August 11, 2010

Justification of Sanctification

Recently I was in a debate with two professing Christians who feels that any sinning is evidence of not being a Christian at all. They read Romans 6 but use a taxi-cab fallacy, and depart when they reach their destination. But they ignore Romans 7:13-25 and we sin because we are in the flesh.

I found it to be a difficult conversation because we have spoken of false converts in the past. I certainly don't feel that just because you sin that you are not saved. So I guess this post is to clarify things.

Maybe some of these Atheists felt the burden to be perfect and ran away discouraged. Christians aren't perfect, just perfected. Not better, just better off.Morality keeps from jail, blood of Jesus Christ keeps you from Hell.

There is a distinguishing difference between,

Justification which is an instantaneous declaration from God of our legal standing before God that was entirely God's work that is fully accomplished now through Jesus Christ. (Romans 3:24,26-28, Romans 8:11, Philippians 3:9, 1 Corinthians 6:11.) KJV, of course.

and,

Sanctification which is more of a internal condition that is a process through life where man cooperates with God that is yet to be fully accomplished.

It is a process by which God patiently, lovingly, and sovereignty convicts us of our sins, that we might turn from them, and be used of God.

Dr. Jerry F. Smith said: "If we were sinless, we wouldn't be taught of sanctification in God's Word (1 Thessalonians 4:3-4; John 17:17; Ephesians 5:26; 1 Thessalonians 5:23; Romans 6:12; 1 John 1:8-10; 1 John 2:1; 1 John 3:2).

From these verses, we can see that God knows we will sin. And has given us His Word to sanctify us. Sanctification is a process: As the believer walks in the Word of God and repents and confesses his sins, he will become a more and more sanctified vessel unto honor. However, we will never reach sinless perfection (experimentally) until heaven, though we are seen through the blood of Christ by God as perfect in Him (positionally) - 2 Cor 5:21, et.al. God knows that we will sin, which is why He gave us the Words found in First John (above)"

Slick said "The more sanctified we are, the more we care for others, the more we sacrifice for others, the more humble we are in our hearts, the more at peace we are with our lives, and the more we are like Christ in our character."

Claiming immediate Sanctification, without Justification, is an awful thought. That would devastate all of us since none of us would know if we are indeed saved until we die sinless. We are saved through Christ and strive to become perfect in Christ. Its not a light switch. Free choices are not eliminated in Justification.

Debunking, Atheists, Lawcourt, JustificationBecause of the work of Christ, and our connection to Him by faith, we have the right standing before God, and are declared blameless in God's sight. This is great comfort to the believer, because it means we will not have to face the wrath of God on the day of judgment. We are secure in Christ, and safe in Him.

Albertus Pieters in his book, Divine Lord and Savior, tells of a believer who was not well-educated, but who had a deep assurance of his salvation. Everyone called him, “Old Pete.” One day, while talking with Dr. Pieters, he said, “If God should take me to the very mouth of Hell, and say to me, 'In you go, Pete; here’s where you belong,' I would say to Him, 'That’s true, Lord, I do belong there. But if you make me go to Hell, Your dear Son, Jesus Christ, must go with me! He and I are now one, and we cannot be separated anymore.'"

Amen!

 Debunking Atheists, Sanctification(click for clearer picture)

UPDATE: If the "body of Christ" is already sinless through the Holy Spirit then there is NO NEED FOR CHRIST, but only the Holy Spirit. Get it? We are JUSTIFIED in Christ. He PAID the price for our sinning, in full.

The professing Christians (two of them) have since blocked all communication as to not allow the truth to be heard and in my opinion they are no different then Michael Moore and his manipulation of truth, and facts, to make his viewpoint be heard. Shame on you both for running from the truth. They attempt to cause stumbling blocks for believers in their teachings and for that they should be ashamed. (1 Corinthians 8:13, 1 Peter 2:8, Romans 14, 1 Timothy 4:12, Romans 14:12, 1 Corinthians 8:9)


bit.ly/JustandSanct

24 comments:

  1. And just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dan:

         In the unlikely event that you are interested, I posted my thoughts on the "false convert" label on my own blog. (Hint: There's no such thing.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's inconcievable how some people are so obsessed with the minutiae of these silly details.
    Sin is merely a convention of ancient leaders to control their tribes.

    If we could harness the energy that people expend on this foolishness society would be far more advanced.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Froggie,

    >>Sin is merely a convention of ancient leaders to control their tribes.

    O'rly?

    How do you explain the eternal myth of Heaven then?

    If that were the case then it would of faded away with the past in the modern society. Plus, that is completely illogical. Dorky logic even. The Bible teaches hope, to fight against evil, and also not to fear man.

    (Joshua 10:8, Psalm 118:6, Matthew 10:31, Hebrews 13:6, Matthew 10:28)

    So, again, how is that to be a control mechanism? Did you even read the battles that Moses went through, and how much the odds was against David fighting Goliath. If God is on your side, you cannot lose. How is that oppressive? You are not making sense.

    Liberation =/= oppression

    ReplyDelete
  5. Pvb,

    False converts fire their lawyers and try to go it alone when the evidence is overwhelming against them. They violate the court orders and thumbs their nose at the the judge. The ones in denial about their sentence, and the entire laws and court system, become Atheists.

    A Christian knows how much trouble they are in and will do anything to right the wrongs that they committed. They cooperate with the courts and will follow the procedures and do the community service. They complied to terms of release of their parole.

    That is really the difference. In reflection, I called myself a false convert for my past years but I was possibly just a babe in my understanding of being a Christian because I have not, nor will ever, run away from my saving salvation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rufus,

    Funny, I liked that, but I am confused.

    You are commenting on something in your opinion is not worth commenting on? Seems a bit...inconsistent.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Froggie said, “Sin is merely a convention of ancient leaders to control their tribes.”
    Dan responded, ” How do you explain the eternal myth of Heaven then?”

    Myth?! Well put Dan! Glad to see you’re beginning to see things a bit more clearly. ;)

    ”If that were the case then it would of faded away with the past in the modern society.”

    Astrology has been around since the early Mesopotamian civilization. The stars and constellations are no longer in the same position in the sky. It never has been shown to be a valid tool. Its been refuted countless time since before I was born. Yet, according to a recent poll, over 25% of people believe in astrology. That’s just one of many examples I can offer.

    Dan, just because something is not true does not mean it cannot offer comforts that make it attractive enough to ignore the obvious.

    “Plus, that is completely illogical. Dorky logic even. The Bible teaches hope, to fight against evil, and also not to fear man.”

    So does most of the skillfully designed propaganda I’ve seen. You cannot deny that fear mongering is also a key ingredient.

    ” Did you even read the battles that Moses went through, and how much the odds was against David fighting Goliath.”

    And I also have read the stories about “Robinhood” and about “The Hobbit”. The little guy who rises up against all odds against the bigger guy and wins. There are many stories with that same theme, so what? It a great story that could motivate others to fight for what they believe in but without any supporting evidence, its just a story.

    ”If God is on your side, you cannot lose. How is that oppressive?”

    But if he’s not on your side look out. He might, or order his loyal minions to, kill your entire nation and all its women and children, except for virgins. He might flood the entire world to kill everyone. He just might destroy your city with fire and brimstone, but don’t look back. If you do, even if you are a good person, he’ll turn you into salt just for looking. He could send you to hell to burn for eternity.

    Those were just a few example of his previous handy work. Also, it’s difficult to tell if you’re following his rules correctly since the holy text is so cryptic, self-contradicting and confusing. With over 38000 denominations just for Christianity, how is a person to know whose interpretation is truly correct. If you’re wrong, you’re screwed!

    ” You are not making sense.”

    Thanks a lot Dan, you just blew out my irony meter.

    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dan:

         For all your attempts to distinguish the "false convert" from the "christian," you are still only able to distinguish after the fact. That is, after someone you considered a true christian leaves, you then say he was only a false convert. No, a "false convert" is indistinguishable from a christian. Someone who, using your analogy, "violate[s] the court orders and thumbs [his] nose at the the judge" is openly non-christian. He considers the christian "court" to be a sham and a kangaroo court. He does not hold it to have any validity and, at most, thinks it forcibly imposed.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dan:
         Since it looks like you may have abandoned the previous thread, I shall reply here.
         "Let's ask it another way then. Can you show evidence that the historical figures made up stories about Jesus; that the [b]ible is a fabrication; that the [b]iblical claims are false?"
         There are conditions in which absence of evidence becomes evidence of absence. If the resurrection were an actual event, non-christian Roman historians should have recorded the fact. It is an event that would be considered worthy of note, but which could also be attributed to an evil spirit. But we find no such record. Similarly, the pharisees are depicted as criticizing the miracles and yet not converting and following Jesus. The bible says that they ascribed his miracles to the work of evil spirits. If this were so, their record should persist. Where are the writings of the pharisees? They are absent.
         Simply put, the claims, if true, should be corroborated by non-christian sources. They are not.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Chimp,

    >>Myth?! Well put Dan! Glad to see you’re beginning to see things a bit more clearly. ;)

    No, it was a quote from "City of Angels" that I forgot to cite. Here is another:

    Seth: You're an excellent doctor.
    Maggie: How do you know?
    Seth: I have a feeling.
    Maggie: That's pretty flimsy evidence.
    Seth: Close your eyes. It's just for a moment.
    [touches her hand]
    Seth: What am I doing?
    Maggie: You're... touching me.
    Seth: Touch. How do you know?
    Maggie: Because, I feel it.
    Seth: You should trust that. You don't trust it enough.

    ” Did you even read the battles that Moses went through, and how much the odds was against David fighting Goliath.”

    >>And I also have read the stories about “Robinhood” and about “The Hobbit”. The little guy who rises up against all odds against the bigger guy and wins. There are many stories with that same theme, so what? It a great story that could motivate others to fight for what they believe in but without any supporting evidence, its just a story.

    mmmmm, yummy Red herring. My point was that the events were evidence to fight against the oppressors and evil, not what Froggie claimed of "merely a convention of ancient leaders to control their tribes." The events in the Bible don't jive with the claim.

    >>You cannot deny that fear mongering is also a key ingredient.

    I can deny that it is fear mongering. So screaming fire in building, when there is a fire, is not effective to communicate the emergency at hand?

    >>With over 38000 denominations just for Christianity, how is a person to know whose interpretation is truly correct.

    How about none of them. (Matthew 23:8-12, John 14:26, 1 John 2:27)

    >>If you’re wrong, you’re screwed!

    Not at all, the Bible says you will be wrong. (Proverbs 3:5-6)

    John 8:31-32

    ReplyDelete
  11. Pvb,

    >> That is, after someone you considered a true christian leaves, you then say he was only a false convert.

    Yes, leaving is a fine indicator of a false convert, but not an exclusive one just an obvious one.

    >>No, a "false convert" is indistinguishable from a christian.

    The fruit may be small at first, but its there to examine.

    >> Someone who, using your analogy, "violate[s] the court orders and thumbs [his] nose at the the judge" is openly non-christian.

    Yes they may end up openly non-Christian but that is not always the case. Insert the Fox and the grapes story here. The fox story explains a false convert perfectly they try and try to act as a christian and then, because God knows their heart, they say "I don't believe in a god or gods"

    >> Since it looks like you may have abandoned the previous thread, I shall reply here.

    I don't abandon any post of mine. They are all up and wide open for comments. Blogger is having issues with comments though, that is not my fault.

    >>If the resurrection were an actual event, non-christian Roman historians should have recorded the fact.

    Yea right, much like the RCC should admit and document that they are all a bunch of pedophiles, or the Jews (Pharisees) apologize and admittedly document that they killed God by nailing Him on a cross. Come back to reality.

    >>But we find no such record.

    Think real hard why that is. Do you know why they invented the shredder?

    >> The [B]ible says that they ascribed his miracles to the work of evil spirits. If this were so, their record should persist. Where are the writings of the pharisees? They are absent.

    Strange isn't it? They invented the shredder for guilty consciences? Once they found out that He was God and attempted to cover it up by paying the Roman Guards the hush money they cleaned house, cleaner then Van der Sloot's home.

    >>Simply put, the claims, if true, should be corroborated by non-christian sources. They are not.

    Just the opposite. Silence is the evidence and speaks mountains. If Jesus was not God they would of had the Billboards, books, and commercials that stated that point. The infomercials would be endless. Instead a cover up ensued to save face.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dan:

         "Yes they may end up openly non-[c]hristian but that is not always the case."
         It is not merely ending up openly non-christian. You have describes openly rejecting the "christian court." At the point someone does this, he is already openly non-christian.
         "I don't abandon any post of mine. They are all up and wide open for comments."
         I in no way suggested that I could not leave a comment on the prior thread. I just had a (possibly mistaken) sense that you might not check the thread to see it. In a similar fashion, it is possible to leave a comment on some of my blog posts that are over a year old. But I don't check my older posts often and so might not see it.
         "'If the resurrection were an actual event, non-christian Roman historians should have recorded the fact.'
         "Yea right, much like the RCC should admit and document that they are all a bunch of pedophiles, or the Jews (Pharisees) apologize and admittedly document that they killed [g]od by nailing [h]im on a cross. Come back to reality."
         If you are done appealing to ridicule. Roman historians could record a resurrection without claiming that the person was divine. They would have no cause to conceal such an event. Silence indicates that the historians never heard of the event.
         "'But we find no such record.'
         Think real hard why that is."
         I have thought why that is. It's because the resurrection never happened. The tale was invented decades later when contradicting witnesses would be harder to find. It's rather like "why didn't the news report on the bombing of the Capitol?" "because it didn't happen. There was nothing to report." Historians are not in the habit of recording all the people who stay dead.
         "Silence is the evidence and speaks mountains. If [they had never heard of Jesus] they would of had the [b]illboards, books, and commercials that stated that point."
         Silence is evidence; but it does not say what you want it to say. If they never heard of Jesus the silence is to be expected. If, as the bible claims, they openly denounced Jesus as a practicer of evil magic, they would have written that down. But we don't see that writing.
         It's really quite simple. If there were people who had heard of divinity claims for Jesus and were themselves claiming that he was not divine (whether because that's what they believed or for financial or other motivation) there should be writings to that effect. It should not be the case that every source that says the pharisees denounced Jesus is either the bible or basing its claims on the bible.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Pvb,

    >>But I don't check my older posts often and so might not see it.

    OK let me clarify my point then. Every single comment gets automatically emailed to me. No matter what post ever, I get alerted. So if you wish to bring something up on a post years ago I get the email of what you said.

    To set that up, go to your settings tab and then the comments tab and at the bottom you can add an email address.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dan,

    "How do you explain the eternal myth of Heaven then?"

    The same way you explain all the other myths.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dan,

    "If that were the case then it would of faded away with the past in the modern society."

    It is fading away. Modern society didn't start till 150 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Dan,

    "Plus, that is completely illogical. Dorky logic even. The Bible teaches hope, to fight against evil, and also not to fear man."

    The ol' argument fron dorkiness, eh?
    You've shown very well that you have no clue how to apply logic to any concept.
    Empathy and all that follows are evolved survival traits honed by eons of human cooperation.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Dan Said, ”My point was that the events were evidence to fight against the oppressors and evil, not what Froggie claimed of "merely a convention of ancient leaders to control their tribes." The events in the Bible don't jive with the claim.”

    I think he was talking about some tribes in ancient history. Though things have change greatly since then, you can still see religion & the bible as a tool for controlling the masses. Actually in roman history a priest’s only role was to perform rituals correctly. He could not use the pulpit to promote social and political ideas. The government had great control over the religious expression and used it as a tool to help control the people. Christians did not like that and promoted a separation of church and state. Once separated they eventually gained momentum and power they decided to link government and religion again. Now they had gain so much power over the people, they would be able to turn the tables and control government through those people. Today, the priest and church depend on their power over the masses to fulfill an agenda they have formulated. They use their interpretation of the cryptic holy text to help convince the parishioners.

    You seem to be very selective in your memory of what is in the bible. It might have some stories that are about fighting an enemy and being victorious, but it also has some pretty fire and brimstone, you do as I say, stuff in it too. You seem to agree since one minute you claim god gives us the freedom to choose how to live our live, but the next post you’ll be painting a picture where if we even stray slightly from his rules of life, we’ll burn in hell. Even if we lead a good life that coincidentally follows his plan, if we don’t worship him we’re going to hell for eternity.

    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  18. ” I can deny that it is fear mongering. So screaming fire in building, when there is a fire, is not effective to communicate the emergency at hand?”

    You are still yet to provide supporting evidence that there is a fire. Endlessly through history people keep claiming the end if the world is coming. They knew this through religious text and personal revelation. We’re still here Dan. Just because you and your fellow Christians believe this does not make it true. Evidence Dan, objective evidence is what we need to see.

    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  19. I said, “With over 38000 denominations just for Christianity, how is a person to know whose interpretation is truly correct.”

    Dan replied, ”How about none of them. (Matthew 23:8-12, John 14:26, 1 John 2:27)”

    I also said,” If you’re wrong, you’re screwed!”

    Dan responded with, “Not at all, the Bible says you will be wrong. (Proverbs 3:5-6)

    Pointing out bible quote is meaningless. I could point out stuff from a book of quatrains by Nostradamus and claim them to reveal the truths of life and the future to me. That does not make them correct.

    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  20. Dan Said, ”Yea right, much like the RCC should admit and document that they are all a bunch of pedophiles, or the Jews (Pharisees) apologize and admittedly document that they killed God by nailing Him on a cross. Come back to reality.”

    Dan, forget about the resurrection itself what about what about all the saints who also rose form the grave, and remained risen for 40 days? I would think that something like that coupled with the resurrection of Jesus would have been written about by some Roman historian, or anyone. That’s a pretty profound event to have gotten ignore by non-Christians. It did not have to be connected to the Christian god. It could have been attributed to the fickle god(s) being honored in the temples, not being pleased by the performance of a ritual.

    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  21.      "Albertus Pieters in his book, Divine Lord and Savior, tells of a believer who was not well-educated, but who had a deep assurance of his salvation. Everyone called him, 'Old Pete.' One day, while talking with Dr. Pieters, he said, 'If God should take me to the very mouth of Hell, and say to me, 'In you go, Pete; here’s where you belong,' I would say to Him, 'That’s true, Lord, I do belong there. But if you make me go to Hell, Your dear Son, Jesus Christ, must go with me! He and I are now one, and we cannot be separated anymore.''"
         I wonder what the response of christians will be if there is an afterlife and they find that they can be separated from "Jesus." I state that I do not deserve the horrors attributed to hell. If I find myself there due to an evil monster presiding over a kangaroo court, I will have the consolation of knowing that it is an injustice perpetrated against me. If Dan finds himself there, he will not even have that consolation as he pronounced his own sentence.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Atomic Chimp said:
    Dan, forget about the resurrection itself what about what about all the saints who also rose form the grave, and remained risen for 40 days? I would think that something like that coupled with the resurrection of Jesus would have been written about by some Roman historian, or anyone. That’s a pretty profound event to have gotten ignore by non-Christians.

    That's what I brought up in an earlier post.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "That's what I brought up in an earlier post.

    I thought it had been mentioned on another thread but I don't remember Dan responding to it. If there was one, just point me to where it is and I'll check it out. Thanks~

    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  24. There is a reason why Jesus said that he came to save the sinners and not the saints.
    Sins gives us a great learning point in the process of Knowing Thyselves.
    Without sin one would be unable to recognize the value of a virtue.

    ReplyDelete

Bring your "A" game. To link: <a href="url">text</a>