Monthly Archives: August 2011

What to Do with Creeds and Councils?

Posted on by
Reply

By John Starke:

The church—be it Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant—has long debated the role of creeds and councils without reaching full consensus. Evangelicals care about sound doctrine, and we would be wrong to think it didn’t exist until the Reformation. So what’s an appropriate emphasis on creeds and councils for evangelicals in particular? What authority should they have in our life and doctrine?

Follow Me as I Follow Christ
In his first letter to the Corinthians, after exhorting them to do all things for the glory of God (10:23-33), Paul sets himself apart as an example when he says, “Follow me as I follow Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1). Notice, though, he doesn’t set himself apart as a perfect guide. He has a very important qualification: “as I follow Christ.” In other words, Paul wants his readers to recognize where Paul’s life is that of Christ’s (I would say, where it is biblical) and therefore follow him in that way. This is an easy paradigm to remember how Protestants have thought about creeds and councils: follow the creeds and councils as they follow the Bible.

Bruce Demarest, in an older Themelios article, “The Contemporary Relevance of Christendom’s Creeds” (by the way, you can look through our entire archives of Themelios, all the way back to 1975) makes the same point rather well:

The creed is not only a rule; it is also a rule that is ruled. As human formulations the creeds are subordinate to Scripture, the supreme rule of faith and practice. However majestic its language, however moving its assertions, however closely it purports to approximate apostolic doctrine, the creed is a human and therefore potentially fallible document. Ultimately the creeds must be checked and ruled by the Word of God. Christendom’s creeds are worthy of honour to the degree that they accord with the teaching of the Word of God.

What Kind of Authority
Since we’ve concluded that the creeds and councils don’t have ultimate authority, which is ascribed only to Scripture, do they have any authority at all? There’s a cavalier spirit in evangelicals that is quick to say, No! But that’s a tough line to plow since our evangelical understanding of the gospel is built upon the orthodox formulations of the creeds and councils. Even the most rogue, “no-creed-but-the-Bible” evangelical still uses words like orthodox and heresy. These aren’t biblical words, so to speak, but Christian words that depend upon some sort of agreement as to what our spiritual ancestors have claimed to be good and right beliefs and what is damnable, according to the Bible.
Continue reading →

Seven Assertions Regarding Justification and Sanctification

Posted on by
Reply

Rick Phillips – Concerning the relationship of justification to sanctification:

This topic is crucial to us getting the gospel right today while avoiding the deadly extremes of antinomianism (a lawless Christianity) and legalism (a works-oriented Christianity). In an attempt to give clarity to this topic, I would offer these six assertions regarding justification and sanctification:

1. Justification and Sanctification are twin benefits that flow from union with Christ through faith.

2. Justification and Sanctification are distinct but simultaneous.

3. Justification and Sanctification are both necessary and intrinsic to salvation.

4. Justification is logically prior to progressive Sanctification.

5. Justification does not cause Sanctification, but Christ both justifies and sanctifies his people.

6. In Justification faith is passive and receptive (Gal. 2:16), whereas in Sanctification faith is active.

7. The law of God functions differently with respect to Justification and Sanctification.

Let me discuss each of these briefly:

(Note: My Scripture references are not meant to be exhaustive, but to point to the main line of biblical support.)

1. Justification and Sanctification are twin benefits that flow from union with Christ through faith. Christ is himself the center of the gospel, and through faith we are saved in union with him (Acts 16:31; Eph. 1:3). Justification and Sanctification are distinct benefits flowing through union with Christ by faith alone. Justification is a legal benefit of our union with Christ, granting us forgiveness of sin and righteousness before God through faith alone (Rom. 3:23-26; Gal. 2:16). Sanctification is a Spiritual benefit* of our union with Christ, involving the believer’s transformation into the holy likeness of Christ (Rom. 6:1-14; Eph. 4:20-24; Tit. 2:12).

* I capitalize Spiritual to emphasize that it is the Holy Spirit’s work in our lives.

2. Justification and Sanctification are distinct but simultaneous. Justification pertains to the legal problem of sin, providing Christ’s imputed righteousness once for all (Rom. 3:23-25). A believer will never be more righteous than at the moment when he first believed, since he receives through faith Christ’s perfect and complete righteousness (2 Cor. 5:21). Sanctification pertains to the spiritual and moral corruption of sin. It is both definitive and progressive. Definitive sanctification refers to the believer being set apart for and to Christ at the moment of conversion (1 Cor. 6:15-17). Progressive sanctification refers to the on-going process of becoming holy according to the likeness of Christ (Eph. 4:21-24). At the moment of saving faith, the Christian is both justified and sanctified (1 Cor. 1:30), definitive sanctification immediately beginning the Spirit’s work of progressive sanctification (Rom. 6:1-14).

3. Justification and Sanctification are both necessary and intrinsic to salvation. While Justification and Sanctification are distinct, they are also inseparable in salvation. A believer cannot be justified without being sanctified (Rom. 6:1-2; Eph. 2:8-10). Through faith alone, sinners are justified in Christ (Gal. 2:16). But as faith brings us into union with Christ, the Holy Spirit also begins and continues sanctification (1 Cor. 6:15-17; Eph. 5:1-21; 1 Thess. 4:1-8). In other words, while we deny that faith + works = justification, we insist that faith = justification + works (i.e. sanctification)(Eph. 2:8-10).

4. Justification is logically prior to progressive Sanctification. This is Calvin’s meaning in describing the doctrine of justification as the hinge on which the door of salvation turns. By “logically prior,” we mean, for instance, that we will usually address an unbeliever regarding his need for justification before we call him to sanctification. (Until the sinner is justified through faith, there is little point in discussing his or her sanctification.) The logical priority of justification is seen in the Book of Romans, where justification is treated first (Rom. 3-5), after which Paul turns to sanctification (Rom. 5-8). As another example, after the Fall God blocked the entryway to the Garden with the angel and his flaming sword. This represents the forensic/legal problem of sin for which justification through faith is the answer. Once passing through this barrier, the believer may eat of the tree of life and dwell in the presence of the Lord, which pertain to his sanctification.

5. Justification does not cause Sanctification. Sanctification, like Justification, is caused by union with Christ through faith (Rom. 6:1-14). Just as Christ justifies, Christ also sanctifies his people (1 Cor. 1:30; Col. 3:12-17). For this reason, the idea that we need only preach justification in order to gain sanctification is contrary to the biblical pattern. Paul, for instance, does not preach justification so that sanctification will occur, but rather he preaches sanctification itself (Rom. 6:12-14; 12:1-2, etc.). Peter also declares “Be holy” (1 Pet. 1:15). This being the case, gospel preaching does not consist merely of preaching Christ for justification, but also consists of preaching Christ for sanctification.
Continue reading →