Healthy Christianity: Its Root and Foundation. Series on Sanctification (Part Three)

Healthy Christianity:  Its Root and Foundation (Series on Sanctification part Three)

Series Part One            Series Part Two

What does healthy Christian growth look like?  I would like to believe that all professing Christians were on the same page on this concept.  This is especially true when applied to the category of Christian growth (think: progressive sanctification).  Let's assume for the sake of argument that people have passed through the doorway (the right door, and there's only one), and now being in the room how will they live while in the house?  Yes, I know this is just an illustration but if a person claims to be a Christian (let's give the benefit of doubt, assuming they have true saving faith), what does or should their life look like?  Are they bearing fruit?  Are they producing good works?  Are they making any effort to obey any command period actually found in the scriptures? (Just for sake of acknowledgement: Christians bear fruit in various degrees, times, and appearance).

Let's reconsider some concepts mentioned above.  What is a professing Christian?  What is true saving faith?  Who defines these terms?  Of course whatever your answer it has something to do with a Biblically-informed content but what content (even cults can do this)?  Will it be so minimal that it basically avoids the offense of nearly every self-proclaimed church or believer (even cults can mention the name of Jesus or believe something)?

We will revisit these ideas much later down the road but let me highlight two words again, "professing" Christian and "saving" faith?  Hope you caught it earlier but these are huge concepts and areas of division among evangelicals.  Who are these people?  Eventually we will have to discuss terms like assurance, perseverance, and preservation but for now the general topic is sufficient.  So who is this person and how does this topic related to the series on sanctification?  Let's consider some options from systematic theology (which may or may not include all the available biblical data).  For sake of familiarity (I'll use the phrase, "Perseverance of the Saints").  Historically this is the the "P" from the acronym TULIP (please note I am not commenting on whether the phrase is correct or not but simply a point of reference for illustration).

1.  Why do we use the adjective "professing" Christian?  Are there fake Christians or people that only look like Christians on the outside?  Consider some phrases you've probably heard before: they have head knowledge but not heart knowledge, they are professors but not possessors, or they have religion but not a relationship.  I would suggest these phrases are all struggling with the same kind of issues (and they all have their own trumping proof texts which they believe solves the issue).

2.   Why do we use the adjective "saving" faith?  Are there Christians who have unsaving faith or a faith that doesn't save anyone?  James tells us that even demons believe and tremble.  Does hiding in the content or object of faith help any?  Can you faith increase or grow?  Again, why the need for the adjective?  Just like point one, there is a struggle here....................

3.  Why does the "P" of the TULIP use the word saints?  Why does it not say, "Perseverance of all believers"?  Why not perseverance of everyone that walks an aisle, prays a prayer, raises their hand, fills out a card, becomes a member of a local church?  If you carefully look at the text of the epistles, the audience is always addressed as "saints" or "brethren," so the writers don't seem to make the distinction we do (just to be fair, we will address spiritual/carnal later).  

4. Does God's character change if it doesn't match my interpretations of the text?  Is God not keeping his promises according to my theological boxes?  Am I creating a God of my own making who allows me to live and do whatever I want?  Is it the same God that promises both blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience (or do we only want to emphasize one part)?

All these areas questions are part of progressive sanctification (health Christian growth).  Eventually we must deal with issues such as fruit bearing, good works, or obedience.  But these will come in time as we actually address specific texts in their context (especially how they get used and abused).  I would like to suggest that a great deal of misunderstanding comes from dealing with certain texts individually and then treating them alone as though they are the sole voice on this particular issue.  Struggling through multiple texts on an issue may produce brain sweat but they both are true whether we can harmonize them or not.

Hope this helps some.

Comments encouraged.