jumping around with your own statements!!!!! This is what you said in post 18

I hate to spoil your disagreement but I do not see regeneration as forensic but as the source of progressive santification. It is justification that I view as forensic - legal position - not regeneration.

Regeneration I view as a transformation (not reformation) of one aspect of human nature (Jn. 3:6) and thus the beginning of a process of confirmation into the image of Christ that is never complete until glorification.

Our difference is when and how of regeneration.

Also in Post 39 you said

My doctrine of justification is forensic but that cannot possibly be said about other aspects of my soteriology. Regeneration, sanctification, glorification are not forensic at all but deal with the actual person and their subjective experience. Election is certainly neither forensic or subjective but is an objective aspect of salvation.

Since there are two aspects which make up a Forensic perspective 1 legal declaration and 2. singular event you can see why I believed you to believe regeneration is progressive. These types of statements make it difficult to nail down what you are actually saying.

I have always pointed out that regeneration and justification both are punticillar completed actions in the past that stand completed. It is sanctification that has its roots in regeneration that is progressive.

Certainly true with Justification not so with regeneration as the above two quotes from two different post attest.

My oh my, that is just the beginning of where we disagree in soteriology.

Well, as it is difficult to pin you down on one topic clearly discuss our differences. So far I only see two but we can explore other areas as long as they are true area's not like the accusation about a "works doctrine". Which so far you have clearly expressed so far the Catholic view in the statement I quoted you.

I deny a person can be justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without regeneration and good works also in its accompaniment.

Whooooaaaa horsey!!! My view of works and the Roman Catholic view of works is the difference between night and day.

Then you are going to have to show how your view lines up with your own quote

I deny a person can be justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without regeneration and good works also in its accompaniment.

and still differs.

No such TWO stage animal!

So you are saying you don't have to believe in Jesus. Intesting....

Believing has for its object Jesus Christ.

Uh.. that is rather obvious.

Moreover, regeneration is only the entry point in time and space to salvation but salvation has its root in the eternal elective purpose of God before the world began.

So you are regenerated at once with out needing to believe on Jesus? Or are you saying that a person has no choice in the matter of believing on Jesus that the moment they are aware of Jesus saving grace they, like an automaton, must believe in Jesus despite whether or not they want to? The down fall of Calvinism as I see it. The elect are relegated to Robots without will.

Neither do we agree on the nature of regeneration as your next comment demosntrates.

ok. Lets see your explanation.

Our "walk" or progressive sanctification which is the working out of the inward man, the new creation and thus the putting on of the new man in our life has its source in what God created/regenerated/quickened in us.

So far consistent with the Catholic view. Btw Sanctification can only be progressive.

Regeneration is not progressive

So you say but you wouldn't have guessed it previously.

but a one time punctillar creative act of God that produced a new nature/inward man created in true holiness and righteousness within us from whence progressive sanctification has its source and from the Indwelling Spirit of God from whence progressive sanctification has its power.

That sounds a lot like saying Sanctification has already occured at the moment of regeneration (the quickening) with out the need to become sanctified. You might want to change that a bit.

The difference between you and I here lies in your constant use of the term "salvation" in the above sentence.

How so?

The term "salvation" is far too broad when speaking about a subject which is so specific and which is far more restrictive than the broad unbrella term "salvation."

Yes I agree salvation is a broad term including many aspects of soteriology. However, salvation can not be more restrictive a term than salvation as you seem to be saying in this post.

The truth is that "good works" is one aspect WITHIN the larger unbrella term of "salvation"

Yes we agree.

but specifically restricted to one aspect of "salvation" called "progressive sanctification"

restricted? to sanctification (ie it can only be progressive) which is still a part of salvation. Which means good works are inherently a part of salvation.

which is NOT regeneration but the effect of regeneration

By which you mean that no matter how you discipline your life or subject yourself to God's authority it doesn't make you any more like Jesus Christ. Which is Problematic.

as regeneration is not progressive but punctilliar creative act of God that produced a new nature and sanctification

Which you seem to be saying that sanctification is now immediate upon reciept of the new nature. Is there then no requirement to be transformed into the image of Christ or doyou believe you are already there?

is the working out of that new nature into the life of the believer progressively and incremently by the power of the indwelling Spirit of God.

if this is your view of sanctification what is the difference Between our views of Sanctification? You seem to be speaking both ways Sanctification is immediate and yet progressive and in either case you don't really have a choice in the matter because God chooses election for you and you can't go against it no matter your disposition. Like a robot.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

cont.

So to describe my view that "good works" is an "excessory part of salvation" is incorrect.

Again you are making it difficult to nail down what you actualy believe about sanctification, good works in relation to salvation.

Salvation is inclusive of many aspects and "good works" is found WITHIN one specific aspect of "salvation" which without there is no "salvation" in its broadest sense.

Salvation is understood as a whole of which you admittedly said good works are a part of it. So again how do we differ?

Again, let me spell my position out in clear terms.

Yes that would be nice.

The term "salvation" is synonymous with the eternal redemptive purpose of God which INCLUDES election, foreknowledge, predestination, the representative work of Christ, regeneration, justification, progressive sanctification, glorification.

Good so far and so far in agreement.

The subject of "good works" are found and restricted in the aspect called "progressive sanctification."

There is no restriction. That is your own device. Either Good works is found as an aspect of sanctification or it is not. And if it is, its a part of salvation.

Progressive sanctification is not a synonym with regeneration but is the EFFECT of regeneration

Let me refer you to the question already asked: are you saying that nothing that you do to discipline your life, study scripture, adhere to the will of God in your life, submitting yourself to the teaching of Jesus does absolutely nothing to transform your life into Christ image? If that is the case then Paul certainly wasted his time saying and exorting Christians in Rome to

Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is —his good, pleasing and perfect will.

because its an already established effect. Just sit there with arms open wide and recieve the effect. According to you then, Paul would have been better informed by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to say "Therefore I ask you brothers and sistsers, in view of God's mercy, to enjoy the laying down of your bodies as a living sacrifice as God will lay your lives down for you since you don't really need to (God Forbid that you actually do anything) because you are already Holy and Pleasing to God. And there is no need to worry about being conformed to the world. You're already are not and no need to worry about being transformed by the renewing of your mind because God is regenerating you with out your consent and its going to happen anyway" Rather than what he actually said.

12 Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. 2 Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is —his good, pleasing and perfect will.

I believe in the economy of the word of God and that Paul indeed did not waste his time URGING the romans to be transformed and purposely avoid (by an act of will) conforming to the world.

 

[The Biblicist]

No wonder you're difficult to understand. You keep jumping around with your own statements!!!!! This is what you said in post 18 Also in Post 39 you said Since there are two aspects which make up a Forensic perspective 1 legal declaration and 2. singular event you can see why I believed you to believe regeneration is progressive. These types of statements make it difficult to nail down what you are actually saying.

My statements are fine and neither teach that regeneration is a PROGRESSIVE ACT. Regeneration is the completed action of being transferred from the kingdom of darkness to light - puntillar action. Regeneration is the punctilliar completed action of the dead being made alive - quickened. Regeneration is the punctilliar act of CREATION of a new nature.

This completed act that brings into existence a NEW NATURE is the "source" from which the Holy Spirit puts on that nature created in true holiness and righteousness in the life of the believer progressively which is called progressive sanctification.

The problem is not with my wording but with your reading into my wording a Roman Catholic perspective.

So you are saying you don't have to believe in Jesus. Intesting....

No, that is not what I am saying. I am saying that God does not give seeing eyes which do not see anything or hearing ears which do not hear anything. When God gives faith it is not a blind and deaf faith but a faith in something -Jesus Christ. On the other hand you are saying God gives seeing eyes that do not see and hearing ears that hear nothing as both what is seen and heard comes later.

So you are regenerated at once with out needing to believe on Jesus? Or are you saying that a person has no choice in the matter of believing on Jesus that the moment they are aware of Jesus saving grace they, like an automaton, must believe in Jesus despite whether or not they want to? The down fall of Calvinism as I see it. The elect are relegated to Robots without will.

No, that is not what I am saying. I am saying that regeneration and conversion are simeletaneous in action and inseparable as cause and effects or the bullet and the hole analogy. Logically NOT CHRONOLOGICALLY quickening precedes faith but CHRONOLOGICALLY they are simeletaneous in action.

So far consistent with the Catholic view. Btw Sanctification can only be progressive. So you say but you wouldn't have guessed it previously. That sounds a lot like saying Sanctification has already occured at the moment of regeneration (the quickening) with out the need to become sanctified. You might want to change that a bit.

The term "sanctification" is used both in the incompleted action tenses and the completed action tenses. In the completed action tenses it does not refer to the life of the believer but to God setting him apart by other aspects of salvation such as election, or representation by Christ, or by regeneration wherein man is PASSIVE in all of these aspects. Whereas progressive sanctification the subject is ACTIVE and participating with God.

restricted? to sanctification (ie it can only be progressive) which is still a part of salvation. Which means good works are inherently a part of salvation.

Of course in the larger or broader perspective of the term "salvation" and more particular in the more restrictive present tense "being saved" aspect of salvation and then even more restrictive sense in "progressive sanctification."

By which you mean that no matter how you discipline your life or subject yourself to God's authority it doesn't make you any more like Jesus Christ. Which is Problematic.

You are not understanding what I am saying. Regeneration by its own inherent nature must be a completed punctilliar act as there is no middle ground between spiritual death and spiritual life just as there is no middle ground between uncreated and created. Regeneration provides the RIGHTEOUS NATURE or NEW MAN or INWARD MAN which has been created in true holiness and righteousness. However, that new man must be PUT ON in our life. Progressive sanctification is the putting on of this new man in our life which is a progressive incremental up and down, gain and loss progressive action that is only completed and perfected at glorification. It begins with regeneration but it is not regeneration.

 

[The Biblicist]

There is no restriction. That is your own device. Either Good works is found as an aspect of sanctification or it is not. And if it is, its a part of salvation.

Ah! Now you have shifted from wanting to understand my position to attempting to make a rebuttal of my position. First understand it so you can deal with it correctly. Later we will debate its Biblical merits.

Let me refer you to the question already asked: are you saying that nothing that you do to discipline your life, study scripture, adhere to the will of God in your life, submitting yourself to the teaching of Jesus does absolutely nothing to transform your life into Christ image?

The reason you cannot understand my position is NOT becuase of my failure to present it clearly and accurately. The fault lies in your reading into my language Catholic concepts and/or attempting to make a rebuttal before you even attempt to grasp what I am clearly saying.

However, once again let me attempt to spell it out in no uncertain terms.

Progressive sanctification is the CONFORMATION PROCESSS to the image of Jesus Christ which involves means such as the church, ordinances, prayer, Bible study, obedience to commandments, etc.). These are only instrumental means used by the indwelling Spirit of God. It is the power of the indwelling Spirit that makes the instrumental means effectual and He works according to the purpose of God for your particular life in his scheme of things according to His eternal purpose as stated in Ephesians 2:10 and Philippians 2:13 among other places.

This progressive sanctification is the EFFECT or CONSEQUENCE of an already completed INTERNAL REGNERATED NATURE as it is empowered and made effectual in the life of the beleiver by the power of the Indwelling Spirit of God. It is not regeneration. It is not made effectual by the inward man as the inward man has no power to make it effectual (Jn. 15:5 "without me ye can do nothing" - Rom. 7:18 "to will is present but how to perform that which is good I FIND NOT"). This progressive putting on of the character of the new man by the effectual power of the Holy Spirit with the use of means is determined by the measure of grace and faith given to each believer in keeping with God's overal purpose for that particular life according to HIs eternal purpose in Christ Jesus.

Hence, progressive sanctification is not regeneration and it is not justification as regeneration has to do with a new creation within your human nature (but not of your whole human nature). Neither is it justification as justification has to do with your forensic legal position in connection with Jesus Christ before the law of God. The first obtains the nature of righteousness in your person (while sanctification is PUTTING IT ON in your life) while the lattter removes all legal obstacles to be accepted by God because you are legally accepted "in the beloved" by imputation. The first deals with imparation in regard to your actual person on earth while the latter deals with imputation in regard to your legal position before God in heaven.

Hence, regenerated/justified persons are by nature and by position the children/Sons of God and desire to be like God and that inward desire which originates from the regenerated nature motivates them to want to be Christ like. The pattern of Christ and the principles of righteousness are revealed in the scriptures, expounded on by the church, symbolically revealed in the ordinances and made effectual in a progressive manner by the indwelling Spirit of God who works in cooperation with all the above listed means and never stops working until you are completely freed from the presence and power of indwelling sin.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

My statements are fine and neither teach that regeneration is a PROGRESSIVE ACT. Regeneration is the completed action of being transferred from the kingdom of darkness to light - puntillar action.

Read the post and see if thats how it reads. But if that is what you believe at least we nailed that regeneration is forensic in that it happens in a single instant. So certainly you have a partial forensic view of regeneration.

The problem is not with my wording but with your reading into my wording a Roman Catholic perspective

. Ah... I think this is a scapegoat. I can certianly say just as easy that you misunderstand anything Isay because your reading my words with a protestant perspective and thus cannot truelly understand what I'm saying. That is a blade that cuts two ways is it not. Often I will define something so that you would understand it in context.

No, that is not what I am saying.

Ok. What are you saying?

I am saying that God does not give seeing eyes which do not see anything or hearing ears which do not hear anything. When God gives faith it is not a blind and deaf faith but a faith in something -Jesus Christ.

Who disagrees with that? Of course if God gives faith that faith is in Jesus Christ? So what are you saying?

On the other hand you are saying God gives seeing eyes that do not see and hearing ears that hear nothing as both what is seen and heard comes later.

That is entirely untrue as I've shown you in the catachism. Look at this progression

Faith is a gift of God, a supernatural virtue infused by him. "Before this faith can be exercised, man must have the grace of God to move and assist him; he must have the interior helps of the Holy Spirit, who moves the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and 'makes it easy for all to accept and believe the truth.'

The term "sanctification" is used both in the incompleted action tenses and the completed action tenses. In the completed action tenses it does not refer to the life of the believer but to God setting him apart by other aspects of salvation such as election, or representation by Christ, or by regeneration wherein man is PASSIVE in all of these aspects. Whereas progressive sanctification the subject is ACTIVE and participating with God.

I don't think there is this distinction in scripture active and passive sanctification. There is Holy which by definition is to be set apart. And then there is sanctification the process of being transformed into the likeness of Jesus Christ.

Of course in the larger or broader perspective of the term "salvation" and more particular in the more restrictive present tense "being saved" aspect of salvation and then even more restrictive sense in "progressive sanctification."

It seems you are saying that you are saved and being saved.

You are not understanding what I am saying. Regeneration by its own inherent nature must be a completed punctilliar act as there is no middle ground between spiritual death and spiritual life just as there is no middle ground between uncreated and created. Regeneration provides the RIGHTEOUS NATURE or NEW MAN or INWARD MAN which has been created in true holiness and righteousness. However, that new man must be PUT ON in our life.

So far I'm in agreement. However, the question that is begged is Why must the new man be put on? If its not associated with salvation? If there is no must then it is optional is it not?

Progressive sanctification is the putting on of this new man in our life which is a progressive incremental up and down, gain and loss progressive action that is only completed and perfected at glorification.

what happens if you don't "put it on"?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Ah! Now you have shifted from wanting to understand my position to attempting to make a rebuttal of my position. First understand it so you can deal with it correctly. Later we will debate its Biblical merits.

The problem with any discussion is when you bring a new term or consept it must be evaluated. In this case this device is singular to you. I would love to here your biblical defense of this use of device. Restriction of an aspect of sanctification. No where in the bible do I find that. Sounds like new doctrine to me.

The reason you cannot understand my position is NOT becuase of my failure to present it clearly and accurately

That is exactly the problem

The fault lies in your reading into my language Catholic concepts

blade that cuts two ways as I've said.

and/or attempting to make a rebuttal before you even attempt to grasp what I am clearly saying.

rebuttal must be made when a new doctrine or classification not in common use must be made.

However, once again let me attempt to spell it out in no uncertain terms.

Not once again but finally!

Progressive sanctification is the CONFORMATION PROCESSS to the image of Jesus Christ which involves means such as the church, ordinances, prayer, Bible study, obedience to commandments, etc.). These are only instrumental means used by the indwelling Spirit of God. It is the power of the indwelling Spirit that makes the instrumental means effectual and He works according to the purpose of God for your particular life in his scheme of things according to His eternal purpose as stated in Ephesians 2:10 and Philippians 2:13 among other places.

Ok that meets with the definition of sanctification.

This progressive sanctification is the EFFECT or CONSEQUENCE of an already completed INTERNAL REGNERATED NATURE

Here is the problem with this statement. You are basically saying what I suggested that

its an already established effect. Just sit there with arms open wide and recieve the effect.

Again there would have been no point for Paul to urge christians as he does in Romans 12:1-2 rather you seem to be redefining what Paul said into that passage providing a meaning closer to

Therefore I ask you brothers and sistsers, in view of God's mercy, to enjoy the laying down of your bodies as a living sacrifice as God will lay your lives down for you since you don't really need to (God Forbid that you actually do anything) because you are already Holy and Pleasing to God. And there is no need to worry about being conformed to the world. You're already are not and no need to worry about being transformed by the renewing of your mind because God is regenerating you with out your consent and its going to happen anyway- TS amendment to his view of the closer meaning of Biblicist thought on sanctification with regard to Romans 12

. I find that problematic.

 

[The Biblicist]

Q

Read the post and see if thats how it reads.

There is not one single word in either posts that says or suggests that regeneration is progressive. I call regeneration the "source" of progressive sanctification but I never define regeneration as progressive sanctification and I have been ever so consistent with that distinction.

But if that is what you believe at least we nailed that regeneration is forensic in that it happens in a single instant. So certainly you have a partial forensic view of regeneration.

Oh no you don't. Glorification occurs instantly in a "twinkling of an eye" but it is not foresenic. The aspect of time has nothing to do with whether or not something is forensic. The term forensic has to do with the LEGAL characterization of something not the TIME characterization of something.

That is entirely untrue as I've shown you in the catachism. Look at this progression

I understand the Catholic view but reject it as Unbiblical. God does not give you abstract faith and then later give you grace to apply it so that it becomes saving or justifing faith.

I don't think there is this distinction in scripture active and passive sanctification. There is Holy which by definition is to be set apart. And then there is sanctification the process of being transformed into the likeness of Jesus Christ.

There is such a difference and one is found in the Perfect tense and passive voice while the other is found in the present tense.

1. I Corinthians 1:2 "them that are sanctified" - Perfect tense completed action.

2. Hebrews 10:10 versus Hebrews 10:14

a. Perfect PASSIVE participle "sanctified through the offering...ONCE FOR ALL.... hath perfected" - vv. 10,14

b. Present PASSIVE participle "being sanctified" - v. 14

The perfect tense speaks of an already completed action by God through means prior to the birth and life of the believer that is "once for all".

The present tense speaks of the progressive sanctification by God (passive voice" through instrumental means (Heb. 10:19-25) wherein the believer is an active pariticipant.

It seems you are saying that you are saved and being saved.

Has your physical body alread been delivered/saved from sin and its presence and power? No! Will it be? Yes.

What is born of Spirit is sprit (Jn. 3:6) and what is born of God cannot sin (1 Jn. 3:9) because His seed remaineth in him (The Holy Spirit and new creature) or the regenerated spirit of man. It is "saved" glorified sinless finished work of God.

This inward New creation that has been "quickened" is to be PUT ON in the mind, affections and actions - Thus your LIFE is being saved as you are REDEEMING THE TIME (Eph. 5:16) or making your life count for the glory of God. This is a daily salvation of the daily life.

So far I'm in agreement. However, the question that is begged is Why must the new man be put on? If its not associated with salvation? If there is no must then it is optional is it not?

It must be "put on" because only according to how a man thinking in his heart so is he. Only as the affections are set on things above so is he. The righteousness found in the new creation or regenerated spirit of man must be put on in the CONSCIENCE SELF - thinking, affections and will which is manifested in what you say and do. This is walking in the Spirit or living under the control of the Spirit.

what happens if you don't "put it on"?

You are either walking AFTER the flesh or AFTER the spirit at all times. What TIME you are walking after the flesh is LOST forever but what TIME you are walking after the spirit is SAVED forever and that is how you REDEEM THE TIME (Eph. 5:16). What is lost is burned in the day of judgement but what is saved is preserved in REWARDS and POSITION in heaven but the "soul" itself is not lost (1 Cor. 3:11-15).

 

[The Biblicist]

There is not one single word in either posts that says or suggests that regeneration is progressive. I call regeneration the "source" of progressive sanctification but I never define regeneration as progressive sanctification and I have been ever so consistent with that distinction.




Oh no you don't. Glorification occurs instantly in a "twinkling of an eye" but it is not foresenic. The aspect of time has nothing to do with whether or not something is forensic. The term forensic has to do with the LEGAL characterization of something not the TIME characterization of something.





I understand the Catholic view but reject it as Unbiblical. God does not give you abstract faith and then later give you grace to apply it so that it becomes saving or justifing faith.



There is such a difference and one is found in the Perfect tense and passive voice while the other is found in the present tense.

1. I Corinthians 1:2 "them that are sanctified" - Perfect tense completed action.

2. Hebrews 10:10 versus Hebrews 10:14

a. Perfect PASSIVE participle "sanctified through the offering...ONCE FOR ALL.... hath perfected" - vv. 10,14

b. Present PASSIVE participle "being sanctified" - v. 14

The perfect tense speaks of an already completed action by God through means prior to the birth and life of the believer that is "once for all".

The present tense speaks of the progressive sanctification by God (passive voice" through instrumental means (Heb. 10:19-25) wherein the believer is an active pariticipant.





Has your physical body alread been delivered/saved from sin and its presence and power? No! Will it be? Yes.

What is born of Spirit is sprit (Jn. 3:6) and what is born of God cannot sin (1 Jn. 3:9) because His seed remaineth in him (The Holy Spirit and new creature) or the regenerated spirit of man. It is "saved" glorified sinless finished work of God.

This inward New creation that has been "quickened" is to be PUT ON in the mind, affections and actions - Thus your LIFE is being saved as you are REDEEMING THE TIME (Eph. 5:16) or making your life count for the glory of God. This is a daily salvation of the daily life.





It must be "put on" because only according to how a man thinking in his heart so is he. Only as the affections are set on things above so is he. The righteousness found in the new creation or regenerated spirit of man must be put on in the CONSCIENCE SELF - thinking, affections and will which is manifested in what you say and do. This is walking in the Spirit or living under the control of the Spirit.




You are either walking AFTER the flesh or AFTER the spirit at all times. What TIME you are walking after the flesh is LOST forever but what TIME you are walking after the spirit is SAVED forever and that is how you REDEEM THE TIME (Eph. 5:16). What is lost is burned in the day of judgement but what is saved is preserved in REWARDS and POSITION in heaven but the "soul" itself is not lost (1 Cor. 3:11-15).

I think we are spreading ourselves over too much territory and should take one aspect at a time or else we will get lost in all the baggage.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

There is not one single word in either posts that says or suggests that regeneration is progressive. I call regeneration the "source" of progressive sanctification but I never define regeneration as progressive sanctification and I have been ever so consistent with that distinction.

It all in how you say it. Yes you called it the source of sanctification identifying it with the progressive aspects which lead me to believe you didn't hold a singular time and point of occurance.

Oh no you don't. Glorification occurs instantly in a "twinkling of an eye" but it is not foresenic. The aspect of time has nothing to do with whether or not something is forensic. The term forensic has to do with the LEGAL characterization of something not the TIME characterization of something.

Actually according to Paul glorification is progressive as we move from glory to glory. However, to be forensic it takes two aspects one is legal the other is point in time. You certainly hold to the point and time aspect.

I understand the Catholic view but reject it as Unbiblical. God does not give you abstract faith and then later give you grace to apply it so that it becomes saving or justifing faith.

two things faith is never abstract its a reality. It either is or is not. and It is clear from that passage in the catachism that certainly the view is scriptural. in fact if you reject this position which part don't you believe? Is it that

Faith is a gift of God,

or that it is

a supernatural virtue infused by him.

Maybe you believe that faith is like justification in that it is an imputation or a declarative statement? How about

"Before this faith can be exercised, man must have the grace of God to move and assist him; he must have the interior helps of the Holy Spirit, who moves the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and 'makes it easy for all to accept and believe the truth.

There is such a difference and one is found in the Perfect tense and passive voice while the other is found in the present tense.

1. I Corinthians 1:2 "them that are sanctified" - Perfect tense completed action.2. Hebrews 10:10 versus Hebrews 10:14

a. Perfect PASSIVE participle "sanctified through the offering...ONCE FOR ALL.... hath perfected" - vv. 10,14

b. Present PASSIVE participle "being sanctified" - v. 14

The perfect tense speaks of an already completed action by God through means prior to the birth and life of the believer that is "once for all".

are you suggesting that there are two sanctifications (as you have) or that by necessity of grammer the same sanctification can be referred to in two ways? It seems you are arguing the former. I argue the latter. Thus I have been sanctified, I continue to be sanctified and I will be sanctified. There are not two sanctification but only one and since it progresses to speak of it at any particular moment another tense must be used.

Has your physical body alread been delivered/saved from sin and its presence and power? No! Will it be? Yes.

surely but I can work for it in that direction. I think you just wait for it to happen as it does so of its own volition by your argument.

What is born of Spirit is sprit (Jn. 3:6)

Yes it is. As this passage refers to being born from above.

and what is born of God cannot sin (1 Jn. 3:9) because His seed remaineth in him (The Holy Spirit and new creature) or the regenerated spirit of man.

but you ignore Jesus requirement to stay in him. Certainly the Holy Spirit which we recieve regenerates the heart yet we are urged to not grieve it.

This inward New creation that has been "quickened" is to be PUT ON in the mind, affections and actions - Thus your LIFE is being saved as you are REDEEMING THE TIME (Eph. 5:16) or making your life count for the glory of God. This is a daily salvation of the daily life.

Ah... That is the Catholic Position. We have been saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved. And since you don't like the word sacrifice I will also that it is not only a daily salvation of the daily life it is a daily laying down (self sacrificing) our lives picking up our cross and following him.

It must be "put on" because only according to how a man thinking in his heart so is he

.
Exactly so!

Only as the affections are set on things above so is he.

Exactly so!

The righteousness found in the new creation or regenerated spirit of man must be put on in the CONSCIENCE SELF - thinking, affections and will which is manifested in what you say and do. This is walking in the Spirit or living under the control of the Spirit.

Yes, but now what if the man chooses not to?

You are either walking AFTER the flesh or AFTER the spirit at all times

Yes

What TIME you are walking after the flesh is LOST forever but what TIME you are walking after the spirit is SAVED forever and that is how you REDEEM THE TIME (Eph. 5:16).

Yes and so it saves you.

What is lost is burned in the day of judgement

Yes

but what is saved is preserved in REWARDS and POSITION in heaven but the "soul" itself is not lost (1 Cor. 3:11-15).

Let me clarify what I see in that passage. I don't see "crowns" in it nor do I see position in it. What I do see is that in verse 14

If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward

I see a reward that I view is more Christlikeness in our eternal life and verse 15

If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.

seems to be sayiing that if all of our works are destroyed yet we may yet recieve eternal life - as one excaping through a flame.