Salvation before Chauvin and Arminius

Chemnitz,

if you read JDDJ you wouldn't say that. They explained what they mean by grace and faith.

 

Is there anything wrong to consider the salvation as a process?

 

I have read it, albeit a long time ago. They never reached a common consensus.

 

The truth for today was abandoned at the end of Pauls life, and only a small band of believers today have taken it back up. Dispensationalism, folks, is the truth that a rightly divided Bible testifies to.

posted by Janosik
Is there anything wrong to consider the salvation as a process?
I don't have an actual date or event that I can refer to, so I say you're right. All I know is that my wife wouldn't marry a non-believer, so I became a believer, cause I couldn't bear the thought of living without her. I do remember so many spiritual lights coming on in my life over about a weeks time. Odd thing was, the pastor that married us was no help, but the one who's church we are still with was.

 

hillclimber,

I agree with your post and there are a few of us around who still take the Word of God seriously and let it speak to us.

Also, Janosik, I am glad you are in the faith of Jesus and as I recall Rev. Dr. Billy Graham's wife said she never knew when she accepted Christ. She grew up in a missionary home and apparently always believed in Jesus.

The best thing is you are still letting the light into your soul, and are growing in Christ. Like you seem to be saying it is difficult to find a Bible believing church that pastors really want you to grow in your spiritual depth and spirituality. This is my opinion and others may disagree.

"Ray"

 

James
"The point about the Waldenses was to show that there were "unorthodox" groups who were not part of Rome,"
"
Actually the Waldenses were part of the RCC at one time.

 

I do know people who have been Christian all their lives; I didn't think such people could 'theologically exist' until I met them, talked to them and realised that they were every inch as Christian as me.

It is clear that the Pauline corpus of the NT talks about the concept of ‘unfinished business’ between us and God quite a bit. Important verses here include Rom 6:18-22, 1 Cor 9:24-27, Phil 3:12-16 and, perhaps most perplexing of all, Phil 2:12. The Romans passage is of particular interest since it contains the ideas of both salvation (Rom 6:18) and sanctification (Rom 6:19-22). Both these terms need looking at.

The distinction between salvation and sanctification has been the subject of a great deal of writing and preaching, especially by evangelicals, and I don’t really want to add a great deal to what has already been said here. Broadly speaking, most evangelicals would draw a clear-cut line between salvation, which they would see as being a once-and-for-all event occurring when an individual repents and gives his/her life to Christ, and sanctification, which is an ongoing work of the Holy Spirit within that individual beginning at the point of salvation and working out the consequences of salvation within this/her life. Putting it simply, whilst salvation is a crisis, sanctification is a process.

I think it is fair to say that, in contrast, the interpretation of the more traditional churches, such as the Catholic and Orthodox churches, appealing more perhaps to Phil 2:12, is to blur the difference between the two terms, and also to down-play to a degree the role of the individual in both whilst emphasising the agency of the Church (the Holy Spirit is seen more as acting in the Church collectively, through for example the hierarchy of the Church). Salvation and sanctification are more interwoven, and sanctification is seen more as a means of effecting salvation rather than as a consequence of it (see for example the notion of purgatory and, perhaps also, suffering as an agency of sanctification).

To a degree, I find both approaches to salvation and sanctification inadequate. Whilst agreeing with the general principle that salvation is a once-and-for-all occurrence (and thus disagreeing with the Catholic view), I take issue with it necessarily being a crisis event; I know many people for whom conversion was far more of a process, and perhaps evangelical soteriology needs to recognise this and be couched more in terms of individuals making a series of steps towards Christ rather than just one great leap. As an example, I understand that apparently Billy Graham can put his finger on the exact moment when he came to faith (crisis) but his wife cannot and her experience is better described as a journey to faith (process). Phil 2:12 is however a verse that cannot simply be ignored. It could be, adopting an exegetical approach, that Paul is admonishing the Philippians for taking their salvation lightly. It can also be interpreted as the results of salvation working themselves out through sanctification, but this does not explain the use of the words “fear and trembling”. Personally, I do not believe that Paul is here warning the church against forfeiting their salvation; he is perhaps reminding them just what they have been saved from and also heightening their awareness of the sheer wrongfulness of sin, something that maybe we Western Christians need to remember as well.

Sanctification also is a term that can cover a multitude of sins (if you’ll pardon the double entendre). The very word itself has connotations of holiness, which is one of God’s defining attributes, so one way of looking at it is to regard sanctification as being the process by which we are made more like God (cp Rom 12:1-2). Clearly, therefore, on one level this is a life-long process; as obvious evidence of this I know of no Christian who does not sin (even those who have been baptised into Jesus’ death and resurrection) and who is therefore already perfect ‘on the ground’, as it were, and accordingly we all have some ongoing business with God that we need to attend to in this area (some, like me, more than others!). On the other hand, Paul also talks in terms of sanctification having already occurred in 1 Cor 1:2. Applying exegetical principles to this passage, we need to ask ourselves whether Paul was correcting an imbalance within the Corinthian church here, as he sometimes did with his churches elsewhere. For example, he is keen to stress grace to the Colossians and Galatians, who were still bound up by the Law to a large extent, but is by contrast harsh with the Corinthians’ licentiousness. It seems unlikely, given the Corinthians’ general arrogance in their spiritual gifts etc, that Paul is trying to reassure them that all is well between them and God; in fact, if there is any corrective soteriological concept which is addressed to this church’s over-confidence it is the idea of beholding God “as through a glass darkly” (1 Cor 13:12 and 2 Cor 3:15-18). I think therefore we need to take what Paul is saying here at face value; that there is a level on which sanctification is already accomplished – having been declared righteous, God regards us as being holy already and treats us accordingly. (Elsewhere, Paul does seek to correct the possible attitudinal problems arising from this way of thinking (Rom 6:1-2)).

I would prefer accordingly to see a fine tuning of the definitions of the terms salvation and sanctification. I see salvation (and sanctification too, in the way set out in the above paragraph) as being accomplished by a combination of grace and faith, grace being a past act (the crucifixion and resultant forgiveness) with continuing consequences, and faith being a response-decision to that (whether taken instantly or over a number a graduated steps). The life-long ongoing process resulting from that I see more in terms of developing and deepening our relationship with God which flows from our salvation and in that way, God being Love, we are fitted for heaven; we try not to sin, not so much because it is wrong, but because it wounds God – love, not Law, should be the motivating factor.

 

Well, if the sanctification is process we don't know the result till the process is finished.
What happens if the sanctification process of a saved person fails?

 

Define 'failure'.

 

An end to believing in Jesus.

 

Indeed we are the house that God is building - His workmanship.

And we see "Thy Kingdom Come" in the view of Daniel 7 -- "by faith" --

[ November 17, 2005, 01:40 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

Janosik,

From God's view our sanctification never fails. Note: I Thessalonians 23. God through Paul is saying that we will be kept blameless until and at the coming of our Lord.

Our concern is to strive to please the Lord in all things so that our state of grace with Him matches our standing with Him.

Philippians 1:6 indicates also that we will be kept by His performance until the day we see Him.

Our concern is to live a holy life and to witness to the lost as to what Jesus has done in our lives.

What are your thoughts?

 

Janosik,

Sorry--I Thessalonians 5:23.

 

So why does Paul say in 1 Thess 5:22 "Avoid every kind of evil." What happens if you don't?

I believe the sanctification process can fail. What happens to the salvation then?

 

Bob,
good quotes!


Matt, Bro. James,
it appears to me that the salvation is process as well.

 

"If WE confess our sins HE IS faithful and just to forgive us our sins" 1John 1:9

"Behold I stand at the door and knock if anyone hears my voice AND OPENS THE DOOR I will come in" Rev 3.

"Come to Me all who are weary and heavy ladened and I WILL GIVE you reset" Matt 11

John 1
12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,

(It does not say "to has many as He arbitrarily selected and then caused to believe - to them He gave the right...")

For this reason scripture can say "work out your OWN salvation" not because we save ourselves - but because God calls us to respond to the Gospel!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bro. James,

the justification is finished. Christ's saving work is done.
The justification is seperate entity. It is not your personal salvation.

Your thoughts?