Featured Our Role In Sanctification: An Imperative

You have misstated the Lordship Salvation position in regards to progressive sanctification I hold to Lordship Salvation (which is not the purpose of this thread by the way). Properly explained it teaches that we are justified at a moment in time and sanctified at a moment in time for the purpose of being set apart for God's use. And there is immediate fruit, although not necessarily outward as we commonly are used to seeing. 2 Cor. 5:17 says the believer is a "new creature" (or "new creation" depending on your translation). The "new creature" immediately has new affections. Unrefined? In need of milk instead of meat? A mere babe in Christ? Yes to all. But when a baby is finally born he acts completely different than he did 5 minutes before he was born. He can breath air and experience with his senses the things he could not do previously when in the womb. As he grows and develops he will mature, much like Christians do the longer they are in the faith. None of the major contemporary advocates of Lordship Salvation expect a new believer to bear mature fruit. That is an accusation you will have to prove.

 

Not exactly an unbiased article.

 

Please do dig up the quotes from Paul Washer. Specifically I want to see where he states that a new believer has to display mature fruit.

I do not believe you understand progressive sanctification as historically defined. You are referencing the practical aspects of Christ's Lordship. To a degree I will agree with you. A new believer does not fully possess an understanding of the Word at day one of his new life as he will on day five thousand. But Jesus Christ is Lord by the very fact that he is God. Jesus is always Lord. He is Lord when the individual was a sinner. He is Lord after the sinner believes. He is Lord thirty years into the Christian's journey on earth. He is Lord when the Christian departs this world for glory.

This is where the charge of functional Antinomianism comes in. If "Bob" comes to faith in Christ today, your version of progressive sanctification would give him a pass on his sins and stunted spiritual growth until such time as he rededicates his life to the Lord; making Jesus the Lord of all in his life. In other words, until he yields complete control to Christ, Jesus is not really Lord of his life. The train of though this creates goes thus: "New Christians are going to be immature and struggle with sin until the time comes when the finally make Jesus Lord of their life. So, we can't expect too much from them until that time." DHK, you may claim not to believe that (or that you would never say those words), but that is the product of your misunderstanding of progressive sanctification.

The majority of Baptists have turned rededication into a third ordinance of the church. But it is fraught with peril. What do we tell a person who is struggling with addiction. You mentioned smoking. Nicotine is addictive. If a Christian who smokes makes Jesus the lord of his life, what are we to say if he doesn't give up smoking? "Oh, you never made Jesus the lord of your life. Do it again." And do it again they do. Some altar calls have more repeat visits by Christians who feel beat down and defeated because of abiding sin in their life, so they keep coming forward to rededicate their life. It's as though they are seeking some dispensation of grace from God at the altar. They do that because they have been taught a defective theology about sanctification.

I have already given examples of the correct view of progressive sanctification in other posts, so I will not restate again.

I agree with you about emotions. You'll notice I never mentioned them. What I did mention were changed affections. You will notice them. You will notice a desire to read the word, to be with God's people, and to pray. You will also notice the conflict within. The mind, which has been trained by sin, will war against the Spirit. Paul had this in mind in Romans 12:1, 2. You will be tempted, sin, repent, and struggle with temptation again. To the extent you resist sin (in the Spirit) you will be better prepared to resist it again. I like the old saying referencing growing in Christian maturity, "You will not be sinless, but you will sin less."

Oh, but there was a change of affections in your life even if you think they weren't visible. There had to be. If you truly came to faith in Christ, the the Holy Spirit came to reside in you at that moment. The statement of reality in 2 Cor. 5:17 is not that you will become a new creature, it is that you are a new creature. Before you were a Christian you could not understand the things of the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2:14). Once you became a believer that all changed. I am not talking about external evidence (which seems to be your defense), but about the internal work of the Spirit.

 

The article did not present Lordship Salvation correctly. It is biased because of the presupposition of the author. Plus, you have this fascination with Paul Washer. I have my favorite whipping boys too, but I would rather reason from scripture.

 

DHK,

A couple of things.

1. It is not helpful to your position to make others do your work for you. You post links instead of providing the rebuttal yourself.

2. I took the time to look at one of the links. The author comes to the wrong conclusion about about what Paul Washer said for two reasons. First, he makes it clear he is interpreting Washer from an Arminian/Semi-Pelagian theological bent. The author writes, "He apparently either ignores or does not understand the two natures (old and new) of the believer and the free will we have to be obedient to the Lord or not" (emphasis mine). Second, he is not able to understand the dogmatic and practical aspect of doctrine. Dogmatic: "If any man is in Christ, he is a new creature" (2 Cor.5:17). Practical: "He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). When Paul Washer says, "It is impossible to be embraced by the Gospel of Jesus Christ and not to be changed at the very core of your being and it not be manifest to those around you" he is absolutely correct, although the author you cite disagrees. At the risk of beating 2 Cor. 5:17 into the ground, it is apropos in this context. The former sinner is changed at the very core of his being. How else can you make sense of becoming a new creature? Of being re-created? Of death becoming life or light out of darkness -- lux ex tenebris? What Washer does not say, and what the author infers, is that a complete visual change must take place in the believer's life at the moment of justification. This is sloppy and shoddy scholarship. Did Paul Washer put a time frame on how long it will take for the organic change that takes place in a new Christian's life to manifest to others? No. He did not.

 

If you mean the term "Lordship Salvation" you are absolutely correct. There is also no "progressive sanctification" (which you claim to believe in) and no Trinity (which I hope you believe in). These terms are not found anywhere in the Bible. Be careful about the premise of your argument because you might just be sinking your own boat.

Yes. Jesus Christ is Lord due to the fact he created all there is (Hebrews 1:2). However Acts 10 really isn't about sanctification or Christian obedience. It is about the gospel going forth to the Gentiles.

So, you are going to build a doctrine on a single verse, especially from the transitional book of Acts? Yet you do not think it would have been helpful to balance Acts 10:43 with Acts 16:30-31?:

 

I don't mean to sound cruel, but is this the sum total of your theological education? Google? Aren't you capable of handling the text yourself? I'm not talking about seminary level work, just basic rudimentary exegesis. I don't need to peruse Google to understand theological terms and I certainly don't post links to make my point without positing my own argument.

Which is it? Speak plainly. Does it border on heresy in your opinion or is it heresy? If it is a works-based salvation then it is heresy and I am not saved, nor others who believe like me.

You do not understand what Progressive Sanctification or Lordship Salvation is. I think I have done an adequate job of proving that.

 

I agree. There are many good local churches in the SBC. Pastor Tom Ascol's church in Cape Coral, FL comes to mind.

As for ex-preacherman, well, to comment further would be to give him the attention he does not deserve.