Sanctification: Monergistic or Synergistic?

[Contra_Mundum]

I explain our "participation" in sanctification this way:

My child is growing up. She's not really "contributing" to that growth, but she does eat. That's "contribution," but you know she doesn't provide any of her own food, just stuffs it in her mouth. And the Lord of Providence does the rest.

She likes to be with mom. She may be standing on a chair in the kitchen, and sees mom stirring the pot. "Me help!" "OK,' says mom indulgently, "you may stir the pot." And she takes the child's hand, and places it on top of her own. Wow, is that kid proud. She's stirring that pot! Oh yea.

That's how we "contribute" to our sanctification. We believe the gospel. We look to the Lord, our Father and Savior, and we try to be helpful. And he brings us along.

Galatians 5:22-25 (New International Version)

22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit.

 

[MRC]

The beginning of sanctification is monergistic, being regeneration and definitive sanctification.

Progressive sanctification is synergistic with the regenerated soul co-operating with the work of Christ by His Holy Spirit in the soul.

The end of sanctification is perfection at death, which is monergistic.

All the glory goes to God because we would never want to co-operate in progressive sanctification without being monergistically regenerated.

Progressive sanctification is definitely not some kind of "Let go and let God" situation.

I also agree. I found the book Possessed by God, by David Peterson, immensely helpful in forming my theology of sanctification.

 

[MW]

(My earlier post was accidentally deleted, so I will repost.)

We should not lose sight of the fact that justification is by faith alone and faith is receptive by nature. In sanctification the other graces are wrought in the person but these graces are creative. Therefore, although God works faith with all other graces in the person, faith is given as the instrument of receiving Christ and His righteousness, whereas the other graces are given for the pupose of bringing forth a Christ-like character and behaviour. Distinction must be made between them to the effect that we can produce nothing as a part of our justification but we must make concerted effort to be productive Christians as a part of sanctification; and in both cases -- the ability to rest in none but Christ in justification as well as the desire to live for Christ in sanctification -- the grace is the inwrought gift of God.

 

[jayce475]

This would be a good place to start (skip down the page to get to the Roman doctrine):

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Justification

There's a whole lot of RC lingo being bandied around and I'm not sure if I get what they actually mean. Apart from the Pelagian (or semi?) assertions of man having active free will in salvation, and setting sanctifying grace as the formal cause of justification, I'm not sure if I understand much else. But these two points already seem to be damnable. Is there anyone around here who can take the RC dogma on this page apart?

 

[Der Pilger]

This is one of those posts that started out short but ended up being longer the more I thought about it. So, sorry for the length, but here are some thoughts to throw into the mix:

What if one doesn't cooperate in their sanctification? Can you be saved yet unsanctified?

Romans 8:29,30 29For those whom he foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

Any cooperation by man is the result of the work of saving grace in our life. Yes, we do participate, or cooperate, in our sanctification. But we must be careful to understand that we can take no credit for obeying. The ability to obey God is also a work of grace. God still receives all the glory; just as He does in salvation. In fact, our sanctification is the working out of our salvation (Phil. 2).

Sounds like the Roman Catholic view of justification/sanctification. Why are they wrong, but we are not?

If I'm not mistaken, the RC view is that our cooperation with "infused grace" is necessary for justification. They confuse justification with sanctification, making the former a lifelong process (i.e., not a one-time imputation of righteousness, as we believe) that is never certain until the day of judgment, when God either pronounces a person guilty or innocent on the basis of that lifelong cooperation. It has been a long time since I have discussed RC theology with anyone, so I could be hazy on some of this.

Christ paid all the price for all the sins of the believer, and it is his righteousness that is imputed to us at the time of faith. This twofold obedience that Christ performed is perfect. His work of taking away our sins is complete, and his obedience to the law on our behalf is perfect. It is on this basis alone that we are justified by faith. That is why justification must be monergistic: There is absolutely nothing we can add to it or do to improve upon Christ's work. As such, it requires no work on our part.

There are, however, things that we can, and must, do in sanctification: making use of the means of grace, watching and praying, drawing near to God, mortifying sin, denying ourselves, gathering together with other believers, etc. This lines up perfectly with Phil. 2:12-13 and, in fact, is even demanded by the text, in my opinion:

So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling;
for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

In v. 12, Paul refers to their obedience and commands them to "work out [their] salvation with fear and trembling." Why would he refer to their past obedience as well as command them to work out their salvation if he thought that this was monergistic? Furthermore, the use of the phrase "with fear and trembling" seems to reinforce his focus on the Phiilippians' obedience. If I'm not mistaken, this phrase is adverbial in nature, modifying the preceding phrase, "work out." In other words, it tells how this working out is to be done. Would Paul teach that God should work "with fear and trembling"? Not at all.

The boldfaced part does not say that God does the willing and the working for us. It says that he works in us "to will and to work." I wonder if that little preposition "in" can tell us more than we suspect. It doesn't say that God works "in our lives," "in our works," or "to carry out our works," but rather simply that he works in us. Paul's view of this divine working in this passage, then, seems limited to the work that God does within a person spiritually. It is heart-work that Paul seems to have in view here, not deed-work.

Something else to consider is the use of the infinitive in the verbs "to will and to work." If I'm not mistaken, the use of the infinitive can indicate the purpose intended by a previous or antecedent action, as in the sentence, "I am going to the store to buy groceries." The infinitive "to buy" indicates the reason why the action of going to the store takes place. Similarly, perhaps this can be applied to this passage: "To will and to work" indicates the purpose for which God is at work in the Philippians. If so, then it must refer to the Philippians' work and not God's, since otherwise we would have the nonsensical translation, "God is at work to do his work."

Along the same line, I find it noteworthy that the word "work" appears twice, and in both cases it is the same Greek word, though in different forms. I'm no expert on this, but it seems to me that, in light of Paul's emphasis on both the Philippians' obedience and God's internal activity within them, the existence of two identical verbs would indicate separate actions: one carried out by God and the other carried out by the Philippians. Otherwise, again, it would seem redundant: "God works to work." That makes little sense. It makes perfect sense that the text means, God works so that the Philippians, in turn, would work.

If the above is correct, then there is a clear distinction drawn between God's activity and ours. Therefore, I don't think this text calls for a monergistic interpretation. While it does hold up God's grace and inner working as the primary factor in our sanctification--the "efficient cause," if I'm using the terminology correctly--it does not rule out our own work and actions. This is something that I find very comforting about this passage. My flesh is weak and frail, and I am prone to wander, prone to leave the God I love, as the old hymn rightly says. God's grace and power are always there, though, persevering on my behalf, perfecting the good work he began until the day of Christ Jesus (Phil. 1:6), working in me to keep desiring, to keep willing, to keep working for his good pleasure as I work out--not for--my salvation.

 

[louis_jp]

Thanks, Jeremy!

I also found helpful this short article from Hodge and Warfield:

Sanctification, by A.A. Hodge & B.B. Warfield

 

[TeachingTulip]

I have always been taught and understood sanctification to be monergistic.

The term "synergism" suggests to me co-operation of two equal sources of power. A partnership, if you will, between two volitional (free) persons, with the same goal in mind.

I do not believe sinners (and regenerate, justified believers, remain sinners) possess the powers and abilities to co-operate with God on any kind of equal basis. Christians are not "partners" with God . . . Christians are "vessels" of God; "servants" of God, in Jesus Christ.

Believers do not work along-side with the Spirit of God; rather the Spirit of Christ tabernacles in them, and their bodies and human spirits belong to God. (I Cor. 6:19-20)

The Christian submits his will to the Father and obeys God, not to gain "graces" or increase his sanctification, but to act in conformance with, and to manifest his love for, the Christ in whom he now abides. The Christian submits his will and obeys God, because He is sanctified in the Son and newly desires to emulate the holiness of Jesus Christ.

Living sanctified, holy lives, is not really a "co-operation", but a willing subjection to the will of the Father and the grace of Jesus Christ:

"If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love." John 10:15

Thus, any good work of willful obedience, faith, or repentance is caused by the abiding presence of the life and power of God.

A sanctified and holy life is the effect of this cause.

"I have been crucified with Christ: it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. I so not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain." Galatians 2:20-21

 

[Peairtach]

I do not believe sinners (and regenerate, justified believers, remain sinners) possess the powers and abilities to co-operate with God on any kind of equal basis. Christians are not "partners" with God . . . Christians are "vessels" of God; "servants" of God, in Jesus Christ.

It's the regenerated soul i.e. regenerated by God that co-operates with God the Holy Spirit in progressive sanctification as the junior partner. So all the glory goes to God that a soul that He has brought to life is now doing genuinely good works with His assistance. We are not passive in progressive sanctification, but at the same time we do not take any of the glory from God, because we would not be spiritually alive without His regeneration, and we would not make progress in holiness without His assistance.

 

[TeachingTulip]

I do not believe sinners (and regenerate, justified believers, remain sinners) possess the powers and abilities to co-operate with God on any kind of equal basis. Christians are not "partners" with God . . . Christians are "vessels" of God; "servants" of God, in Jesus Christ.

It's the regenerated soul i.e. regenerated by God that co-operates with God the Holy Spirit in progressive sanctification as the junior partner.

"Junior partners?"

Christians are mere instruments of God, used to fulfill His purposes. What has happened to the doctrine of "adoption?"

So all the glory goes to God that a soul that He has brought to life is now doing genuinely good works with His assistance.

"Assistance?"

Sorry, but such assessment reduces the power and purpose of God's saving grace.

Grace is not a mere provision of assistance as the RCC, NPP, and FV try to sell. God's grace is the power of God that tranforms sinners to saints; spiritually dead souls to eternal life; guaranteeing the elect of God eternal life through the imputation of Christ's righteousness to their account, as well as sealing them with the very sanctifying presence of God the Holy Spirit.

We are not passive in progressive sanctification, but at the same time we do not take any of the glory from God, because we would not be spiritually alive without His regeneration, and we would not make progress in holiness without His assistance.

Sorry, but my soul is offended by the language of "co-operation," "junior partners," and "assistance."

I do not believe any of these terms are biblical or Reformed.

 

[MW]

Sorry, but my soul is offended by the language of "co-operation," "junior partners," and "assistance."

I do not believe any of these terms are biblical or Reformed.

These terms have a biblical basis and may be used in a reformed sense. "Co-operation" and "assistance" are clearly implied in such passages as Philippians 2:12, 13; 3:12; where the finishing of the work of salvation belongs to the believer in a specific sense, on the understanding that his willing, doing, and apprehending is the result of God's working. "Partnership" is one of the ideas associated with "fellowship" and "communion" represented by the word "koinonia."

 

[TeachingTulip]

Sorry, but my soul is offended by the language of "co-operation," "junior partners," and "assistance."

I do not believe any of these terms are biblical or Reformed.

These terms have a biblical basis and may be used in a reformed sense. "Co-operation" and "assistance" are clearly implied in such passages as Philippians 2:12, 13; 3:12; where the finishing of the work of salvation belongs to the believer in a specific sense, on the understanding that his willing, doing, and apprehending is the result of God's working.

So if the believer's works are the finish of God's sovereign purposes, where is the need to introduce contingencies ("co-operation" and "assistance")?

I do not find comfort or security in any mere or imagined implications garnered from God's word . . . without further and better exegesis.

"Partnership" is one of the ideas associated with "fellowship" and "communion" represented by the word "koinonia."

Fellowship between God and man cannot undo God's sovereign rule over His creatures.

in my opinion, in order for created mankind (even regenerated mankind) to become "partners" with their Maker, is an impossibility outside of union with Jesus Christ, achieved solely through the grace and power of Godly regeneration.

Only the uncreate Son was equal with His Father. The rest of the sons of God are adopted, and lesser than their Father Creator, and ever will be . . .even though, He, by His grace, has endowed them with His name, blessings, and promise of inheritance into His kingdom.

 

[MW]

So if the believer's works are the finish of God's sovereign purposes, where is the need to introduce contingencies ("co-operation" and "assistance")?

While the fulfilling of God's purpose is not contingent on "supposed conditions" (WCF 3:2), it is nevertheless true that God's unconditional purpose is fulfilled by the contingency of second causes (WCF 5:2). As God requires us to work out (finish the work of) our salvation, it is obvious that God's purpose of final salvation is fulfilled by the contingency of a human effort which He enables.

I do not find comfort or security in any mere or imagined implications garnered from God's word . . . without further and better exegesis.

In this particular application the Word calls for "fear and trembling" rather than "comfort and security." One must be wary of an imbalanced reading of the Word whereby it is only fitted to minister to one side of human nature. The deceitful heart will imagine to itself a carnal security whereby the promises of God are turned into an excuse for non-compliance with the demands of God. The Word regulary addresses this imagination by stirring up the heart to maintain a watchful guard against its own wickedness.

Fellowship between God and man cannot undo God's sovereign rule over His creatures.

I don't believe anyone has suggested that it can.

 

[TeachingTulip]

Fellowship between God and man cannot undo God's sovereign rule over His creatures.

I don't believe anyone has suggested that it can.

The suggestion of a legalistic "junior partnership" surely does, in my opinion.

The forensics that accomplished the salvation of the sons of God was "legal" solely in regards to the works of Christ, and the Covenant of Works was accomplished by Jesus Christ, alone.

Plus, the promises and applications given from result of same accomplishments, were solely familial in regards to "grace," via the election of souls by the Father.

God the Spirit, does not function, and will not deviate, from either the Son's forensic accomplishments of (Law) or the Father's familial provisions (elective Grace), established amongst themselves by the everlasting and Godly Covenant of Redemption.

Christians are adopted sons of God, according to grace . . .not established as legal partners ("Junior" or otherwise) with God, according to sanctification or works.

I find no Scripture or portions of the WCF that upholds such a legalistic view of working Christian "partnership".

Fellowship is not legalistic, but only familial . . . and for one to be named and considered an adopted Son of God, is purely the work of Godly grace alone . . . and not of works at all.

Sola Gratia!

 

[MW]

Fellowship is not legalistic, but only familial . . . and for one to be named and considered an adopted Son of God, is purely the work of Godly grace alone . . . and not of works at all.

No person on this thread has suggested the fellowship/partnership is legal. You would have to read "legal" into the word "partnership" in order to have a valid basis for criticising the use of the term. I think all would agree that the relation we are brought into by grace is a familial one; and in this connection it must be maintained that there are responsibilities which attach to the familial tie. E.g., 1 Peter 1:14, "As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance."

 

[TeachingTulip]

You would have to read "legal" into the word "partnership" in order to have a valid basis for criticising the use of the term.

Which indeed I do.

A "partnership" is a (necessary) legal establishment of relationship that establishes agreeable contract between persons, which is not always familial or based upon rights of inheritance.

I think all would agree that the relation we are brought into by grace is a familial one;

Indeed.

and in this connection it must be maintained that there are responsibilities which attach to the familial tie.

All legal accountabilities, under God's Law, were performed and fulfilled by Jesus Christ, in order to validate and establish familial grace. Such is the definition of imputed righteousness.

Law and grace are distinct . . . there is no grace without lawful obligations first being met . . . and only Jesus Christ as Mediator and representative of elect humankind achieved and fulfilled all such contingencies.

There is no reason to impose any further contingencies upon the sons of God, who have been legally redeemed, justified, and sanctified by the powers and grace of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

E.g., 1 Peter 1:14, "As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance."

No dispute. The sons of God, by the grace of God, will manifest obedience to this command. Not because they are "assisted" to do so, nor because they are "junior partners" legally obligated to do so . . .but solely due to the abiding presence of the indwelling Holy Spirit of God who causes them to be willing and desirous to do so, to the glory of God and His grace, alone.

No contingencies imposed . . .

Sola Gratia!

Sola Fide!

Soli Deo Gloria!

 

[MW]

You would have to read "legal" into the word "partnership" in order to have a valid basis for criticising the use of the term.

Which indeed I do.

A "partnership" is a (necessary) legal establishment of relationship that establishes agreeable contract between persons, which is not always familial or based upon rights of inheritance.

Then by your own admission you are reading "legal" into the use of "partnership." In response I would simply ask you to exercise more charity towards the words of others, and treat them with the same fairness you would desire your own words to be treated. The fact is, partnership/fellowship is a biblical concept represented by the word "koinonia." When the apostle speaks of the fellowship of Christ's sufferings he is indicating "partaking" of them. This is not legal, but a gift.

There is no reason to impose any further contingencies upon the sons of God, who have been legally redeemed, justified, and sanctified by the powers and grace of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

I'm not sure what you mean by "contingencies," but the fact remains that the Word of God continually calls upon the people of God to fulfil the responsibilities which are connected with their privileged position. Any challenge of that fact is a challenge to the authority of God's word.

 

[Der Pilger]

Sorry, but my soul is offended by the language of "co-operation," "junior partners," and "assistance."

I do not believe any of these terms are biblical or Reformed.

These terms have a biblical basis and may be used in a reformed sense. "Co-operation" and "assistance" are clearly implied in such passages as Philippians 2:12, 13; 3:12; where the finishing of the work of salvation belongs to the believer in a specific sense, on the understanding that his willing, doing, and apprehending is the result of God's working. "Partnership" is one of the ideas associated with "fellowship" and "communion" represented by the word "koinonia."

I don't think that a fair reading of Phil. 2:12-13 could yield anything other than a synergistic view of sanctification. Good point about koinonia, too. That is a helpful angle.

 

[TeachingTulip]

I don't think that a fair reading of Phil. 2:12-13 could yield anything other than a synergistic view of sanctification. Good point about koinonia, too. That is a helpful angle.

I would differ, and so offer the following quotation, which explains and clarifies my views, better than I can compose for myself. I believe it will be edifying to the OP and others reading this thread:

" . . God works continuously in us to will and to do of His good pleasure. He not only regenerates us in principle, but He also continuously sanctifies us through the Spirit of Christ. That work of God in us is of such a nature that we consciously and willingly bear fruit unto righteousness. It is not true that God works our sanctification and that we work also, and that these two aspects of the work of salvation stand independently from each other or must be conceived as an irreconcilable contradiction. Nor is it true that God alone accomplishes sanctification and that He drags us along the way as stock and blocks, as is the presentation of the antinomians. Still less is it true that the relation between God's work and our work is such that we must work, and that if we work, God will help us, as is the view of the Pelagians.

All these wrong conceptions are repudiated by Scripture. Rather, the relation is always that we work out of the power of the work of God in us. God is first; and we follow. God is the fountain out of which we live. God works our salvation to will and to do of His good pleasure, and we work out our own salvation as the fruit of the work of God (Phil. 2:12,13). 'God is light' (I John 1:5), and we are always the light-bearers. God energizes us through Christ, and we manifest His energy as rational, moral creatures. He gives, preserves, and strengthens our life, and we live. He works and continues to work in us true faith, and we believe. He works in us continued conversion, and we turn. He gives us and preserves in us the love of God, and we taste His love and love Him. He works within us sorrow after God, and we call upon Him in penitence for the forgiveness of sins. He gives us true humility, and we walk in meekness of heart and life. He enlightens us, and we know. He leads us by His Spirit, and we walk. He makes us hungry and thirsty for the bread and water of life, and we hunger and thirst after righteousness. He calls efficaciously, and we come. He gives us power to persevere, and we persevere.

The power and operation of the power . . faith and believing, love and loving, hope and hoping, the eye and the seeing, the ear and the hearing, the understanding and the knowledge, the will and the willing, the power to fight and the fighting . . all in connection with gifts, talents, means, circumstances, and time . . are from God alone. He sanctifies us, and we walk in sanctification. Exactly from this relationship arises the possibility and the high calling of the people of God to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling, because this obligation does not violate the moral, rational nature of the sanctified people of God, but rather preserves it. We must not say, therefore, 'Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, but God must do it.' Still less must we say, 'Work out your own salvation, then God will do it.' But according to Philippians 2:12,13 we must say, 'Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God which works in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure.' Of Him, through Him, and unto Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever (Romans 11:36)." Herman Hoeksema, "Reformed Dogmatics"

 

[MW]

I would differ, and so offer the following quotation, which explains and clarifies my views, better than I can compose for myself. I believe it will be edifying to the OP and others reading this thread:

The quotation from Rev. Hoeksema makes the very point which you have been criticising: "Nor is it true that God alone accomplishes sanctification and that He drags us along the way as stock and blocks, as is the presentation of the antinomians" (p. 527). As he had stated on p. 524, "Scripture also teaches that the people of God are called to strive after sanctification of life and to walk worthy of the calling wherewith they are called."

 

[TeachingTulip]

The quotation from Rev. Hoeksema makes the very point which you have been criticising

The very point I have been criticizing is whether sanctification is synergistic. And Hoeksema specifically rejects a synergism in sanctification. I quote again:

"The relation between our walking in sanctification of life and God's work of sanctification must not be conceived in the Arminian or synergistic sense. God is first also in the work of sanctification. Without Him we can do absolutely nothing. Only when He works in us to will and to do of His good pleasure can we work out our salvation with fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12,13)." "Reformed Dogmatics" Volume II, Page 128

 

[MW]

The very point I have been criticizing is whether sanctification is synergistic. And Hoeksema specifically rejects a synergism in sanctification.

Rev. Hoeksema did indeed criticise an Arminian or synergistic idea of sanctification, and this Arminian concept has been repudiated throughout the thread; but as soon as he argued that the believer works as well as God he effectively stated a Reformed idea of synergy because synergy simply means "to work with." Further, you have repudiated more than the bare idea of synergy because you have withstood the idea that the believer is responsible to strive after sanctification, and this is clearly contrary to Rev. Hoeksema's express words.

 

[TeachingTulip]

The very point I have been criticizing is whether sanctification is synergistic. And Hoeksema specifically rejects a synergism in sanctification.

Rev. Hoeksema did indeed criticise an Arminian or synergistic idea of sanctification, and this Arminian concept has been repudiated throughout the thread; but as soon as he argued that the believer works as well as God he effectively stated a Reformed idea of synergy because synergy simply means "to work with." Further, you have repudiated more than the bare idea of synergy because you have withstood the idea that the believer is responsible to strive after sanctification, and this is clearly contrary to Rev. Hoeksema's express words.

I do not believe I have repudiated human responsibility to actively seek to obey God and live a holy life. I am rejecting and voicing sensitivity to language and terms used that create expectations that creatures can and should match the powers of their Creator; somehow achieving and maintaining their own sanctification. For instance, I do not believe Christians are obligated to "strive after sanctification." I believe Christians WILL desire to live holy lives, out of love for Christ, and because of the indwelling of the Spirit of Christ. Sanctification, to me, is not an achievement, but a blessed fruit. I revert to the Canons of Dordt and the Scripture in John, to clarify my thoughts:

". . . When God accomplishes His good pleasure in the elect, or works in them true conversion, He not only causes the gospel to be externally preached to them, and powerfully illuminates their minds by His Holy Spirit, that they may rightly understand and discern the things of the Spirit of Go, but by the efficacy of the same regenerating Spirit He pervades the inmost recesses of the man; He opens the closed and softens the hardened heart, and circumcises that which was uncircumcised; infuses new qualities into the will, which though heretofore dead, He quickens; from being evil, disobedient, and refractory He renders it good, obedient, and pliable; actuates and strengthens it that like a good tree, it may bring forth the fruits of good actions." Canons of Dordt, Main Points 3 & 4, Article 11

"I am the Vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing." John 15:5

(Underlined emphasis, mine.)

 

[Scott1]

Westminster Larger Catechism

Q. 77. Wherein do justification and sanctification differ?

A. Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification,330 yet they differ, in that
God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ;331 in sanctification of his Spirit
infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof;332 in the former, sin is pardoned;333 in the
other, it is subdued:334 the one doth equally free all believers from the revenging wrath of
God, and that perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation335 the other is
neither equal in all,336 nor in this life perfect in any,337 but growing up to perfection.338

Scripture proofs

[330] 1 Corinthians 6:11. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Corinthians 1:30. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.

[331] Romans 4:6, 8. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works.... Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

[332] Ezekiel 36:27. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

[333] Romans 3:24-25. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God.

[334] Romans 6:6, 14. Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.... For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

[335] Romans 8:33-34. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

[336] 1 John 2:12-14. I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake. I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father. I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one. Hebrews 5:12-14. For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

[337] 1 John 1:8, 10. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.... If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

[338] 2 Corinthians 7:1. Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. Philippians 3:12-14. Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

.

 

[MW]

For instance, I do not believe Christians are obligated to "strive after sanctification."

And herein you explicitly contradict the statement of Rev. Hoeksema (p. 524), "Scripture also teaches that the people of God are called to strive after sanctification of life and to walk worthy of the calling wherewith they are called."

You have been shown wherein your view is unreformed; one whom you respect as a reformed teacher has clearly stated your view is contrary to Scripture; now I am formally asking you to cease advocating your unreformed view on this board.

 

[TeachingTulip]

For instance, I do not believe Christians are obligated to "strive after sanctification."

And herein you explicitly contradict the statement of Rev. Hoeksema (p. 524), "Scripture also teaches that the people of God are called to strive after sanctification of life and to walk worthy of the calling wherewith they are called."

You have been shown wherein your view is unreformed; one whom you respect as a reformed teacher has clearly stated your view is contrary to Scripture; now I am formally asking you to cease advocating your unreformed view on this board.

Dear Sir,

Please note the language distinguishing between "obligated" and "called." Which, in my opinion, happens to be the crux of the entire discussion.

Your accusation and request seem a bit extreme. The OP asked a question of Reformers, and I as a Reformed Christian, have given one side of the two views.

But I will assuredly cease and desist in my conversation with you.

 

[MW]

Your accusation and request seem a bit extreme. The OP asked a question of Reformers, and I as a Reformed Christian, have given one side of the two views.

Your view is neither Reformed nor Christian. This is a Reformed Christian board. It is only reasonable that discussion be restricted to Reformed Christian beliefs and that participants abide by the moderation which restricts discussion to Reformed Christian beliefs.