Justification Sanctification and Chuck Colson

  • Thread starter Thread starter Annie39
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Annie39

Guest
I have been searching the web for good explanations of the difference between Luther’s theology that claims that our sins are covered over rather that taken away; and a good explanation of the difference between our understanding of sanctification vs the protestant understanding using the bible on both issues. I have found a couple of web pages I can use but before I organize my thoughts in order to explain the Catholic doctrine to a fundamentalist Christian in my life I thought that I’d ask if anyone in this forum can suggest a good web site or perhaps can opine on the subject. In case it matters, the reason that I have found it necessary to research this topic is that my niece (the fundamentalist mentioned above who is also a wonderful person) recommended that I read Chuck Colson’s book THE GOOD LIFE. I’m sure that she will want to ask me to comment on it and I want to be “ready to give an answer…”

Thank you in advance,
Annie
 
Annie39 said:
I have been searching the web for good explanations of the difference between Luther’s theology that claims that our sins are covered over rather that taken away; and a good explanation of the difference between our understanding of sanctification vs the protestant understanding using the bible on both issues. I have found a couple of web pages I can use but before I organize my thoughts in order to explain the Catholic doctrine to a fundamentalist Christian in my life I thought that I’d ask if anyone in this forum can suggest a good web site or perhaps can opine on the subject. In case it matters, the reason that I have found it necessary to research this topic is that my niece (the fundamentalist mentioned above who is also a wonderful person) recommended that I read Chuck Colson’s book THE GOOD LIFE. I’m sure that she will want to ask me to comment on it and I want to be “ready to give an answer…”

Thank you in advance,
Annie
Click to expand...
Annie,

The first question can be answered quickly. Scripture speaks of justification “ontologically” and not simply “forensically” which is the view espoused by Luther. There are many examples of this in the NT but I’ll give you a couple that quickly come to mind.

Romans 5:4
For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience many will be **made **righteous.
Click to expand...
The phrase “made righteous” is clearly ontological just as the fall is ontological, and the underlying Greek readily attests to that fact as does the context.

Galatians 3:21
Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law.
Click to expand...
The Greek word translated here as “impart life” is zoopoeio, which means to cause to live or make alive. Note that in Galatians 3:21, Paul states that if a law could give life, then righteousness would truly have been by law. So here Paul is equating the giving of life with righteousness. That means that RIGHTEOUSNESS OR JUSTIFICATION IS THE GIVING OF SPIRITUAL LIFE. Again, it is ontological in nature.

I hope that answers the first question. If you need more verses to show the ontological aspect of justification, I will be glad to provide them.
 
Annie39 said:
I have been searching the web for good explanations of the difference between Luther’s theology that claims that our sins are covered over rather that taken away; and a good explanation of the difference between our understanding of sanctification vs the protestant understanding using the bible on both issues. I have found a couple of web pages I can use but before I organize my thoughts in order to explain the Catholic doctrine to a fundamentalist Christian in my life I thought that I’d ask if anyone in this forum can suggest a good web site or perhaps can opine on the subject. In case it matters, the reason that I have found it necessary to research this topic is that my niece (the fundamentalist mentioned above who is also a wonderful person) recommended that I read Chuck Colson’s book THE GOOD LIFE. I’m sure that she will want to ask me to comment on it and I want to be “ready to give an answer…”

Thank you in advance,
Annie
Click to expand...
Look for the articles written by James Akin and Marshner.

chnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/salvation.pdf

This one also:salvationhistory.com/library/category/apologetics
 
Annie,

As far as justification and sanctification are concerned, I must first say that you are heading into a discussion that must cover a lot of ground in order to be properly understood and appreciated from each perspective.

Generally, non-catholic Christians believe that Catholics mistakenly don’t distinguish between justification and sanctification and that we frequently use the terms interchangeably. You have to be careful here because, although we properly recognize the differences, we also recognize that both have the same cause(i.e. God’s grace), and that they also happen simultaneously at our spiritual rebirth[see 1 Cor 6:11]. Likewise, both are necessary for salvation.

Furthermore, Catholics recognize that justification is not a one time event. Many non-catholics believe in OSAS which is “once saved always saved.” I can supply you with a considerable amount of scriptural data and a thorough refutation of OSAS if you need it. Just send me a PM with your email and I will send file attachments that will give you everything you need for that one. Likewise, I can supply you with the scriptural references and attendant explanations showing that justification is not a one time event and I will use Abraham as the example. I use Abraham because he is the non-Catholic choice for showing that justification is only a one time event.

For Catholics there is no bright line that completely separates justification and sanctification, but non-catholic Christians do not see it that way. The discussion usually winds up heading into the territory of faith and works and their role or place in salvation. Please keep one thing in mind and use scripture to ground yourself in this. We do not work our way into heaven. Works are, however, necessary for our salvation. The good works that we do are from God and by his grace and they “complete” our faith and thus also justify per James 2:22-24. Tie that passage from James to Paul’s words in Eph 2:8-10 which says:
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God–not because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
Click to expand...
Please note all that is in the passage as follows:
  1. Everything is by grace.
  2. When God brings us to faith we have done nothing to earn it in any way.
  3. It is all gift.
  4. We are God’s workmanship.
  5. We are as God’s workmanship created in Christ Jesus for good works.
  6. The good works that we are to do were prepared by the Father even before we are justified.
  7. As God’s workmanship and by his grace we are to walk in the good works prepared by the Father.
Eph 2:8-10 and James 2 actually explain one another and once you grasp the connections you will be well on your way to properly articulating the Catholic position. There is a whole lot more that can be said on all of this. Besides what you will receive from posters on this thread, I would also recommend the following link:

philvaz.com/apologetics/apolog.htm#SALVATION

I hope this will give you the jump start you need. I will tell you, however, that much preparation is necessary and considerable followup may be needed as well. I’ve only begun to scratch the surface.

God bless.
 
Annie39 said:
I have been searching the web for good explanations of the difference between Luther’s theology that claims that our sins are covered over rather that taken away; and a good explanation of the difference between our understanding of sanctification vs the protestant understanding using the bible on both issues. I have found a couple of web pages I can use but before I organize my thoughts in order to explain the Catholic doctrine to a fundamentalist Christian in my life I thought that I’d ask if anyone in this forum can suggest a good web site or perhaps can opine on the subject. In case it matters, the reason that I have found it necessary to research this topic is that my niece (the fundamentalist mentioned above who is also a wonderful person) recommended that I read Chuck Colson’s book THE GOOD LIFE. I’m sure that she will want to ask me to comment on it and I want to be “ready to give an answer…”

Thank you in advance,
Annie
Click to expand...
I think that conflating Luther’s theology and that of contemporary fundamentalists would be a serious mistake and probably only further confuse the situation. Christian fundamentalism would actually be much closer to Calvinist thought, even if they don’t recognize this fact themselves.

Here’s a suggestion that might be useful. Instead of concentrating on justification/sanctification, you might start off by comparing your niece’s idea of “salvation” (a key fundamentalist notion) with a Catholic understanding. Most fundamentalists define salvation as that moment in time in which they “accept Christ” and are “born again” or experience some sort of profound or significant conversion experience that changes one’s eternal destiny. Catholics tend to think of salvation more inclusively, i.e., all that God has done and continues to do on behalf of humanity; to me this is a much different idea of “being saved.” This of course includes ideas about eternal destiny but is not limited to them.

Just a thought that might open some dialogue.
 
Hi David Noonan (I’m related to some Noonans :))

Thank you for your reply. I am not attempting to get into a long discussion with my niece on the topic, I just want to be ready to discuss the book with her when she asks me for comments which I’m sure that she will. Since she is a fundamentalist she will really only be open to discussions using chapter and verse of the Bible. However beyond this, This thread seems to be turning into one of those that I find most interesting to read. I plan to write replies to others by this evening but I thought that I’d take a little time out this afternoon to reply to your post now.
As an ex-Lutheran (LCMS) I don’t understand why you think that evangelicals are closer in belief to Calvin rather than Luther. Of course I don’t know every evangelical but those of my acquaintance including many who are members of my own family; I don’t see it that way. Maybe they are a combo of Luther and Calvin because at least those fundamentalist of my acquaintance do not believe in double predestination. Also, Luther believed that one could lose one’s salvation if that person apostatized Calvin did not.
When you write “Catholics tend to think of salvation more inclusively, i.e., all that God has done and continues to do on behalf of humanity” I’m not sure if I disagree with you or I don’t understand what you mean.

Annie
 
Annie39 said:
I have been searching the web for good explanations of the difference between Luther’s theology that claims that our sins are covered over rather that taken away; and a good explanation of the difference between our understanding of sanctification vs the protestant understanding using the bible on both issues. I have found a couple of web pages I can use but before I organize my thoughts in order to explain the Catholic doctrine to a fundamentalist Christian in my life I thought that I’d ask if anyone in this forum can suggest a good web site or perhaps can opine on the subject. In case it matters, the reason that I have found it necessary to research this topic is that my niece (the fundamentalist mentioned above who is also a wonderful person) recommended that I read Chuck Colson’s book THE GOOD LIFE. I’m sure that she will want to ask me to comment on it and I want to be “ready to give an answer…”

Thank you in advance,
Annie
Click to expand...
I don’t know of a website but the best book I’ve read on this subject is “Not By Faith Alone” by Robert Sungenis. It’s signed off on everybody like Scott Hahn and Tim Staples. It’s over 700 pages and covers most things to do with Justification and Sanctification.
 
Annie39 said:
Hi David Noonan (I’m related to some Noonans :))

Thank you for your reply. I am not attempting to get into a long discussion with my niece on the topic, I just want to be ready to discuss the book with her when she asks me for comments which I’m sure that she will. Since she is a fundamentalist she will really only be open to discussions using chapter and verse of the Bible. However beyond this, This thread seems to be turning into one of those that I find most interesting to read. I plan to write replies to others by this evening but I thought that I’d take a little time out this afternoon to reply to your post now.
As an ex-Lutheran (LCMS) I don’t understand why you think that evangelicals are closer in belief to Calvin rather than Luther. Of course I don’t know every evangelical but those of my acquaintance including many who are members of my own family; I don’t see it that way. Maybe they are a combo of Luther and Calvin because at least those fundamentalist of my acquaintance do not believe in double predestination. Also, Luther believed that one could lose one’s salvation if that person apostatized Calvin did not.
When you write “Catholics tend to think of salvation more inclusively, i.e., all that God has done and continues to do on behalf of humanity” I’m not sure if I disagree with you or I don’t understand what you mean.

Annie
Click to expand...
Many fundamentalists follow “once saved, always saved” or “eternal security” theology which, as you point out, is much closer to Calvin (perseverance of the saints) than Luther.

Also, fundamentalists are non-sacramentarians, which—at least if you have to choose between the two—is much closer to Calvin than Luther, especially in their conceptions about the Eucharist and the Real Presence and the Lutheran ideas of the means of grace.

For Lutherans, regeneration happens at the moment of baptism; for Calvinists, conversion generally happens with the calling/urging of the Holy Spirit—much closer to the fundamentalist’s idea of conversion/regeneration and the “sinner’s prayer.”

A fundamentalist’s most prevalent conception of the way people are saved is substitutionary atonement, which is also significant in Calvinism.

Finally, I don’t see fundamentalists being at all close to a Lutheran sense of biblical theology since fundamentalism comes out of the Enlightenment—though it’s probably not that Calvinist either on this issue. I’m not really all that familiar with the way Calvinists think about the Bible.

I think when most Catholics talk about “salvation” they encompass what fundamentalists think of as sanctification. A Catholic would see salvation more as a life-long process of conversion, that the Christian is “being saved” (1Cor 1:18; 15:2; see particularly CCC 794, but also, e.g., 64, 980, 1421, 1811…)
 
Thanks Pax
Annie
Pax said:
Annie,

The first question can be answered quickly. Scripture speaks of justification “ontologically” and not simply “forensically” which is the view espoused by Luther. There are many examples of this in the NT but I’ll give you a couple that quickly come to mind.

Romans 5:4

The phrase “made righteous” is clearly ontological just as the fall is ontological, and the underlying Greek readily attests to that fact as does the context.

Galatians 3:21

The Greek word translated here as “impart life” is zoopoeio, which means to cause to live or make alive. Note that in Galatians 3:21, Paul states that if a law could give life, then righteousness would truly have been by law. So here Paul is equating the giving of life with righteousness. That means that RIGHTEOUSNESS OR JUSTIFICATION IS THE GIVING OF SPIRITUAL LIFE. Again, it is ontological in nature.

I hope that answers the first question. If you need more verses to show the ontological aspect of justification, I will be glad to provide them.
Click to expand...
 
The url looks promising thanks.

Annie
Pax said:
Annie,

As far as justification and sanctification are concerned, I must first say that you are heading into a discussion that must cover a lot of ground in order to be properly understood and appreciated from each perspective.

Generally, non-catholic Christians believe that Catholics mistakenly don’t distinguish between justification and sanctification and that we frequently use the terms interchangeably. You have to be careful here because, although we properly recognize the differences, we also recognize that both have the same cause(i.e. God’s grace), and that they also happen simultaneously at our spiritual rebirth[see 1 Cor 6:11]. Likewise, both are necessary for salvation.

Furthermore, Catholics recognize that justification is not a one time event. Many non-catholics believe in OSAS which is “once saved always saved.” I can supply you with a considerable amount of scriptural data and a thorough refutation of OSAS if you need it. Just send me a PM with your email and I will send file attachments that will give you everything you need for that one. Likewise, I can supply you with the scriptural references and attendant explanations showing that justification is not a one time event and I will use Abraham as the example. I use Abraham because he is the non-Catholic choice for showing that justification is only a one time event.

For Catholics there is no bright line that completely separates justification and sanctification, but non-catholic Christians do not see it that way. The discussion usually winds up heading into the territory of faith and works and their role or place in salvation. Please keep one thing in mind and use scripture to ground yourself in this. We do not work our way into heaven. Works are, however, necessary for our salvation. The good works that we do are from God and by his grace and they “complete” our faith and thus also justify per James 2:22-24. Tie that passage from James to Paul’s words in Eph 2:8-10 which says:

Please note all that is in the passage as follows:
  1. Everything is by grace.
  2. When God brings us to faith we have done nothing to earn it in any way.
  3. It is all gift.
  4. We are God’s workmanship.
  5. We are as God’s workmanship created in Christ Jesus for good works.
  6. The good works that we are to do were prepared by the Father even before we are justified.
  7. As God’s workmanship and by his grace we are to walk in the good works prepared by the Father.
Eph 2:8-10 and James 2 actually explain one another and once you grasp the connections you will be well on your way to properly articulating the Catholic position. There is a whole lot more that can be said on all of this. Besides what you will receive from posters on this thread, I would also recommend the following link:

philvaz.com/apologetics/apolog.htm#SALVATION

I hope this will give you the jump start you need. I will tell you, however, that much preparation is necessary and considerable followup may be needed as well. I’ve only begun to scratch the surface.

God bless.
Click to expand...
 
Dave_Noonan said:
Here’s a suggestion that might be useful. Instead of concentrating on justification/sanctification, you might start off by comparing your niece’s idea of “salvation” (a key fundamentalist notion) with a Catholic understanding. Most fundamentalists define salvation as that moment in time in which they “accept Christ” and are “born again” or experience some sort of profound or significant conversion experience that changes one’s eternal destiny. Catholics tend to think of salvation more inclusively, i.e., all that God has done and continues to do on behalf of humanity; to me this is a much different idea of “being saved.” This of course includes ideas about eternal destiny but is not limited to them.

Just a thought that might open some dialogue.
Click to expand...
Is it correct to state the Once Saved Always Saved crowd believe that backsliders were never really saved? I’m not clear on this point
example:
  • a man finds Jesus and is ‘born again’ through baptism and the believers prayer.
  • the man leads a moral and faith filled life for many years.
  • the man then takes to drinking, adultry and other sins.
  • the man dies before seeking repentance.
Do your calvanists simply write him off as ‘never saved’ even though everyone thought he was ‘saved’ up to his sin binge? For if he was truely sanctified, he never would have sinned again.
 
tarboy said:
Is it correct to state the Once Saved Always Saved crowd believe that backsliders were never really saved? I’m not clear on this point
example:
  • a man finds Jesus and is ‘born again’ through baptism and the believers prayer.
  • the man leads a moral and faith filled life for many years.
  • the man then takes to drinking, adultry and other sins.
  • the man dies before seeking repentance.
Click to expand...
That’s usually the thought process, yes. Interestingly, Max Weber explores this a bit in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Basically he says that the impetus behind the Protestant work ethic was so you could prove to everyone that you were indeed one of the elect by evidence of your prosperity and therefore that your conversion wasn’t some sort of “false start.”
tarboy said:
Do your calvanists simply write him off as ‘never saved’ even though everyone thought he was ‘saved’ up to his sin binge? For if he was truely sanctified, he never would have sinned again.
Click to expand...
They’re not MY Calvinists 🙂 Yeah, I’d say that’s pretty close. So while there is eternal security for the elect, there is always this nagging fear that you might not actually be one of the elect.
 
There is a brilliant professor at Ave Maria U who has lectured on many subjects, including this one. His lecture can be found here, scroll down to the lecture called St. Paul on Justification %between%
 
Annie,
there’s a great paper on the internet by David Ppalm,“justification and sanctification”. I think it is currently kept on Dave armstrong’s website. It’s about 15 years old but I wish it were more well-known. It was originally a presentatin to a conference of baptists.

Peace
Steve
 
constantconvert said:
There is a brilliant professor at Ave Maria U who has lectured on many subjects, including this one. His lecture can be found here, scroll down to the lecture called St. Paul on Justification %between%
Click to expand...
I have listened to his lectures many times and I marvel at the depths of his knowledge of the Church and the doctrines. He has a talent to explain complex things very simply.
mdcpensive1
 
James224 said:
I don’t know of a website but the best book I’ve read on this subject is “Not By Faith Alone” by Robert Sungenis. It’s signed off on everybody like Scott Hahn and Tim Staples. It’s over 700 pages and covers most things to do with Justification and Sanctification.
Click to expand...
Can’t recommend this book enough myself 👍 👍 A must read for Catholics IMHO!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top