I have found very few of Monty's videos that deal with sanctification. I can't say that he rejects sanctification but he doesn't emphasize it much. I do not believe that sanctification is "necessary" for salvation since that would then mean that justification and sanctification are both necessary to be saved, which is basically the Roman Catholic position. All that is necessary for salvation is justification by faith alone or assenting to the propositions of the law that we are all miserable sinners and assenting to the Gospel promises that God saves those who never will deserve anything other than hell but assent to or believe the Gospel.
How sanctified would I need to be in order to be saved or justified before God?
Having said all that, however, it is true that we must evidence a true profession of faith before men and the church. (James 2:18. Cf. Galatians 5:6; Romans 3:28; Matthew 7:17; Hebrews 11:33; Romans 1:16-17). If someone is blantantly disobeying the decalogue or general summary of the moral law then that person is to be disciplined. It does not mean that his salvation depends on sanctification, however. What it means is that the elect are not saved by good works or sanctification but that the elect are saved "for" good works. Some evidence more fruit than others. But all are saved by grace and grace alone. The ordo salutis is the order in which God has logically decreed the salvation of His elect and how that order falls out in historical time.
Also, it should be pointed out that the context of James 2 is not justification by works at all. (James 2:23). James is talking about charity or helping the poor. (James 2:1-19). How many Christians are helping other Christians in need? If they are doing nothing but saying, "Be warmed and filled," then according to James they have dead faith. That convicts the vast majority of Evangelical churches and individuals. Therefore I find it strange that they would try to use this passage to justify the Roman Catholic understanding of faith plus obedience or faith plus faithfulness as the basis for salvation. The vast majority of Christian churches are middle class and discriminate against the poor. The point of James 2 is showing partiality to the rich and ignoring the poor. The focus of James 2 is breaking the moral command not to covet and to love thy neighbor as thyself. But who keeps this law? If we keep ALL the law and break only one we are guilty of breaking them all because all of God's moral laws stand together. (James 2:10). Therefore to covet as the rich young ruler did it is to reveal that we have ALL broken the moral command not to covet. We are all guilty of not helping our brother and not loving our neighbor as ourselves. We ALL deserve hell and in effect, James is saying that we are ALL law breakers. (Cf. Romans 3:10-23). We all have dead faith when it comes to perfect obedience of the law of God. (Cf. Matthew 5:17-20, 48). The point of the moral law is not so God will pat you on the back and tell you what a wonderful job you're doing! (Luke 17:7-10). The purpose of the moral law is reveal you to be the miserable sinner you are and will be until you drop dead. (Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7). Like the rich young ruler we all refuse to follow Christ because we are all covetous to one degree or another. (Cf. Luke 18:22-30).
The short answer is the Lordship salvation view is basically Roman Catholic because they claim to have been faithful when the Apostle Paul says the opposite. They claim to have done many wonderful works rather than appealing to the good works of Christ and Christ alone to save them. (Matthew 7:22-23). It should be pointed out that in Matthew 25 the elect have done good works without trying to take credit for doing them. (Cf. Matthew 25:37-40). Christ is the end of the law for righteousness! (Romans 10:4). Unless we are clothed in the righteousness of Christ and not our own righteousness we will be cast out of the wedding party. (Cf. Matthew 8:10-12; Matthew 22:11-14).
It is true that no man is free from the moral law. (Cf. Article 7, Thirty-nine Articles of Religion). The three uses of the moral law still apply. 1) The pedagogical use applies until we die. The moral law drives us to Christ for mercy in conversion, justification and sanctification. At no single point have we arrived nor can any good work please God apart from faith PRECISELY BECAUSE WE ARE ALL LAW BREAKERS TO ONE DEGREE OR ANOTHER UNTIL WE DIE. Forgive me for yelling:) 2) The second use of the law is the civil and criminal laws are by general equity put in place to keep peace in society and among nations on earth. Those who violate the criminal law of the nation in which they live will face God's appointed servants, being the civil magistrates who bear the sword. (Romans 13:1-7). 3) The third use of the moral law tells the Christian how he is to live by faith. (Romans 1:17). But this in no way implies that good works in any way merit salvation. We are saved for good works and not BY good works. (Ephesians 2:8-10). In short there will be many "good" Muslims, Papists, Jews, atheists, Mormons, Buddhists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Hindus, and various other religious people in hell. But the elect are chosen unconditionally before the foundation of the world and before they are born. (Cf. Ephesians 1:4-5, 11; Romans 9:11-13; Titus 3:5-7; 2 Thessalonians 2:13).
I could say more but I have given you much to think about here. But remember that Lazarus had nothing to offer God or man when he died under the table as the dogs were licking his wounds. But the rich man went to hell. (Cf. Luke 16:17, 19-31). I say to you that this parable is the perfect illustration of the comparison of those who come to Christ just as they are and those who come in their own righteousness.
May the peace of God be with you!
Charlie
P. S. I am posting this one to the blog.
Addendum: See also, Article 12.
How sanctified would I need to be in order to be saved or justified before God?
Having said all that, however, it is true that we must evidence a true profession of faith before men and the church. (James 2:18. Cf. Galatians 5:6; Romans 3:28; Matthew 7:17; Hebrews 11:33; Romans 1:16-17). If someone is blantantly disobeying the decalogue or general summary of the moral law then that person is to be disciplined. It does not mean that his salvation depends on sanctification, however. What it means is that the elect are not saved by good works or sanctification but that the elect are saved "for" good works. Some evidence more fruit than others. But all are saved by grace and grace alone. The ordo salutis is the order in which God has logically decreed the salvation of His elect and how that order falls out in historical time.
Also, it should be pointed out that the context of James 2 is not justification by works at all. (James 2:23). James is talking about charity or helping the poor. (James 2:1-19). How many Christians are helping other Christians in need? If they are doing nothing but saying, "Be warmed and filled," then according to James they have dead faith. That convicts the vast majority of Evangelical churches and individuals. Therefore I find it strange that they would try to use this passage to justify the Roman Catholic understanding of faith plus obedience or faith plus faithfulness as the basis for salvation. The vast majority of Christian churches are middle class and discriminate against the poor. The point of James 2 is showing partiality to the rich and ignoring the poor. The focus of James 2 is breaking the moral command not to covet and to love thy neighbor as thyself. But who keeps this law? If we keep ALL the law and break only one we are guilty of breaking them all because all of God's moral laws stand together. (James 2:10). Therefore to covet as the rich young ruler did it is to reveal that we have ALL broken the moral command not to covet. We are all guilty of not helping our brother and not loving our neighbor as ourselves. We ALL deserve hell and in effect, James is saying that we are ALL law breakers. (Cf. Romans 3:10-23). We all have dead faith when it comes to perfect obedience of the law of God. (Cf. Matthew 5:17-20, 48). The point of the moral law is not so God will pat you on the back and tell you what a wonderful job you're doing! (Luke 17:7-10). The purpose of the moral law is reveal you to be the miserable sinner you are and will be until you drop dead. (Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7). Like the rich young ruler we all refuse to follow Christ because we are all covetous to one degree or another. (Cf. Luke 18:22-30).
The short answer is the Lordship salvation view is basically Roman Catholic because they claim to have been faithful when the Apostle Paul says the opposite. They claim to have done many wonderful works rather than appealing to the good works of Christ and Christ alone to save them. (Matthew 7:22-23). It should be pointed out that in Matthew 25 the elect have done good works without trying to take credit for doing them. (Cf. Matthew 25:37-40). Christ is the end of the law for righteousness! (Romans 10:4). Unless we are clothed in the righteousness of Christ and not our own righteousness we will be cast out of the wedding party. (Cf. Matthew 8:10-12; Matthew 22:11-14).
It is true that no man is free from the moral law. (Cf. Article 7, Thirty-nine Articles of Religion). The three uses of the moral law still apply. 1) The pedagogical use applies until we die. The moral law drives us to Christ for mercy in conversion, justification and sanctification. At no single point have we arrived nor can any good work please God apart from faith PRECISELY BECAUSE WE ARE ALL LAW BREAKERS TO ONE DEGREE OR ANOTHER UNTIL WE DIE. Forgive me for yelling:) 2) The second use of the law is the civil and criminal laws are by general equity put in place to keep peace in society and among nations on earth. Those who violate the criminal law of the nation in which they live will face God's appointed servants, being the civil magistrates who bear the sword. (Romans 13:1-7). 3) The third use of the moral law tells the Christian how he is to live by faith. (Romans 1:17). But this in no way implies that good works in any way merit salvation. We are saved for good works and not BY good works. (Ephesians 2:8-10). In short there will be many "good" Muslims, Papists, Jews, atheists, Mormons, Buddhists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Hindus, and various other religious people in hell. But the elect are chosen unconditionally before the foundation of the world and before they are born. (Cf. Ephesians 1:4-5, 11; Romans 9:11-13; Titus 3:5-7; 2 Thessalonians 2:13).
I could say more but I have given you much to think about here. But remember that Lazarus had nothing to offer God or man when he died under the table as the dogs were licking his wounds. But the rich man went to hell. (Cf. Luke 16:17, 19-31). I say to you that this parable is the perfect illustration of the comparison of those who come to Christ just as they are and those who come in their own righteousness.
"Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 "The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself,`God, I thank You that I am not like other men-- extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. 12 `I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.' 13 "And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying,`God, be merciful to me a sinner!' 14 "I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." (Luke 18:10-14 NKJ)Those who claim to have kept God's law reveal themselves as the Pharisees they really are. They lower God's standards so they can appear to be righteous before men. But before God all of their works are but filthy rags. (Isaiah 64:6). There is no one who is righteous. No. Not even one. (Romans 3:10-12). Is sanctification necessary for salvation? Yes. If you are trying to get to heaven in a row boat. Hope you make it.
May the peace of God be with you!
Charlie
P. S. I am posting this one to the blog.
Addendum: See also, Article 12.
On 9/1/2012 11:32 PM, BB wrote:
Charlie, you mentioned that Monty Collier rejects sanctification. What exactly did you mean by that? And where do you see that in him? Does he have videos on that or something? Also, is that where you'd consider him deviating from Clark and Robbins? And if so, do you hold that sanctification is then necessary for salvation? Or do you consider it just natural, to individual degrees for different believers?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment