Bible-belted
New Member
Carson,
"I believe that Paul uses the terms of "justification" and "sanctification" interchangeably"
That is of course not true. you can't even argue it really. Try pluggin "sanctification" inot the verses which say "justifcation" and you'll come up with things that you don't agree with. Most obviously Ro. 3 I should think. you don't hold fro example that people are sanctified by grace apart from good works.
Acts 26:18 quotes Jesus, not Paul.
Now understand that sanctification and jsutification ARE related. But they are nto the same thing. Your confusion on this is evident.
That sanctification and justification are used inthe same sentence affirms this. But the very fact that they are BOTH used shows that they are not interchageable. If they were using both in the same sentence would be redundant.
As fro 6:11 itself it is perfectly harmonious with Paul's view fo baptism as seen in Ro. 6, which sees batpism as the time when the believer identifies with the death of Christ. For Paul baptism is an integral poart of conversion. Which, becuase it is related to the once for all finished work of Christ, can be spoken of in the past tense.
Take things in context, and not as a proof text, and things make sense.
I am aware of Scott hahn. He writes reasonably well. His argumentation is quite flawed.
BTW I ask you again to refrain from the term "anti-catholic".
As for Hebrews, remember that justifcation and sanctification are relateed. One cannot be sanctified without being first justified. That is Paul's argfument in Romans 8 remember?
BTW you can't prove your position by continually shifting the grounds. Please stick to one issue, on Scripture at a time. You cannot justify a flawed understanding of Romans 8 witha flawed understanding of Acts an 1 Corinthians.
"I believe that Paul uses the terms of "justification" and "sanctification" interchangeably"
That is of course not true. you can't even argue it really. Try pluggin "sanctification" inot the verses which say "justifcation" and you'll come up with things that you don't agree with. Most obviously Ro. 3 I should think. you don't hold fro example that people are sanctified by grace apart from good works.
Acts 26:18 quotes Jesus, not Paul.
Now understand that sanctification and jsutification ARE related. But they are nto the same thing. Your confusion on this is evident.
That sanctification and justification are used inthe same sentence affirms this. But the very fact that they are BOTH used shows that they are not interchageable. If they were using both in the same sentence would be redundant.
As fro 6:11 itself it is perfectly harmonious with Paul's view fo baptism as seen in Ro. 6, which sees batpism as the time when the believer identifies with the death of Christ. For Paul baptism is an integral poart of conversion. Which, becuase it is related to the once for all finished work of Christ, can be spoken of in the past tense.
Take things in context, and not as a proof text, and things make sense.
I am aware of Scott hahn. He writes reasonably well. His argumentation is quite flawed.
BTW I ask you again to refrain from the term "anti-catholic".
As for Hebrews, remember that justifcation and sanctification are relateed. One cannot be sanctified without being first justified. That is Paul's argfument in Romans 8 remember?
BTW you can't prove your position by continually shifting the grounds. Please stick to one issue, on Scripture at a time. You cannot justify a flawed understanding of Romans 8 witha flawed understanding of Acts an 1 Corinthians.