New Testament Holiness

I was reading from "The Holy Way" by Dr. Dale Yocum today.  I believe that his insight into the doctrine of holiness is quite helpful.

As we look into the New Testament and study what it has to say about holiness, we notice that there are 2 families of English words that are used.  These words are "holy" and "sanctify".  Both of these words (and their derivatives) come from the same root word in the Greek.   There is no verb form for holy in our English language.   However, there is a noun form for each word. 

Is there actually a difference between being holy and being sanctified?

Yocum says that holiness in the ceremonial sense is the "purification from sin".  And that holiness in the ethical sense is "being made free from sin".

He continues by explaining the sanctification is the action of God cleansing our hearts from sin.  Holiness is the state that is the result of this cleansing.

This cleansing is two-fold.  The first part of this cleansing is external.  As a sanctified person, we cease from the action of sin.  We are cleansed from sinful acts.  We no longer live a life that is characterized by sin.  This happens at salvation.  We commonly call this initial sanctification. 

The second part, called by many different names including "entire sanctification", is when God cleanses our hearts from sin.  Other descriptive names for this work include: baptism of the Holy Spirit, full consecration, perfect love, full surrender.

How can we rightly say that this is 2 separate works?

Consider this with me for a few moments.  I encourage you to open your Bible and follow along as we look at a few references.

The first reference is I Corinthians 1:2.  The apostle Paul addresses his epistle to the "saints" at the church in Corinth.  Literally, he is writing to the "holy ones" in this church.  As we will see later, they have been saved (forgiven of their sins), but are not entirely sanctified.

Again in I Cor. 6:11, Paul mentions that they have been sanctified.

In chapter 3, we are told how this church is in a state of spiritual babyhood and are yet carnal (in the flesh/ fleshly).  And yet, in this same chapter, Paul tells them that they are the holy temple of God (I Cor. 3:17).

In II Corinthians 7:1, the apostle tells this same church that they need a cleansing "from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God".  

I Thessalonians 5:23 is a frequently used verse on the subject of entire sanctification.  Dr. Daniel Steele says that in the Greek, the tense of the verb translated "sanctify" signifies that this work is instantaneous (happens in a moment of time) in the heart of a man.

Holiness, as I understand it, is something that begins when we are saved.  But we are to continue in holiness throughout the rest of our lives.

Dr. Alan Brown has said that a simple one-word definition for holiness is "Christ-likeness".

Original Question

Back to the original question.

Do I believe entire sanctification or progressive sanctification?

I believe in both.  We are progressively sanctified.  That is to say that as Christians, God's desire for us is to become more like Him and to be ever changing to be conformed to the image of His Son.

Initial sanctification (salvation) and entire sanctification are some goal posts along this path.  If anyone thinks that once he is entirely sanctified that he can sit back and coast into Heaven, he is completely wrong.  Entire sanctification is a sort of gateway into a closer relationship with God.  Yet, we are continually growing in this relationship.

I do not believe that we can grow into holiness.  That would be akin to saying that we grow into salvation.

I do believe that we are to grow in holiness.  We are to continually seek to be more like Christ in our everyday attitudes, thoughts, actions, etc.

Rick,

I was just reading from Exodus chapter 3 and was reminded of an example of what it means to be holy.  Remember, Moses was out in the middle of the wilderness.  He had been raised as a prince of Egypt.  He was now tending sheep for his father-in-law.  The Bible says that he was on the backside of the desert.  That doesn't sound like a great place to be.  It doesn't sound like a place where you would expect to meet anyone, especially God.

Moses sees a bush that is on fire.  He decides to check it out, because he can quickly see that this bush is not being consumed by the fire.

As he approaches the bush, God tells Moses to remove his shoes because he is standing on holy ground.

What made this place holy?  Was there something significant about this bush and the ground around it that made it holy?

No.  This bush and the ground around it were declared holy because they were in the presence of Almighty God.  By implication, we can be declared holy when we have the presence of a Holy God in our lives.  There is nothing about us that merits holiness.  It is all about the presence of God in our lives.

Why Can't I Eat Bacon?!?

Rick,

What was God's purpose in instituting the food laws? 

Some have proposed the theory that God instituted the food laws for health reasons.  Others have put forth the idea that some animals (such as camels) are more useful as a beast of burden than as a food source.  However, I am not satisfied with these attempts to explain the laws that God set forth for His people.

"In his book 'To Be a Jew' (an excellent resource on traditional Judaism), Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin suggests that the dietary laws are designed as a call to holiness. The ability to distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil, pure and defiled, the sacred and the profane, is very important in Judaism. Imposing rules on what you can and cannot eat ingrains that kind of self control, requiring us to learn to control even our most basic, primal instincts.

"Donin also points out that the laws of kashrut elevate the simple act of eating into a religious ritual. The Jewish dinner table is often compared to the Temple altar in rabbinic literature. A Jew who observes the laws of kashrut cannot eat a meal without being reminded of the fact that he is a Jew."  (http://www.jewfaq.org/kashrut.htm)

I agree with the findings of Rabbi Donin.  After all, if the food laws were about health, would that not imply that God did not care about the health of every other person who lived prior to the giving of the Law?

Check out what God told Noah in Genesis 9:3-4.
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. 

It appears that after the Flood, God told Noah that every living thing was good for meat.  Either God didn't care about Noah's health, or the food laws were not about health.

Again, I believe - like Rabbi Donin - that the food laws were an object lesson to help God's people learn about holiness.  They were learning that God makes a distinction between the common/ordinary things and the holy things.  It was not wrong to own a donkey, but it was wrong to eat a donkey.  The donkey, in and of itself, was not sinful.  God was trying to reorient the minds of His people to a correct understanding of true holiness.

In our culture, we must also strive to have a correct understanding of true holiness.  We cannot allow our views to be shaped by a particular church or educational institution or even by a church movement.  The Word of God must be our primary source for understanding God's holiness, and thereby understanding the holiness that God requires in our lives.