Ordo Salutis

Justification, regeneration and conversion happen simultaneously...sanctification occurs thereafter and until glorification. There, wasn't that easy? :laugh:

edited...conversion is also part of sanctification, too.

 

Salve RB! Quid Agis?

I think this will be a very interesting thread. I'm not an expert on this subject but I will enjoy seeing the posts.

 

Gladly! :laugh:

Justification -- sanctification -- glorification. Now let's break it down...

Justification REQUIRES believing the gospel of Jesus Christ which reconciles us to God positionally (we're adopted) and judicially (we're declared righteous).

Sanctification is the sovereign act of God whereby He gives us the Holy Spirit to indwell us (known variously as "regeneration," "new birth/new creation," "born again," "sanctified," etc.). With the impartation of the Spirit, we have the "substance" and "evidence" of faith, Heb 11:1 -- that is, He gives us faith. He gives us into Christ's kingdom and "body," the believing church.

Now the things He doesn't give us is discipleship. We still must choose to be discipled and followers and sometimes we choose "amiss" and follow someone who ISN'T part of Christ's body.

Glorification -- well, I don't think this is an issue, is it? suffice it to say that we are never fully "saved" until we are taken out of sin, death, and this world.

skypair

 

So in other words you can't believe unless something happens?

 

Just a quick journey through the web it states that a calvanist would view it in this order:

and a armenian would view it this way

 

It just occured to me that this discussion can easily turn on the covenantal christian vs. the dispensationalistic christian. Can justification be understood apart from a covenantal perspective? Here is a quote from Edward Hamilton which seems resonable from a historical perspective

 

Ok. I can see how it means that.

 

See NET Bible at http://www.bible.org/netbible/index.htm:
Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ8 has been fathered9 by God, and everyone who loves the father10 loves the child fathered by him

Notes:
9tn The verb γεννάω (gennaw) here means to be fathered by God and thus a child of God. The imagery in 1 John is that of the male parent who fathers children. See the note on “fathered” in 2:29 for further discussion of this imagery.

Also loves the child fathered by him. Is the meaning of 5:1b a general observation or a specific statement about God and Christians? There are three ways in which the second half of 5:1 has been understood: (1) as a general statement, proverbial in nature, applying to any parent: “everyone who loves the father also loves the child fathered by him.” (2) This has also been understood as a statement that is particularly true of one’s own parent: “everyone who loves his own father also loves the (other) children fathered by him (i.e., one’s own brothers and sisters).” (3) This could be understood as a statement which refers particularly to God, in light of the context (5:1a): “everyone who loves God who fathered Christians also loves the Christians who are fathered by God.” Without doubt options (2) and (3) are implications of the statement in its present context, but it seems most probable that the meaning of the statement is more general and proverbial in nature (option 1). This is likely because of the way in which it is introduced by the author with πᾶς ὁ (pas Jo) + participle. The author could have been more explicit and said something like, “everyone who loves God also loves God’s children” had he intended option (3) without ambiguity. Yet that, in context, is the ultimate application of the statement, because it ultimately refers to the true Christian who, because he loves God, also loves the brethren, those who are God’s offspring. This is the opposite of 4:20, where the author asserted that the opponents, who profess to love God but do not love the brethren, cannot really love God because they do not love the brethren.

I am not sure you can use this verse to try to show the order of salvation because that is not what the verse is about. It's about the fact that Christians love other Christians.

Even using the idea that one "has been born again" does not mean he was born again before something else, like belief. I could say, "everyone who believes has been born again" because anyone who believes in Christ was born again at the moment of belief.

 

I would hard pressed to vary far from this, but I will add somethings happen simultaneously.......the list is more Logical than Chronological in that respect


1) election
2) predestination
3) calling
4) regeneration
5) faith
6) repentance
7) justification
8) sanctification
9) glorification

Reformer

 

Start with this. How is one "saved wholly?" Soul, spirit, body. Now tell us -- How is the soul saved? How is the spirit saved? How is the body saved?

Adam died in the same order: His soul died immediately, his spirit progressively, his body eventually. Reversing that, we must be reconciled with God immediately, sanctified in spirit (intellect, emotions, will) progressively, and glorified bodily ultimately.

This is NOT a difficult analogy. All this adding of other "steps"...

...is a of secondary significance.

skypair

 

Since the blood of animals could not save according to Hebrews is the Ordo S. different for the Old Testament saint? If so how is it different? :wavey:

 

Right, I see what you are saying but I do not see the text supporting it. Of course all who believe in Christ have been born again. That says nothing about the order of salvation.

Besides, you need more than one passage if you want to make a case, (but I don't think this passage is one of them).

My own view is that there is no passage to support any one view because we can find passages to support different views. I think God doesn't want to tell us the order because it's none of our business.

 

Actaully RB, there is quite a problem here and it has been quite extensively talked about here in my Regeneration thread by myself, TCGreek, and Alex Q.

Here is an excert that begins the discussion we had on it which refutes the misunderstanding of using a "perfect tense" word with "present force" to derive some form of chronology from it to maintain an order of salvation. Though Alex wasn't popular on the board due to his supiority complex he was correct in this and much more eloquent than I, though I was involved in much of the conversation as well.

The perfect tense is not referencing chronology (as some perpetuate) but a state of present being due to the past acts of belief and being born.

The very fact one is in pesently continuing in belief is proof that he has been born again. Both events (belief and born) look back to a past event that is proven through present realities. Thus if one is no longer of belief that first testified of it, it is proof that he has not been born again. Which is why they leave us because they were never of us.

 

Originally Posted by exscentric
Since the blood of animals could not save according to Hebrews is the Ordo S. different for the Old Testament saint? If so how is it different? :wavey:

"What were the OT saints looking forward to in the offering of animals? It was a foreshadow of that perfect sacrifice in Christ. So I don't think it was different."

Not sure the OT saints were looking forward to anything but a Messiah and that a political one, they were offering animals because they were told to. If they were looking for a suffering blood shedding offering Messiah, why didn't the apostles know what was going on during their training? They didn't grasp the coming crucifixion/resurrection - being good Jews had they looked forward to Christ through their animals you'd think they would have gotten it.

 

Order I believe:

1) election to salvation,
2) predestination to conform those saved to the image of Christ,
3) gospel call
4) conversion (faith & repentance),
5) regeneration - which includes simultaniously :,
....(5a.) justification and sanctification (logical order of being made righteous in Christ and united unto God)
6) sactification (spiritual growth)
7) glorification.


Really and truthfully the order here is typically centered around what regeneration is and what it does BUT ALSO what should be talked about how does regeneration do this? Most specifically that if regeneration is before faith - "How" does regeneration before faith and salvation salvation bring us into a union or approval or better reconciled with God?

There are differing views on your side (to smaller or greater degrees) that regeneration sanctifies, and or justifies, and and or brings one into a relationship with Christ Jesus, or that it 'just' brings them into unity with God. I have personally spoken with people that have held different portions of the above.
So in short the person regenerate is given:
1. a new nature
2. (some state this) the Holy Spirit though not yet indwelling them (some say He does)
3. their relation to God has been reconciled
4. And are now IN Christ.
5. - and are given faith and repentence to be used (but this isn't the issue yet)

I will place this here from the link I provided about what I see: