Book Recommendation: Holiness: Its Nature, Hindrances, Difficulties, and Roots By. J. C. Ryle

Holiness: Its Nature, Hindrances, Difficulties, and Roots. By. J. C. Ryle

This treasure is still in print today (paper, kindle, and pdf).  I have worked through it several times.  It still serves as a refreshing source for combating what much of evangelicalism is passing off today as correct doctrine and practice.  Progressive Sanctification is simply not taken as serious as it should in today's Christian circles.  Much of what is passed off today under the guise of grace, liberty, and relevance is infecting the lives of Christians for their harm.  Code words such as legalist, antinomian, neo-nomian and judgmental have been used far to long by present-day evangelical writers.  Christians today need to return to time-tested books that have served God's people for many years not the trendy and faddish books quickly printed and disappearing from print almost as fast.

Consider the table of contents below:

Ch. 1 Sin
Ch. 2 Sanctification
Ch. 3 Holiness
Ch. 4 The Fight
Ch. 5 The Lost
Ch. 6 Growth
Ch. 7 Assurance
Ch. 8 Moses-An Example
Ch. 9 Lot-A Beacon
Ch. 10 A Woman to be Remembered
Ch. 11 Christ's Greatest Trophy
Ch. 12 The Ruler of Waves
Ch. 13 The Church which Christ Builds
Ch 14 Visible Churches Warned
Ch. 15 Lovest Thou Me?
Ch. 16 Without Christ
Ch. 17 Thirst Relieved
Ch. 18 Unsearchable Riches
Ch. 19 Wants of the Times
Ch. 20 Christ is All
Ch. 21 Extracts from Old Writers

I highly recommend this book to any and all who desire to take the doctrine of progressive sanctification seriously.

Kewsick View of Progressive Sanctification: Spirit-filled or Victorious? (Series on Sanctification Part Six)

Keswick View of Progressive Sanctification: Spirit-Filled or Victorious?  
(Series on Sanctification Part Six)

Series Part One          Series Part Two          Series Part Three      Series Part Four

Evangelical Christianity begins with what the Bible calls salvation.  The Bible repeatedly emphasizes the new position is that of a "saint."  This is how Paul's epistles (letters) address his readers.  Living, breathing, walking people with a new status in God's sight.  How then are they to live?  Do they just sit in this position and do nothing?  Does the scripture actually teach our only role is to keep reminding ourselves of what Christ did for us in the past?  Are we absolved of any personal responsibility to grow?  Do we resort to name calling if others don't share our form or practice we do (think: new evangelical, legalist, antinomian, or fundamentalist)?

Here is where we turn our attention.  How do we live?  There is a vast gap for most of us between when we became a Christian and when we each meet the Lord (either via death or eschatological position).  The previous article focused on the standard Wesleyan view of progressive sanctification.  This article will focus on what is the typical pattern of progressive sanctification found with Keswick theology.

Again a chart may be helpful in providing a picture of what is happening (See previous article for possible diagram sources).

Now to add some words of explanation to the above chart and some texts of scripture used by its advocates to teach this position.  I leave it up to you the reader to determine the merits of this particular system of progressive sanctification.  Please remember this is the general pattern not the catch all to every person holding to this position.

First, if you will note as in the previous article, growth or progressive sanctification begins at the cross (think: temporal moment of salvation, faith and repentance).  The new Christian is described as "non Spirit-filled" and/or "defeated."  So in this system of thinking you can be a Christian but living in a defeated position.  I assume this also is defining a Christian who is not filled with the Spirit.  Carefully pay attention to the fact that this new believer is also identified as a "carnal man."  I also assume that a believer will stay in this status (not sure of what growth can occur here) until the next stage of sanctification: crisis.

Second, see that the status or positional change does not change till this crisis.  This crisis is also defined as a consecration event .  Many also identify this crisis event as surrendering.  Please see the identification that this crisis point is when the carnal/non Spirit-filled and defeated carnal believer actually "lets go."  This implies before this chronological act following salvation a believer is not surrendered to God and is living in a state of defeat and carnality.  Not that once a crisis decision is made there are still arrows going up and down after this act of consecration.  This crisis event can occur in any number of venues: "revival" meetings, summer camps, rallies, etc....

Consider some of the following questions concerning this diagram (and how it reflects Christianity lived).  Whether it fits the best possible exegetical understanding of proof texts is another question.

1)  Is there any evidence in scripture that all believers are filled with the Spirit?  Are there any believers in the NT who are not Spirit-filled?

2)  How can we best explain the descriptions of believers in the book of Acts who are said to be "filled with Spirit"?

3)  How do we describe believers before Pentecost (Acts 2)?

4)  Note the descriptions in 1 Cor 2-3.  Is Paul addressing different types of believers or  believers behaving like unbelievers?  Again, what does it mean to be identified as "carnal" or "fleshly"?  Also taking into account the context of each.

5) Again how does Rom 12 fit into this system?  Rom 7-8 "flesh/law" and "Spirit."  An unbeliever?  A disobedient believer?  A mature believers wrestling with sin?  flesh?

These are only some suggestions in addressing this theological position describing the process of progressive sanctification.  There are other positions yet to come and to be discussed.

Hope this helps some.

Book Review: Side by Side (Walking with Others in Wisdom and Love) By Edward T. Welch

Side by Side (Walking with Others in Wisdom and Love) By Edward T. Welch (Crossway, 2015).

I would like to recommend this book to those looking for ways to get more involved in the person to person ministry of your local church.  He makes some good points that are worthy of noting and being challenged in our ministry to one another in a local church setting.  I included some quotations I thought were personally pertinent and applicable in the my daily life.  Hopefully they will be a blessing to you.  I also enjoyed to discussion and responses which followed each chapter.

Part One: We are Needy

Ch. 1 Life is Hard
"There is never a day when we have immunity from difficult circumstances."

Ch. 2 Our hearts are busy
"Our emotions point out those things that are most important to us."

Ch. 3 Hard circumstances meet busy hearts
Ch. 4 Sins weighs a lot
Ch. 5 Say "Help" to the Lord
Ch. 6 Say "Help" to other people

Part Two: We are Needed

Ch. 7 Remember: We have the Spirit
Ch. 8 Move toward and Greet one another
Ch. 9 Have thoughtful conversations
Ch. 10 See the Good, enjoy one another
Ch. 11 Walk together, tell stories
Ch. 12 Have compassion during Trouble
Ch. 13 Pray during Trouble
Ch. 14 Be alert to Satan's devices
Ch. 15 Prepare to talk about sin
Ch. 16 Help fellow sinners
Ch. 17 Keep the Story in view

Conclusion

Wesleyan View of Progressive Sanctification: Entire or Perfect? (Series on sanctification part five)

The Wesleyan View of Sanctification (Part Five)

Series Part One          Series Part Two          Series Part Three      Series Part Four


There are many view of sanctification practiced by professing Christians across the globe.  One common thread identifiable in the vast majority of them is that one key aspect of sanctification is its progressive nature.  Christians are identified as saints (note the beginning of many of Paul's epistles, "the saints at...").  Even though set apart, sanctified, or holy there is still an idea that Christians can and must grow in their sanctification.  But what does this look like?  Somewhere and somehow people will be forced to deal with God's activities in this process and man's responsibility or obligation in this process.

Scripture gives us glimpses of what this growth looks like.  And as a result many have tried to categorize this growth either in steps, phases, hills, valleys, and decisions, etc.  What I wish to do here is attempt a presentation of each position (and the scriptural proof texts employed by each position).  I leave it up to you the reader to discern the truth/error, value, strength/weakness of each position.  In some form or fashion, I'm sure you have seen and/or heard all these positions before (maybe not in full but at least some of the parts).

Each system or position has to deal with key texts in scripture.  Consider how you personally understand or have been taught concerning the following texts (Just a thought: Claiming God does or does not keep promises of both blessing and cursing will not change the exegesis of the following texts.  However, presuppositions do provide powerful "rose-colored" glasses to view all texts):

1.  Simon the sorcerer (Acts).  Was he a true believer?  Did he only make a profession?  Fruit bearing?
2. Romans 7 and 8.  Who do these texts describe? Believers?  Unbelievers? Mature?
3. 1 Corinthians 2-3.  Who is fleshly?  Who is carnal?  Who is spiritual?
4. Gal 5-6.  Who walks in the spirit?  Who walks in the flesh?
5. Romans 12.  When do we do this?  How many times do we do this?  What if we don't more/less sanctified, separated, dedicated?

We'll begin with the Wesleyan view of sanctification (please see diagram below).

Just in case pictures help to understand the theological teaching of Wesleyan progressive sanctification, please see the diagram above.  These charts are not unique to me (sources using same charts are listed at end of this article).***

If you will notice (at least in the realm of evangelical Christianity), Christian growth begins at the cross.  This pattern will appear in each chart position presented.  In this (means) of Christian growth the point of salvation is described as a first work of grace (perhaps efficacious, saving, or prevenient).   Notice also from the diagram that there is a point in the chronology of progressive sanctification which is called a crisis.  This crisis will be identified in many of the charts though with various titles/nomenclature (spirit-baptism, Christ as Lord, speaking in tongues, etc...).  Notice also that until this point the professing believer is still in a non-sanctified state (I take this to mean that they have not reached a crisis point where true sanctification can begin).

Note that when this crisis occurs (which is not actually an upward clime or progressive) but that the professing Christian actually functions on a higher level than when they began (we'll call this maturity or being a mature/complete believer).   This higher level is also identified as entire sanctification, Christian perfection, perfect love between God and man.  This crisis event will take multiple forms under different systems of progressive sanctification (accepting Christ as Lord, Life-dedication, full time Christian service, Spirit-baptism/tongues speaking, etc...).  These will be discussed in more detail with each related system (with particular system proof texts).

Lastly, please see there are arrows going up and down between this higher position and lower level.  I presume this to mean that this higher level of mature living can be lost and gained again.  Please remember this pattern it will also appear in other Christian diagrams describing Christian sanctification.  You will see this changing of levels in multiple forms of progressive sanctification.

A careful reading of original source literature denotes that advocates are not claiming sinless perfection (though some may take this position or accuse all advocates as teaching such).  Note: English translation glosses such as" "perfect"  "perfection" or "holy."  Notice the sermon on the mount or 2 Tim 3:16-17, using this terminology of "perfect."  Perhaps even in your own scripture study you've seen the terms but have used other words such as "mature" or "complete."

So how would you identify this form of progressive sanctification in a local church?  Notice how the sermon ends?  What are you actually asked or encouraged to do?  Dedication, commitment, salvation?  These type of questions (but not exclusively) help to identify what form/pattern of progressive sanctification is being taught in the local church.

*** I don't know for certain who originated these charts but the following employ them in literature:

H. Wayne House. Charts of Christian Theology and Doctrine. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.

Naselli, Andrew.  Let Go and Let God?  A Survey and Analysis of Keswick Theology.  Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2010.

Ryrie, Charles.  Balancing the Christian Life. Chicago: Moody, 1969.

Hope this article and the ones to come on the issue of progressive sanctification are a help in this area of Christian growth.

Comments and corrections exegetically or theologically always encouraged.

The series will continue with other Christian views of progressive sanctification.

The Indicatives and Imperatives of Scripture: Series on Sanctification Part Four

The Indicatives and Imperatives (Series on Sanctification Part Five)

Series Part One          Series Part Two          Series Part Three

So what does right doctrine look like (orthodoxy)?  Or what does right living (orthopraxy) or right feelings and affections (orthopathy) look like?  I would again like to suggest all three are necessary for healthy Christianity.  I would also like to suggest (this is not unique to me) that these concepts mirror the truths of divine sovereignty and human responsibility.  Let's reword these to help elaborate: God has made direct promises and/or statements which are both positive and negative (think: divine sovereignty) and believers have obligations to obey/practice/do/applications (human responsibility).  Throw into this formula doing everything with the right biblical motive/feelings, affections (orthopathy).  To emphasize one of these and neglect the others is dangerous.  Consider some options in quick recap (does not exhaust every possible arrangement of the three variables):

Right beliefs but with a wrong daily lifestyle or with wrong motives and/or affections.

Wrong beliefs but with a right daily lifestyle or with wrong motives and/or affections.

It is probably easiest to believe all the right doctrinal truths.  Just pick up a theology text or read a creed and/or confession and its not to hard to see some overlapping categories of doctrinal truth.  Its hard to pass by consistent categories such as Bible, God, Creation, Sin, Salvation, Church, etc....  However, consider the vast number of sermons or text which simply explain the truth of scripture and then make no applications to daily living.  Consider in your own mind the dangers of people obeying a list of rules (applications) without scriptural motivation either by command or well-derived principles.

The emphasis on this indicative and imperative framework appears in many large sections within the scriptures (sometimes even shaping the content of entire epistles).  Consider some indicative and imperative texts in near context relation.  They both are necessary.  Having all the Christian doctrine by itself leaves your Christianity incomplete.  On the other hand, Christianity is also incomplete trying to obey or practice without a basis or foundation.  So let's compare some texts (some technical words will be used):

Romans 6:2 and v. 12.

"God forbid.  How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"  The verb "are dead" appears in the aorist tense.  This generally refers to a past action.  It appears in the indicative mood stating a past fact.  Compare this with verse 12, "Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof."  "Let not sin .... reign" is a present tense (continually) command or imperative.  So the facts don't stand alone without an obligation placed upon the reader.  Based on a particular fact or reality (think promise made by God), you need to obey now.

Col 3:3 and v. 5.

"For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God."  Again "ye are dead" is a past tense verb appearing in the indicative mood and "is hid" is a perfect tense verb.  The perfect tense contains an idea/active that happened in the past but has ongoing results/benefits.  We could easily identify surrounding imperatives in this context,  both before and after.  "Set you affections" is an imperative from previous verse (drawing from reality of verse one) or "mortify ... your members" from the following paragraph (v. 5).  Both appear as imperatives placing an obligation upon believers (think human responsibility).

Gal 5:24 and v. 25-26.

"And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts" (v. 24).  Consider the following verses (v. 25-26), "If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in  the Spirit.  "let us not be desirous of vain glory,..."  Here as well, we a verse reminding the reader of a fact/reality "have crucified" appearing in the aorist tense and indicative mood.  This is followed by a different nuance for a verb (the subjunctive mood).  Both verb appearing as commands or exhortations in the English text are what we might call a hortatory subjunctive or if negative a prohibition.

Eph 4:21-23 and v. 25.

"If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus: that ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, ... and that ye put on the new man."  These verbs are little more tricky than the previous references.  "Put off" and "put on" are infinitives.  However they both are elaborating on the claim of vs. 20, "But ye have not so learned Christ ... as the truth is in Jesus."  The verb learned is in the indicative mood.  The putting off and putting on are realities for a believer.  But where's the command for believers?  Keep reading.  "Speak every man truth with his neighbour" (v. 25).  This imperative "speak" is followed by a string of imperatives all for believers.

We could apply this pattern to hundreds of other indicative and imperative references throughout the scriptures.  I hope this is enough to show several key concepts in relation to the topic of progressive sanctification.  We will touch more on the subjunctive mood in another post in relation to conditional clauses (for now think: "if ... then" clauses) in relation to progressive sanctification.

1. God has made promises to all believers (divine sovereignty) and believers have commands still made to them today (human responsibility).  We still need to address the relationship of obedience to progressive sanctification.  The epistles call believers "saints," people who are holy and sanctified already.

2. Denying the promises God has made leaves you with a self-defined religion of self-righteousness.  History shows this is definitely not orthodoxy. It is very easy to see how a works-righteousness can emerge: obey to be saved or bear fruit so you can be saved.  Late we will need to address a plethora of texts placing fruit-bearing as a result of justification not the means of justification.

3.  Denying the hundreds of commands God has still placed upon believers produces a religion of license and liberty that history shows is definitely not orthopraxy.  Even this cuts cross grain to many church discipline passages explicitly written to correct/confront/discipline sinful practices (of professing believers).  How we live and obey scripture does matter to God.

4.  We will have to wrestle with obeying the imperatives based on the motivation provided from the indicatives.  This will also need to tie in at a later date motivations based on "love of God" "love of Christ" and "love of neighbour."  In time we will also need to address the means by which these motivations are made possible.

We will have to address in a later post the claims of legalism and antinomianism in relation to these above points, especially how they relate to Christian growth (progressive sanctification) and assurance/perseverance issues for believers.

Much more to come.  Hope this helps some in your daily walk.

Comments encouraged.

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.

Orthodoxy, Orthopraxy, and Orthopathy: Series on Sanctification (Part Two)

Orthodoxy, Orthopraxy, and Orthopathy

Series Part One

You may or may not have experienced these terms before but they are crucial to understanding a healthy view of Biblical Christianity.  Consider their three simple definitions:

First, orthodoxy is correct doctrine/teaching.  The content is right.

Second, orthopraxy is correct living.  The lifestyle is right.

Third, orthopathy is right emotional and/or affections.

To deny a right doctrine or teaching at worst case could produce a false teacher or false preacher.  Church history preserves this pillar for us through creeds, confessions, and doctrinal statements, all of which show that certain beliefs are correct and others are not.  But the scriptures do not stop identifying a healthy Christianity with beliefs alone, there is more.  Even those who adopt a minimalist view of core beliefs for the sake of fellowship or defining what a Christian is are in fact admitting that certain beliefs do matter.

To deny a right lifestyle is essential and many times may have its own motives: avoidance of confrontation, refusal to address a known sinful lifestyle, refusal to obey clear commands found in scripture, avoidance of ad hominems such as "legalist," etc....  In recent evangelical history, primarily in writing and preaching, this has been an issue of divide.  Consider the terms indicative and imperative.  The orthodoxy (point one above) has this one nailed down.  They believe in right doctrine however when it comes to the imperatives then we have a new ball game.  Actually its kind of ironic that the same ones accusing others of Pharisaism, legalism or any other self-defined position turn around and make up their own lists (usually from a minimalist position).

But in the end there are too many action verbs (regardless of verb tense) orchestrating the lives of every believer.  You could also view this through the lens of bearing fruit and good works repeatedly demanded of true believers.  If this were not enough, right doctrine and practice is still not enough to produce a truly desirable Christianity.  Even as I write this I am looking at the mission statement of a our church our family attended years ago.  Their statement ends with this clause, "glorifying God our Father in all we do and say."  Here's a test case question: when you hear or read someone use the phrase sola scriptura, what do they really mean (maybe sounding reformed is cool, relevant,  or trendy)?  Do they mean the Bible is sufficient or the only source of authority for doctrine alone?  Very interesting that sola scriptura doesn't apply to how we actual live (think: right beliefs, but wrong lifestyle).
      
Lastly, to deny that right emotions or affections are necessary leaves you open to influence from a plethora of external sources (all of which of course are neutral and unbiased, as some will claim).  These last two are commonly denied to make it convenient for focusing only on correct doctrine and practice (that is right living and affections don't matter).  There are many doors to the human heart changing and/or affecting our desires (eyes, ears, touch, etc...).  I'll be blunt to end this section.  If the sounds going into your head are producing emotions and affections that do not correspond with scripture, then the sound is not aiding in your sanctification.  If what is placed before your eyes, is producing horrible images and thoughts in your mind and heart, then what you are viewing is not helpful.  Or worse any of these gates to the heart produces sinful thoughts (followed with sinful actions), then don't claim it is aiding in your personal growth.

In recap as this series on sanctification begins there are multiple aspects to a healthy view of Biblical Christianity.  

History through careful Biblical exposition, creeds, and confessions has repeatedly defended that orthodoxy (right beliefs), orthopraxy (right living) and orthopathy (right affections) are all necessary for a correct view of Biblical Christianity.

Hope this is helpful to your personal daily walk with the Lord.

Comments encouraged.

Christian Growth: Misnomer or Personal Necessity? (Series on Sanctification) Part One

Christian Growth: Misnomer or Necessity? (Series on Sanctification) Part One

Believe it or not every form of religion teaches and practices some form of growth or maturing process (even if dying, rebirth, or rituals).  It is not my intention nor purpose to encourage or teach on the belief and practices of what I consider to be false religions.  It is however my intention here to discuss the differing views of sanctification within what is called Biblical Christianity (yes many use the name but have dramatically different definitions for the term).

So before we can dive into this topic I need to elaborate on several specific terms (mentioned already above).

(Caveat: I am well aware of many textbooks (written or electronic), systematic theologies, creeds, confessions, lectures, sermons, etc.  that begin their topics with definitions.  Many times their entire argument is a defense of their own definitions, which have been carefully crafted, whether they be self-derived straw men, either/or,  or other fallacies is another question entirely).  So with that in mind let me craft some straw-men, how well they burn is up to others.  I will list some recent publications at the end of this article.

Click link here to review the previous article on informal fallacies.     Informal Fallacies Article

First, in reference to the term Christian growth.  I am referring to what is known in broader evangelical Christian circles to what we call progressive sanctification.  I wish it were true, but not all Christians actually believe sanctification is progressive (chances are, you've got some of their books and aren't aware of what they actually say--a hidden danger).  We will address this issue in time.

Second, in reference to sanctification.  I am referring to the traditional three-part division.  It commonly is divided with the use of adjectives (you should be concerned if the speaker/author denies one of these three).  Consider the terms, you'be probably heard before: (1) initial (maybe even "definitive" sanctification perhaps chronological placed near justification), (2) progressive sanctification (actual daily Christian growth and maturing), and (3) final sanctification (related to issue of glorification).  These three terms can also be identified with actual Greek verb tenses.  Many verbs related to this topic occur in the past tense (both aorist and perfect tense).  In a similar way a vast selection of verbs appear in the present tense (now).  Lastly, verbs associated with this issue occur as future tense verbs (things that will happen).

Third, many polarizing terms appearing under this theological umbrella have multiple meanings (equivocation, see blog post on Informal Logic).  These different meanings have actually changed over time.  Someone can be accused of one definition of the term but not the other definitions of the term.  Let's consider one example here of a term which does not appear in scripture: antinomianism.  Does this mean only "against the law" or "no law" (easy bullet to dodge if definition is restricted only here)?  Does it mean that part of the Mosaic law doesn't apply today or all the mosaic law doesn't apply today?  Is there a sanctifying or even teaching purpose for the law?  Does it mean obedience to NT commands/imperatives is not necessary or required of believers?  Does it mean I should use the term grace in every other sentence so that I'm not accused of being a legalist (whatever this term means)?   Can it be both a theological and practical concept?  You decide.

Lastly, when I use the term Biblical, I am referring to the idea that all of our theology and practice must find its source within the scriptures.  Much disagreement happens with people who don't agree on acceptable proof texts, exegetical methodology, or systematic theology grids.  This is just my opinion but I would challenge you if you claim to believe sola scriptura (then do you actually believe it includes every area of life (theology, daily living, morality, ethics, music, culture)?  Or is it only the convenient to believe this when I can self-create adiophora boxes (think: "things indifferent").

Let's take one of these terms just as an example to show the varying degrees of difficult grappling with this topic.  Consider the term: believe.

It appears as both a substantive (think: noun or subject) and as a verb.
The verb can appear as a command and as past, present, and future verbs (including infinitives and participles).
The verb for believe has varying relationships to the word repentance (vast groups disagree here).
The verb has multiple chronological and theological positions in relation to the ordinance of baptism (both with water and spiritually).
The verb even has moods and motivations (this is a key area where ad hominems emerge--think name-calling).

And yes, all these examples for this one term are related to the concept of Christian growth.  How it starts, presently occurs, and finishes.  Even the continued concepts of prescriptive and descriptive verses comes into play in this conversation.  Consider some abuses (even informal fallacies) made from the above data:

1.  I could present sanctification as though it is completely past tense (making no reference to present or future verbs)?  This turns it into a indicative only form of sanctification (little room if any for obedience).

2.  I could present sanctification as though it is completely present tense (making no reference to past tense verbs)?  This creates a imperative only form of sanctification with what motive?

3.  I could take a verse here or there and create a mood or motivation that trumps even direct biblical statements in many other places (then call others names for disagreeing with my motivations).

4. I could accuse others of not being Christians for not seeing all the specifics of salvation just the way I do (insert terms like faith/repentance, faith/regeneration, faith/baptism, etc...).

5.  I could make up my own list of tasks and/or beliefs for sanctification then evaluate my progress based on my own list (even worse I could evaluate others sanctification based on my list).  Principles derived either through a descriptive and/or prescriptive means have dramatic implications in this area.

Please consider a sample listing of the following recently published books directly addressing this issue in relation to progressive sanctification.  Most of these were written directly or indirectly to address an error they perceive on this subject--some more helpful, others less (listed in alphabetical order).  I have deliberately selected broader conservative or new evangelical sources to show they are struggling with this issue as well as Biblical Fundamentalists.

Bridges, Jerry. The Pursuit of Holiness: Run in Such a Way as to Get the Prize 1 Corinthians 9:24. (NavPress, 2006).

DeYoung, Kevin. The Hole in Our Holiness: Filling the Gap between Gospel Passion and the Pursuit of Godliness. (Crossway, 2014).

Ferguson, Sinclair.  The Whole Christ: Legalism, Antinomianism, and Gospel Assurance--Why the Marrow Controversy Still Matters.  (Crossway, 2016).

Jones, Mark. Antinomianism: Reformed Theology's Unwelcome Guest? (P&R Publishing, 2013).

Piper, John. Acting the Miracle: God's Work and Ours in the Mystery of Sanctification. (Crossway, 2013).

Ryle, J. C. Holiness: Its Nature, Hindrances, Difficulties, and Roots (Multiple Printings).

Tchividjian, Tullian. Jesus + Nothing = Everything. (Crossway, 2011).

Hope this helps some.  Hope you are growing (whatever this means).

There will be much more to come in this thread.

Thoughts and comments encouraged.

Book Recommendation: Hole in Our Holiness: Filling the Gap between Gospel Passion and the Pursuit of Godliness By Kevin DeYoung

Hole in Our Holiness: Filling the Gap between Gospel Passion and the Pursuit of Godliness By Kevin DeYoung 

This book was a rather refreshing read several years back.  It is a welcome reflection upon a great deal of false teaching in the area of progressive sanctification (that is assuming you believe your sanctification can progress) in growth.  Many do not.  Many chaff at the idea of imperatives, holiness, godliness, and piety.  It is much too easy for way to many people influenced by today's trendy authors to whip out the straw man, ad hominems (you know: legalism, judgmental, etc...).  

I recommend this book to any seek how to grow in holiness and sanctification.  Yes, there is more to sanctification than rehearsing some indicatives over and over and over.  Far too many churches today have the doctrinal ducks in a row but the way they live.  Well if you didn't know otherwise, you wouldn't know they were followers of Christ at all (and that's putting it charitably).

I am including a very meaty and detailed outline from the text.  Please fell free to comment on the issue of progressive sanctification.

1.      Chapter One: Mind the Gap

1.1. Holiness is the New Camping

1.2. Who Says?

1.2.1.      Is Our Obedience known to All?

1.2.2.      Is Our Heaven a Holy Place?

1.2.3.      Are We Great Commission Christians?

1.3.Why so Holey?

1.4. But he (may) have this against you

1.5. Chapter One Study Questions

1.5.1.      What come to mind when you hear the word “holiness”?  Are your thoughts primarily positive?  Negative?  Encouraging?  Discouraging?  Burdensome?  Freeing?

1.5.2.      Growing up, how did your church, family, and friends speak of holiness?

1.5.3.      Is the holiness of heaven of delightful thought for you?  Does it equal the delight you have in thinking about heaven as a place of love, peace, enjoyment, and happiness?  Why or why not?

1.5.4.      Why does there appear to be a “hole in our holiness” today?  Which of the reasons given by the author resonate with your own struggles with holiness?

1.5.5.      What have been the major themes of your Christian life?  Has holiness

2.      Chapter Two: The Reason for Redemption

2.1. A Necessary Good

2.2. A Necessary Explanation

2.3. Chapter Two Study Questions:

2.3.1.      What reasons come to mind when you think about why God saved you?

2.3.2.      What are some passages in Scriptures that have impacted your life of holiness?  Why do these hold significance?

2.3.3.      Do you find the pursuit of holiness intimidating?  Why or why not?

2.3.4.      Does it seem disagreeable to stress personal holiness?

3.      Chapter Three: Piety’s Pattern

3.1.Got and still growing

3.2. Cheap Imitations

3.2.1.      Holiness is not mere rule keeping

3.2.2.      Holiness is not generational imitation

3.2.3.      Holiness is not generic spirituality

3.2.4.      Holiness is not “finding your true self”

3.2.5.      Holiness is not the way of the world

3.3. The Real Deal

3.3.1.      Holiness looks like the renewal of God’s image in us

3.3.2.      Holiness looks like a life marked by virtue instead of vice

3.3.3.      Holiness looks like a clean conscience

3.3.4.      Holiness looks like obedience to God’s commands

3.3.5.      Holiness looks like Christlikeness

3.4.Chapter Three Review Questions

3.4.1.      What assurance and confidence does definitive sanctification give?

3.4.2.      Where has the church in previous generations gone wrong in its pursuit of holiness?  What errors do you see today?  Are some of them present in your own understanding of holiness?

3.4.3.      As you read through the list of virtues and vices in this chapter, what are some of the vices in your life that you need to get rid of?  What are some of the virtues you see and need to continue to encourage?

3.4.4.      Of what things in your life would you have trouble saying, “I can thank God for this?”

3.4.5.      Do you know the Ten Commandments?  Do they shape your living?  How?

4.      Chapter Four: The Impetus for the Imperatives

4.1.What’s Left for the Law?

4.2. The Grace of Law

4.3. The Law of Love and the Love of Law

4.4. The Medicine for our Motivation

4.5. Chapter Four Review Questions:

4.5.1.      Do you delight in the law of the Lord?  Do you see the law as an expression of God’s grace?  Why or why not?

4.5.2.      What motivations for holiness listed in this chapter are currently the “best medicine” for you?

4.5.3.      Which motivations for holiness have you seldom heard in sermons or within the church?  Why do you think that is?

4.5.4.      Think of a sin you are struggling with.  Which biblical motivations for holiness provided in this chapter are an encouragement to you to pursue holiness and to mortify this sin?

5.      Chapter Five: The Pleasure of God and the Possibility of Godliness

5.1. A Gospel-Centered Pancake

5.2. Imagine the Possibilities

5.3. A Perfect Storm

5.4. Filthy Rags or Fully Pleasing?

5.5. The Hazard of Moral Equivalence

5.6. Sons, not Illegitimate Children

5.7. Feeling Clean

5.8. Chapter Five Review Questions:

5.8.1.      Has your pursuit of personal holiness been short-circuited in certain ways?  How?

5.8.2.      When you are told that the Scriptures teach that righteousness is possible, that you truly can do good works, and you can please God, what is your reaction?  Does it surprise you?  Encourage you?

5.8.3.      Do you allow yourself not only to be convicted while reading the Scriptures, listening to sermons, and reading Christian books, but also to be encouraged at the progress and “success” within your Christian life?

6.      Chapter Six: Spirit-powered, Gospel-driven, faith-fueled effort

6.1. Holiness by Holy Spirit Power

6.2. Good Deeds based on Good News

6.3. Standing on the Promises

6.4. Effort is not a Four-letter word

6.5. Chapter Six Review Questions

7.      Chapter Seven: Be Who you are

7.1. Jesus Christ and Union Station

7.2. Union Confusion

7.3. From Being with Christ to Being Like Christ

7.4. Making the Reality Real

7.5. The Other Romans Road

8.      Chapter Eight: Saints and Sexual Immorality

8.1.Run, Baby, Run!

8.2. Members of Christ

8.3. Holiness in a Hookup World

8.4. Not even a hint

8.5. Fit for a King

8.6. A Pastoral Post-script

9.      Chapter Nine: Abide and Obey

9.1. Union and Communion

9.2. Keeping Commandments, Abiding in Love

9.3. Four Practices for Oneness with Christ

9.3.1.      We pursue communion with Christ through prayer.

9.3.2.      We pursue communion with Christ through the word of truth.

9.3.3.      We pursue communion with Christ through fellowship with other Christians.

9.3.4.      We pursue communion with Christ through partaking of the Lord’s Supper.

9.4. Extraordinary Holiness through Ordinary Means

10.  Chapter Ten: That All May See Your Progress

10.1.        Repentance as a way of Life

10.2.        What Kind of Grief?

10.3.        Growing into a Good-Looking Christian