Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
CRUCIAL CONCEPTS
Election
God’s choice of an individual or group for a specific purpose or destiny.
Romans 9:10-13
Regeneration
To be born again; Born of the Spirit" (John 3:8). Fallen man is created anew "in the image of God," and brought from death in sin to life in Christ.
Justification
God’s act of declaring us “not guilty” for our sins, making us “right” with him.
Romans 4:25; 5:18
Propitiation
The removal of God’s punishment for sin through the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
Romans 3:25
Redemption
Jesus Christ has paid the price so we can go free. The price of sin is death; Jesus paid the price.
Romans 3:24; 8:23
Sanctification
Becoming more and more like Jesus Christ through the work of the Holy Spirit.
Romans 5:2; 15:16
Glorification
The ultimate state of the believer after death when he or she becomes like Christ (1 John 3:2).
Romans 8:18-19, 30
________________________________________________________________________________
ELECT, ELECTION
Election refers to the selection of a leader by a group of people. It involves choice. Usually one must be chosen out of many candidates.
When the verb “elect” is used in the Bible, it usually has God as its subject. God chose Israel to be his people (compare Acts 13:17). In other words, they didn’t decide to belong to him. God took the first step. God’s choice wasn’t based on any particular virtues that his people showed. Rather, it was based on his promise to their forefather Abraham (Deuteronomy 7:7-8). God also chose such leaders as Saul and David (1 Samuel 10:24; 2 Samuel 6:21). There was no popular vote by the people. The word thus means that God decides what shall happen, and it’s apart from human choice.
The same thoughts are found in the New Testament. God’s people are described as his “elect” or “chosen ones.” Jesus used this term when speaking of the future time when the Son of Man will come and gather together God’s people (Mark 13:20, 27). He will reward them for their sufferings and for their patience in waiting for his coming (Luke 18:7). In 1 Peter 2:9, God’s people are called a “chosen [elect] nation.” This phrase was first used of the people of Israel (Isaiah 43:20). It brings out the fact that the people of God in the Old Testament and the Christian church in the New Testament are connected to each other. The promises addressed to Israel now find fulfillment in the church.
In Romans 9-11 Paul discusses why the people of Israel as a nation have rejected the gospel, while the Gentiles have accepted it. He states that in the present time there is a “remnant” or small remaining part of Israel as a result of God’s gracious choice of them. This group is “the elect.” They are the chosen people who have obtained what was meant for Israel as a whole. But the greater mass of the people have failed to obtain it because they were “hardened” as a result of their sin (11:5-7).
Nevertheless, God’s choice of Israel to be his people has not been canceled. Most Jewish people have set themselves against the gospel. As a result, the Gentiles have entered into their place to receive God’s blessings. However, the Jewish people are still loved by God, and God will not go back on his original calling of them (Romans 11:28). That is why Paul is confident that in due time there will be a general return to God by the people of Israel.
The word translated “elect” is generally found in the plural. It refers either to the members of God’s people as a whole or to those in a particular local church (Romans 8:33; Colossians 3:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:4; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1-2; 2 Peter 1:10; Revelation 17:14; compare Romans 16:13 and 2 John 1:13, which have the singular form). The use of the plural may partly be explained by the fact that most of the New Testament letters are addressed to groups of people rather than to individuals. The point is that God’s election is concerned with the creation of a collective people rather than the calling of isolated individuals.
The word “election” emphasizes that God took the first step in calling people into the membership of his people. This election was made before time began, prior to all human response (Ephesians 1:4; compare John 15:16, 19). It is God who has called men and women to be his people, and those who respond are elect. God’s call does not depend on any virtues or merits of the human race. Indeed, he chooses the foolish things by worldly standards to shame the wise, the weak to confound the strong, and the lowly and insignificant to bring to nothing those who think that they are something (1 Corinthians 1:27-28). The effect of election is to leave no grounds whatever for human boasting in achievement and position. The elect owe their standing entirely to God, and they cannot boast or compare themselves with other people.
God’s elect are a privileged people. They now have God to uphold them. No one can bring any accusation against them that might lead to God’s condemnation (Romans 8:33). They are a royal priesthood. They are God’s servants with the right of access to him (1 Peter 2:9). It is for the elect’s sake that the apostles endured hardship and suffering, so that they might enjoy future salvation and eternal glory (2 Timothy 2:10).
The elect are recognized by their faith in God (Titus 1:1). They are called to show the character that should mark God’s people (Colossians 3:12). They must make their calling and election sure. That is, they must show that they belong to God by the quality of their lives (2 Peter 1:10). They must continue being faithful to the One who called them (Revelation 17:14).
The relationship between God’s call and human response is explained in Matthew 22:14: “For many are called, but few are chosen.” Although God calls many through the gospel, only some of those respond to the call and become his elect people. The text sheds no light on the mystery of why only some become God’s people. Certainly, when a person does respond to God’s call, it is because the gospel comes to him or her “in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction” (1 Thessalonians 1:4-5). When men and women refuse the gospel, it is because they have become hardened as a result of sin and because they trust in their own works. Scripture does not go beyond that point in explanation, and neither should Christians.
“Election” can also be used of God’s choice of people to serve him. Jesus chose the twelve disciples out of the larger company of those who followed him (Luke 6:13; Acts 1:2). The same thought appears in John’s Gospel. Jesus said that although he chose the Twelve, one of them turned out to be a devil (John 6:70; 13:18). When a replacement was needed for Judas, the church prayed to Jesus. They asked him to show them which of the two available candidates he would choose to fill the gap in the Twelve (Acts 1:24). Peter attributes his evangelism among the Gentiles to God’s election of him for that purpose (15:7). Similarly, Paul was elected as God’s witness to the Gentiles (9:15).
________________________________________________________________________________
JUSTIFICATION
The doctrine of justification, the storm center of the Reformation, was a major concern of the apostle Paul. For him it was the heart of the gospel (Rom. 1:17; 3:21–5:21; Gal. 2:15–5:1) shaping both his message (Acts 13:38-39) and his devotion and spiritual life (2 Cor. 5:13-21; Phil. 3:4-14). Though other New Testament writers affirm the same doctrine in substance, the terms in which Protestants have affirmed and defended it for almost five centuries are drawn primarily from Paul.
Justification is a judicial act of God pardoning sinners (wicked and ungodly persons, Rom. 4:5; 3:9-24), accepting them as just, and so putting permanently right their previously estranged relationship with himself. This justifying sentence is God’s gift of righteousness (Rom. 5:15-17), his bestowal of a status of acceptance for Jesus’ sake (2 Cor. 5:21).
God’s justifying judgment seems strange, for pronouncing sinners righteous may appear to be precisely the unjust action on the judge’s part that God’s own law forbade (Deut. 25:1; Prov. 17:15). Yet it is in fact a just judgment, for its basis is the righteousness of Jesus Christ who as “the last Adam” (1 Cor. 15:45), our representative head acting on our behalf, obeyed the law that bound us and endured the retribution for lawlessness that was our due and so (to use a medieval technical term) “merited” our justification. So we are justified justly, on the basis of justice done (Rom. 3:25-26) and Christ’s righteousness reckoned to our account (Rom. 5:18-19).
God’s justifying decision is the judgment of the Last Day, declaring where we shall spend eternity, brought forward into the present and pronounced here and now. It is the last judgment that will ever be passed on our destiny; God will never go back on it, however much Satan may appeal against God’s verdict (Zech. 3:1; Rev. 12:10; Rom. 8:33-34). To be justified is to be eternally secure (Rom. 5:1-5; 8:30).
The necessary means, or instrumental cause, of justification is personal faith in Jesus Christ as crucified Savior and risen Lord (Rom. 4:23-25; 10:8-13). This is because the meritorious ground of our justification is entirely in Christ. As we give ourselves in faith to Jesus, Jesus gives us his gift of righteousness, so that in the very act of “closing with Christ,” as older Reformed teachers put it, we receive divine pardon and acceptance which we could not otherwise have (Gal. 2:15-16; 3:24).
Official Roman Catholic theology includes sanctification in the definition of justification, which it sees as a process rather than a single decisive event, and affirms that while faith contributes to our acceptance with God, our works of satisfaction and merit contribute too. Rome sees baptism, viewed as a channel of sanctifying grace, as the primary instrumental cause of justification, and the sacrament of penance, whereby congruous merit is achieved through works of satisfaction, as the supplementary restorative cause whenever the grace of God’s initial acceptance is lost through mortal sin. Congruous, as distinct from condign, merit means merit that it is fitting, though not absolutely necessary, for God to reward by a fresh flow of sanctifying grace. On the Roman Catholic view, therefore, believers save themselves with the help of the grace that flows from Christ through the church’s sacramental system, and in this life no sense of confidence in God’s grace can ordinarily be had. Such teaching is a far cry from that of Paul.
This article was excerpted from Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs by J. I. Packer.
________________________________________________________________________________
PROPITIATION
Appeasing another person’s anger by the offering of a gift is propitiation. The word was often used by the pagans in antiquity, for they thought of their gods as unpredictable beings, liable to become angry with their worshipers for any trifle. When disaster struck, it was often thought that a god was angry and was therefore punishing his worshipers. The remedy was to offer a sacrifice without delay. A well-chosen offering would appease the god and put him in a good mood again. This process was called propitiation.
Understandably, some modern theologians have reacted against using the term in reference to the God of the Bible. They do not see him as one who can be bribed to become favorable, so they reject the whole idea. When they come to the term in the Greek New Testament, they translate it as “expiation” or some equivalent term that lacks any reference to anger. This is an unjustified avoidance because, in the first place, the Greek term for propitiation occurs in some important biblical passages (Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17; 1 John 2:2; John 4:10). In the second place, the idea of the wrath of God is found throughout the Bible; it must be taken into account in the way sin is forgiven.
The idea that God cannot be angry is not based on the Old Testament or the New Testament. God does have anger for the sins of the human race. Whenever his children sin, they provoke the anger of God. Of course, his anger is not an irrational lack of self-control, as it so often is with humans. His anger is the settled opposition of his holy nature to everything that is evil. Such opposition to sin cannot be dismissed with a wave of the hand. It requires something much more substantial. And the Bible states that it was only the cross that did this. Jesus is “the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2, KJV). This is not the only way of looking at the cross, but it is an important way. If God’s anger is real, then it must be taken into account in the way that sin, which caused that wrath, is dealt with. When the New Testament speaks of “propitiation,” it means that Jesus’ death on the cross for the sins of mankind put away God’s wrath against his people once and for all.
________________________________________________________________________________
REDEEMER, REDEMPTION
These are two English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back.” The term is used to describe freeing someone from chains, slavery, or prison.
OLD TESTAMENT AND NEW TESTAMENT WORDS
There are three different words used in Hebrew to describe the idea of “redemption.” The meaning of these words comes from ancient Hebrew customs. We must understand their culture to understand these terms.
The first term used for redemption has a legal meaning. The verb padah is used when an animal substitutes for (or redeems) a person or another animal. The noun derived from the root word means the ransom or the price paid. When a living being, person or animal, needs to be redeemed, the substitution must be made, or price paid; otherwise, the creature involved is killed (Exodus 13:13; 34:20). However, there is evidence that this rule was not always strictly followed (21:8; Job 6:23).
The firstborn male in any family, both human and animal, belonged to God. Sometimes the firstborn animal was sacrificed to God, but human firstborns and some animals were redeemed (Exodus 13:13; 34:20; Numbers 18:15-16). In the redemption of the firstborn son, an animal was substituted, although later a sum of money was paid (18:16).
The second term involved is the Hebrew root ga’al, which is used to discuss family rules and obligations, the laws over family property rights and duties. For example, if a piece of property were lost by a family member, the next of kin had both the right and the obligation to redeem this property. This right of redemption protected the family inheritance. The noun derived from this root is equivalent to the English root “redemption,” and the person who buys back the property is the go’el, or redeemer.
An Israelite who was forced to sell himself into slavery to pay his debts could be redeemed by a near relative or even by himself (Leviticus 25:47-49). Land might also be redeemed in the same way (25:25-28; Jeremiah 32:6-9).
The right to be redeemed came to people in special circumstances, as well. The obligation of a man to marry his brother’s widow is well known. In the book of Ruth, the right of redemption is extended to a distant relative. In this story, Boaz redeemed not only the property but Ruth as well, and she became his wife (Ruth 3:13; 4:1-6).
The third term used in Hebrew is the root verb kaphar, which means “to cover.” From this root come the terms meaning to cover sin, atone, or expiate. The noun derived, kopher, means the price paid to cover sin. This term is used to mean the payment made for any life that should be forfeited. A good illustration is the price paid by the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death. Under the law, the owner’s life was forfeited, but he could redeem himself by paying a set amount of money (Exodus 21:28-32).
All three terms are translated by the same Greek verb, luo, meaning “to loose.” The noun lutron (ransom), is used for all three terms on different occasions. This indicates that while the Hebrew used different words for different situations, the same essential meaning of redemption was involved in all situations. The concept of redeeming or freeing was of primary concern.
GOD AS REDEEMER
In the Old Testament God is spoken of as “redeeming his people” as a whole, rather than individuals. The beginning of this concept of national redemption is seen in God’s freeing the people from slavery in Egypt. Though they were in bondage, their God ransomed them (Exodus 6:6; Deuteronomy 15:15).
This idea of redemption required the payment of a set price or the substitution of one life for another. But when God in the Old Testament is spoken of as “redeeming,” he redeems through his might and power, not by paying a price. “I am the LORD, and I will free you from your slavery in Egypt. I will redeem you with mighty power and great acts of judgment” (Exodus 6:6, NLT; compare Deuteronomy 15:15). The same thought is carried forward in other times of need and rescue, such as the time of exile. God is the national Deliverer (for example, Isaiah 29:22; 35:10; 43:1; 44:22; Jeremiah 31:11).
Again there is no suggestion that God paid a price to free his people. God redeems by his own power. “For this is what the LORD says: ‘When I sold you into exile, I received no payment. Now I can redeem you without paying for you’ “ (Isaiah 52:3). When Cyrus let the people free, it was again without payment of a price (45:13).
In the Christian community, especially in the early centuries of the church, there arose the idea that a ransom price was needed to pay for sins. In fact, it was often taught that the sinner was, in effect, held captive by Satan. Christ’s death was the ransom price paid by God to Satan to free sinful people. Scripture does not necessarily say this. The death of Christ is an atonement for sin, but this does not mean that his death was a price paid to Satan. God is not pictured anywhere in Scripture as making some sort of deal with Satan. The redeeming work of salvation through the Cross must always be thought of as a mystery, not as a commercial transaction.
REDEMPTION AND THE MESSIAH
In the Old Testament, redemption is closely linked with the hope of a Messiah. From the time of the Exodus on, God is revealed as deliverer. The hope of redemption is very strong during the time when Israel is captive in Babylon. The prophets constantly speak of God as Redeemer or Deliverer. This hope was to be fulfilled ultimately through God’s anointed one, or Messiah, who would be of the line of David (Isaiah 9:1-6; 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6).
The messianic hope grew stronger during the periods when Israel was exiled and persecuted. In fact, during the long centuries of persecution, this hope of a messiah was stronger than ever. This period, generally called the intertestamental period, lasted about four centuries and extended from the last of the prophets until the time of John the Baptist and Jesus. Christians believe that Jesus is the Messiah spoken of in the Old Testament. John the Baptist described Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive kingdom (Matthew 3:12) and hence, the Messiah of Israel. Jesus, the Son of Man, came to give himself as a ransom for many (20:28; Mark 10:45). The Messiah came to die for others, in their place.
Paul expresses the same thought. Christ is the sin offering to the Father (Romans 3:25). He redeems us by giving up his life (Acts 20:28) for a purchased people (1 Peter 2:9; see also 1 Corinthians 7:22-24; 2 Corinthians 5:14-17). These are all words or expressions used to present the idea of redemption or atonement. Jesus Christ fulfilled the redemption promised in the Scriptures and by his sacrifice provided for the redemption of sinners.
The concept of redemption has deep meaning for God’s people. In the Old Testament it illustrates the truth that God is the Savior of his people. Although Israel fell into sin by denying God’s law, God did not destroy them but restored them to favor when they repented.
In the prophets, especially, God’s redemptive work was to be completed through the Messiah and his redemptive sacrifice. The followers of Jesus believed that he was the Messiah who would provide redemption for the whole world. Along with the idea of redemption is the motivating force of divine love as the basis for our restoration (John 3:16). Those who believe will be freed from the bondage of sin and find favor again with their redeeming God.
________________________________________________________________________________
SANCTIFICATION
Sanctification is a word that means, “being made holy, or purified.” It is a word that is used many times to describe different parts of a Christian’s relationship with God. However, most theologians and scholars usually use sanctification to describe only certain parts of a Christian’s life. They want to make sure it is not confused with other similar words like “regeneration,” “justification,” and “glorification.”
DEFINITION
A comprehensive definition of sanctification by the New Hampshire Baptist Confession (1833) states,
We believe that Sanctification is the process by which, according to the will of God, we are made partakers of his holiness; that it is a progressive work; that it is begun in regeneration; and that it is carried on in the hearts of believers by the presence and power of the Holy Spirit, the Sealer and Comforter, in the continual use of the appointed means-especially the Word of God, self-examination, self-denial, watchfulness, and prayer. (Article X)
This definition helps us to distinguish sanctification from regeneration because sanctification speaks of the beginning of the Christian life. Sanctification is also distinguished from glorification, which focuses on the completion of God’s work in the believer. Put quite simply, then, regeneration refers to the beginning, sanctification to the middle, and glorification to the end of salvation.
The distinction between sanctification and justification, on the other hand, calls for more detailed attention, both because it is subtle and because it is fundamental. In the first place, “justification,” like “regeneration,” refers to the beginning of the Christian experience, whereas the above definition of sanctification emphasizes how it is a process. Second, justification refers to a judicial act of God where believers are at once forgiven for all their guilt and made legally righteous.
Sanctification, like regeneration and glorification, calls attention to the transforming power of the Holy Spirit upon the moral character of people who believe in God.
This distinction played an important role at the time of the Reformation. The Roman Catholic Church, in the opinion of the Reformers, confused these two doctrines by insisting that justification “is not remission of sins merely, but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man” (Decrees of the Council of Trent, Sixth Session, 1547, chapter VII). In contrast, the Reformers emphasized that the two doctrines, although they were inseparable, must be distinguished. John Calvin argued that these two elements of God’s saving act cannot be torn into parts any more than Christ can be torn apart: “Whomever, therefore, God receives into grace, on them he at the same time bestows the spirit of adoption, by whose power he remakes them to his own image. But if the brightness of the sun cannot be separated from its heat, shall we therefore say that the earth is warmed by its light, or lighted by its heat?” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, 3:11.6). In short, then, justification is a once-for-all act of God as Judge, whereas sanctification is a progressive change in the character of a person.
One more element in the New Hampshire Baptist Confession definition requires comment, namely, the statement that “we are made partakers of his holiness.” A complete survey of what the Bible has to say about sanctification is not possible here, since practically the whole of Scripture addresses this issue in one way or another. One central theme in that teaching, however, must be emphasized: “You shall be holy as I am holy” (Leviticus 11:45, 1 Peter 1:16, and Matthew 5:48). According to the Westminster Shorter Catechism, which was composed in 1647, by sanctification “we are renewed in the whole man after the image of God” (Colossians 3:10). Nothing can be more crucial to our view of sanctification than this truth. When people become holy, they completely conform their behavior to follow Jesus’ example (Romans 8:29). Anything less than that is a lowering of the standard set by Scripture. The definition above, however, implies that Christ is more than our pattern. He himself provides his holiness for those united with him. He is our sanctification (1 Corinthians 1:30).
INITIAL SANCTIFICATION
The progressive and changing nature of our sanctification is clear in many passages, especially in Paul’s statement that Christians are transformed “from glory to glory” into the Lord’s image (2 Corinthians 3:18, Romans 12:1-2, Philippians 3:14, Hebrews 6:1, and 2 Peter 3:18). In addition, the numerous commands found in Scripture imply that the Christian experiences growth.
At the same time, however, a number of expressions in Scripture reveal that sanctification is given to the believer at the same time they believe in God. For example, Paul frequently refers to Christians as “saints,” that is, “holy ones” (Romans 1:7 and Ephesians 1:1). Paul’s description suggests that sanctification is already the possession of believers. In fact, Paul specifically says that the Corinthian Christians “have been sanctified” (1 Corinthians 1:2), and he even compares sanctification with washing and justification as though all three things had taken place at the same time (1 Corinthians 6:11). Even more impressive is Paul’s declaration that Christians have died to sin (Romans 6:2). One can hardly think of a more powerful figure than death because it suggests a permanent, irrevocable breaking of the believer’s relationship with sin.
It goes without saying, of course, that these passages do not teach absolute perfection for every Christian when they believe in Jesus Christ. An interpretation like this would contradict the clear teaching of Scripture as a whole. Furthermore, one should note that the Corinthian “saints” were marked by woeful immaturity ( 1 Corinthians 3:1-3, 6:8, and 11:17-22).
How, then, should these passages be interpreted? Some writers have suggested that Paul is speaking of “potential” sanctification. That is, although our relationship with sin has not been actually broken, God has given us what we need for that to take place. There is an element of truth in this formulation, but it hardly does justice, by itself, to the force of Paul’s language. A more adequate explanation involves “positional” sanctification. According to this view, Paul is speaking in judicial terms regarding our status before God. One should certainly recognize a judicial element in Paul’s discussion because Romans 6:7 uses the word “justified.” However, if that is all that is said, then it suggests that Romans 6 simply restates the doctrine of justification, which is doubtful. Much more satisfactory is the view that Paul’s teaching contains both a judicial element and a reference to an actual experience Christians go through when they become believers.
PROGRESSIVE SANCTIFICATION
HISTORICAL SURVEY
Although all Christian groups recognize the need to become transformed by the renewing of the mind (Romans 12:2), there are considerable differences between them on specific issues. Reformed Christians, for the most part, believe in a “pessimistic” view of personal sanctification. This view is clearly described in the Westminster Confession of Faith, which was composed in 1647. This work states that sanctification “is imperfect in this life; there abideth still some remnants of corruption in every part, whence ariseth a continual and irreconcilable war” within the believer (XIII.ii). Although the confession goes on to emphasize the overcoming power of the Spirit, some Christians believe that its basic thrust obscures the need and possibility of spiritual victory.
To some extent, the teachings of John Wesley (1703-1791) may be viewed as a reaction to the usual beliefs of the Calvinists and Lutherans. Strongly influenced by the Pietistic movement of his day, Wesley paid much attention to the experiences of Christian belief. Wesley eventually created, though not with great consistency, the doctrine that “entire sanctification” is possible in this life. During the nineteenth century, interest in the possibility of perfection spread to many Christian circles. According to some, perfection resulted from the elimination of sin. According to others, spiritual victory was gained by counteracting the sin that remains in the Christian’s heart. The second approach became common to the so-called Victorious Life Movement. However, these various groups that looked for perfection in this world were subjected to a strong criticism by the Princeton theologian Benjamin B. Warfield (1851-1921). The debate has continued ever since then.
THE AGENCY IN SANCTIFICATION
Much of the controversy on the topic of sanctification focuses on the human role in the process. While all Christians agree that holiness would be impossible without God’s help, it is difficult to define precisely how that truth affects each Christians’ own behavior. For Roman Catholics, so much emphasis has been placed on the cleansing power of baptism and on the merits of good works that one could question if they ignore the idea of divine grace. At the other extreme stand some followers of the Victorious Life Movement, whose stress on “let go and let God” (a slogan that has some value if properly used) sometimes suggests that believers remain completely passive in the process of sanctification.
No passage of Scripture is more relevant to this issue than Philippians 2:12-13, where Paul combines the command for people to work out their own salvation with the declaration that it is God who provides the spiritual strength necessary for the task. It may be tempting to emphasize the first part of Paul’s statement and ignore the significance of the second part. In the same way, it is easy to become so focused on Paul’s stress on divine grace that people’s personal responsibility is overlooked. Paul, however, appears to have deliberately and carefully preserved a fine balance between these two truths.
Sanctification requires discipline, concentration, and effort, as is clear by the many encouraging passages in the Bible, especially those where the Christian life is described with such figures as running and fighting (1 Corinthians 9:24-27 and Ephesians 6:10-17). However, Christians must always resist the temptation to assume that they sanctify themselves, that spiritual power comes from within them, and that they may therefore rely on their own strength. There is a delicate balance between participating in the process of sanctification and realizing that God is primarily responsible for everything. ________________________________________________________________________________
GLORIFICATION
Glorification is a word used to describe God’s glory, splendor, and beauty. The word for “glory” originally meant “weighty, heavy, or important.” From there it moved to the idea of an influential, rich, or prominent person. In ancient cultures the wealthy and the powerful were marked by their fine dress and jewels. And fine clothes and jewels were items of beauty. Therefore, a person’s glory meant the showy signs of wealth and power. The concept was then extended to God.
GLORY OF GOD
The book of Exodus is rich with references to God’s glory. There was the fiery pillar and the glory that entered into the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle (compare Exodus 40:34-38).
In the making of the tabernacle (Exodus 25:1-27), the concepts of glory and beauty are joined. The “goodness” of the Lord that Moses saw (33:19) could also be translated as “beauty.” Hence, God’s glory is his beauty.
The New Testament continues the thought of the Old Testament that God is a God of glory. For example, look at the vision of God in his glory in Revelation 4. But the primary message in the New Testament centers on the glory of Christ. The transfiguration of Christ was a breaking out into the open of his glory (Matthew 17:1-8). The apostle Paul called Jesus the Lord of glory (1 Corinthians 2:8). He added that the glory of God radiated from his face (2 Corinthians 3:18).
John’s Gospel is uniquely the Gospel of glory. In the Incarnation, the Son of God showed the glory that was his as the One and Only who came from the Father (John 1:14). The raising of Lazarus revealed the glory of God in Christ (11:40). Jesus’ prayer in 17 is filled with comments on the glory of Christ. He affirmed that the disciples of the Lord would share in that glory.
GLORIFICATION OF THE BELIEVER
In 2 Corinthians 3:18). spiritual transformation is described as a changing from glory to glory. Glorification is implied as the last event in the change from glory to glory. In the process of salvation Paul lists glorification as the last and final event (Romans 8:28-30). The verb used in verse 30 is in the past tense. Some have taken this to mean the certainty and finality of glorification. Glorification, then, is the completion, the perfection, the full realization of salvation.
Glorification is the perfection of sanctification as it relates to one’s inner character. No one passage treats this theme extensively, but Ephesians 5:27 is a good example. In that passage Paul wrote about presenting the church to Christ. What he says of the church is true of each Christian. Jesus will present the church to himself in “splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she [the church] might be holy and without blemish.” Or, in the language of 2 Timothy 2:10, “Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain salvation in Christ Jesus with its eternal glory” (RSV).
Just as the inner person undergoes glorification, so does the believer’s body. Paul calls the resurrection of the body the redemption of the body (Romans 8:23). In Philippians 3:21 Paul speaks of the transformation of lowly bodies (that is, bodies wracked by sin and mortality) into bodies of glory identical to that of Christ. The power that shall do this is the power of God, who is able to subject all things to his reign.
The largest section on the glorification of the body is found in 1 Corinthians 15. More details can be found in 2 Corinthians 5. Paul’s theme in 1 Corinthians 15is that as Christians have borne the image of the mortal clay of Adam, they shall bear the image of the immortal Son of God. Paul contrasts the two bodies. The present body is perishable; the resurrection body will be imperishable. This body is one of dishonor; the resurrection body will be one of glory. This body is one of weakness; the resurrection body is one of power. This body is of the current physical order; the resurrection body will be of the future, spiritual, eternal order.
Salvation involves justification, regeneration, and sanctification in this life. In the life to come it means the glorification of the inner person and the resurrection of the body in glory. But such a glorified person must live in a glorified environment. Therefore, the course of salvation ends with a glorious new heaven, new earth, and a new Jerusalem.
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged | 
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
