Sanctification and Christians

What is sanctification? Is this concept important to me as a Christian? If so, how? 

Before I delineate what “sanctification” you will need to keep it mind its relationship to justification. I have explained to you above that justification is God’s declaration repentant sinners righteous. God does not stop there; He actually is making the sinners righteous through the power of the Holy Spirit; this is “sanctification.” In justification, the guilt of our sin is removed only on the account of atoning work of Christ, yet in sanctification, the pollution of our sin is in the process of being removed by the power of Holy Spirit. Justification is better seen the work of Christ “for” us, sanctification is the work of Christ “in” us. Thus, Sanctification can be seen more “experiential.” The following comparison in the table will make you more clear and understand that sanctification is important in our daily christian life.

Justification	Sanctification
Legal standing before God	Internal condition of heart before God
Christ’s work “for” us	Christ’s work “in” us through the power of Holy Spirit
Once and for all time	Continuous throughout life
Solely God’s act	We cooperate through faith and obedience
Perfect in this present life	Not perfect in this life; only in the age to come

Now what let’s look at the word “sanctification.” It is derived from Latin term (sanctus facere ) meaning “to make holy.” In OT, this word is synonymous to qados meaing to “be consecrated or be holy,” derived from hebrew root qad meaning to “cut” or “separate.”  In ceremonial context this verb is used to signify that a person, places or objects are holy for they are separated from what is profane and set apart and devoted to Yahweh. The people of God are set apart from all what are profane for God’s service so that they should avoid whatever displeases him. 

In NT, the word “sanctification” means two things; (1) it is separation from all the sinful practices of that day, thus, it is more moral and ethical, and (2) it is also consecration to God’s service. So being holy is not just avoiding all bad things; thus, doing good deeds. It rather means totally dedicated to God. Sanctification is a process and who initiates this process in christian life? It is Triune God himself.  

Therefore, sanctification is the gracious work of the Triune God (the Father is the Originator, the Son is the Completer, and the Holy Spirit is the Efficator) whereby those who are effectually called and regenerated are set apart from sin to be partakers of His holiness (Heb. 12:10; 1 Pet. 1:15-16; 2 Pet. 1:4). Sanctification is predestinated by the eternal decree of the Father (Rom. 8:29; Eph. 1:4; 1 Pet. 1:2); accomplished by atoning blood of the Son (Heb. 9:10, 14; 10:10; 13:12); and effectuated by the power of indwelling Holy Spirit (I Cor. 6:11; Rom. 15:16; 1 Pet. 1:22). It is appropriated through the Word of God, and is conditioned by the faith and obedience of human being (Ac. 15:9; Jude 20; 1 Jon. 5:4-5). The role of human is both passive and active. Passive in the sense, we totally depend on God to sanctify us; active in the sense, we strive to obey God by the power of Spirit and take steps that will increase our sanctification. 

In sanctification process, repentant sinner has been positionally and initially sanctified, is being progressively and experientially sanctified and shall be ultimately and completely sanctified in the presence of God. Let me explain this statement. 

1. At regeneration, the repentant sinner is positionally sanctified; legally set apart from unholy things in his standing before God. Even though he once lived under the power of sin, he is now placed out of that realm into the special care and loving service of God. Now he becomes the recipient of special blessings and effectual working of Triune God. By virtue of this standing, all believers who are sanctified in Christ are therefore called saints (1 Cor. 1:2; Col. 1:2; 1:12). 
2. At regeneration, the repentant believer receives God’s gracious cleaning of initial sanctification. He will experience purification, the power of sin is destroyed and he will be turned from sin to righteousness (Rom. 6:6-22). The “old self” is crucified and the “new self” has been put on (Rom. 6:6), which is “created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness” (Eph. 4:24), which is “being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator” (Col. 3:10-12). 
3. Through out his life, believer is progressively brought into greater conformity to the Image of Christ (Rom. 8:29; 2 Cor. 3:18; 1 Jn. 4:17). He is continuously to be putting of the characteristics of “old self” (Rom. 6:12; 8:13; Col. 3:5). His renewed nature is to be continually strengthened while the indwelling remnant of corruption, that remains through out his life, must be more fully subjected. Thought the desire of the flesh may occasionally come out; though he may face inner conflict between the flesh and the Spirit, yet the true believer will not continue to sin because he has overcome the desires of the world by faith (1 Jn. 3:2). 
4. Finally the goal of sanctification is reached in its ultimate aspect, when the believer is fully conformed to the image of Jesus Christ in the age to come when he is finally glorified (Rom. 8:29), then he will be like Christ (1 Jn. 3:2) bearing the image of the heavenly (1 Cor. 15:49), having put on incorruption and immortality (1 Cor. 15:53).  

Views on Christ's Atonement

Various historical views on Christ’s atonement

1. Classic or Ransom Theory: This view sees that the atonement of Christ as the victory over Satan and the forces of sin and evil. God offered his son as a ransom on the cross, a bargain that Satan eagerly accepted. But On the resurrection, Satan was left without either his original prisoners or the ransom he had accepted in their stead. So with resurrection, Jesus triumphed over the power of Satan. The presupposition behind this view is the cosmic struggle between God and Satan, who always wanted to control over human beings from God. So, on the cross, Christ paid ransom to the devil; but it turned out to be a trick and Satan and his all followers were defeated after Christ has resurrected. 
2. Satisfaction Theory: This view is proposed by Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury. Anselm saw sin as totally dishonoring the Holiness of God.. The insult of sin was so great that only one who is God can provide satisfaction. But it should also be done by one who is also man, so only man should do so. Thus, God send his Son Jesus to become man and died, and finally satisfied God’s honor again. The problem here is that Christ’s death offered satisfaction to God’s honor, not His wrath. 
3. Moral Influence Theory: This view is proposed by Peter Abelard and hold by many liberals today. This view presents the greatness of God’s love on the cross. This delivers us from fear and kindles in us an answering love. We must respond to this love with love and no longer live in selfishness and sin. In this view, God is seen mostly as love; his attributes of justice and holiness is neglected. 
4. Governmental Theory: This view is promoted by Hugo Grotius (d. 1645). His view is called “governmental” because Grotius sees God as a ruler or a head of government who passed a law: “ the soul that sins, it shall die.” Yet God did not want all the sinners to die, so he relaxed his rule and accepted Christ’s death instead. He could have forgiven the sins of all, but that would be against his divine justice. So the death of Christ became public example of the depth  and seriousness of sin, and satisfies the demands of justice. 
5. Universal Reconciliation Theory: This view is promoted by Karl Barth. This view holds that Christ’s death reconciled the world to God the Father. Thus, the cross of Jesus Christ makes the election of all humankind possible. 

Now I will delineate what I believe is most biblical theory of atonement. It is called Penal Substitution. 

Penal Substitution Theory: This view is promoted some church father and Reformers. This view was formulated by the 16th century Reformers as an extension of Anslem’ satisfactory theory. Anselm’s theory was correct in introducing the satisfaction aspect of Christ’s work and its necessity, however the Reformers saw it as insufficient because it was referenced to God’s honor rather than his justice and holiness. This Reformed view says simply that Christ died for man, in man’s place, taking his sins and bearing them for him.In short, this theory holds that Jesus Christ bore penalty for our sins and in so doing he appeased God’s wrath. 

When we look at a number of passages, some anticipate and some reflect upon the death of Christ as a penal substitutionary sacrifice for sin (Ex. 12; Lev. 16; Isa. 52:13-53:12; Mark; John; Rom. 3:21-26; Gal. 3:10-13; 1 Pet. 2:24; 3:18). These passages clearly states that Jesus bore teh penal consequences of sin when he died on the cross. For example, Isaiah 53:5 states, “the punishment that brought us peace was upon him.” It was also clear that God’s wrath was poured out on his Son; in the powerful OT imagery of “the cup” picked up in Mark 14:36 (cf. Ps. 75:8; Isa. 51:17-23; Jer. 25:15-29; Ezek. 23:31-34). As a matter of fact, Jesus bore the consequences our sin in our place, as substitute. He did not merely share in the punishment we deserve; he bore it instead of us. Thus, Isaiah testified, “he was pierced for our transgressions” (53:5). He had no guilt of his own, being innocent, but our guilt was imputed to him, and for this he suffered and died. 2 Corinthians 5:21 says, “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” Through his death, Christ rescues us from God’s wrath. “Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath” (1 Thess. 1:10). “Since we have now been justified by blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him!” (Rom. 5:9). The prophet Isaiah already anticipated the work of God’s suffering Servant’s substitutionary act, which will later be fulfilled in Christ Jesus. (Note personal pronoun he/his verses our/us.) 

verse	The Servant’s Part	The People’s Part
53:4	he took he carried	our infirmities our sorrows
53:5	he was pierced  he was crushed his punishment his wounds	for our transgressions for our iniquities brought us peace we are healed
53:6	laid on him	the iniquity of us all

Here is one final note for you. All the theories mentioned above are not totally and mutually exclusive to one another. As a matter of fact, the concept of atonement is vast and deep, and when we talk about this in one theory, we need all the vivid concepts of redemption, propitiation, justification, ransom, love, grace and justice. Each theory draws its own attention to one or two aspects of atonement, and seem to neglect the others. Nevertheless, penal substitutionary theory seems to incorporate all the aspects from each theory and present the most biblically sound theory of atonement. Penal substitution integrates fully with God’s justice and truthfulness, preserving the harmony of his attributes of justice and mercy, holiness and love. It also sheds light on Christ’s victory over evil powers. This view also emphasizes the fact that God gave his Son for his enemies (Rom. 5:10), so it deepens our appreciation of God’s love. And this view also gives us the correct understanding on ransom theory. In fact, we are indebted not to the devil but to God. it is to God that a ransom must be paid. Finally this view also helps us to better understand union with Christ. Since Christ has bore our sins and imputed his righteousness to us, we are united with Him by his Spirit through faith, and receive benefits of his atoning work.