Misconceptions about Justification and Sanctification
I have benefited from reading the comments on the wide
variety of blogs that have picked up the discussion between Tullian Tchividjian
and me on the subject of total depravity, the Christian, and the doctrine of
sanctification. In some respects, these
conversations are most valuable in terms of the interplay that takes place in
the comments. I have been helped by
reading what people are thinking and want to thank those who have commented,
whether positively or negatively about me.
I have found, however, a number of misconceptions that it may help to
have cleared up. Here are five points that I hope will clarify this discussion:
1. Total depravity is not proved by arguing for the on-going presence of sin in the believer. The point of total depravity is the spiritual inability of the sinner so that he or she will not and cannot respond positively to God through faith (Rom. 8:7; 1 Cor. 2:14; Eph. 2:1-3). To say that Christians cannot be totally depraved is not to argue that they do not continue to wrestle with sin, sometimes profoundly. The point that I am making is that while Christians will continue to sin, it is not because we must do so. We have been freed from the reign of sin (Rom. 6:6-12), though not from sin's presence (1 Jn. 1:8). As Augustine put it, whereas before our conversion we were not able not to sin, in Christ we now are able not to sin.
2. Luther's wonderful formula, simil justus et peccator (simultaneously just and a sinner), is the Reformation doctrine of justification, not
sanctification. To use this response
to questions of sanctification is simply to change the subject. With respect to sanctification, Christians
are saints (1 Cor. 1:2). To deny being a
saint, as well as a justified sinner, is simply to deny being a Christian.
3. A robust
approach to sanctification will not cast formerly discouraged believers back
into despair. It was a blessing to
read comments reporting spiritual liberty experienced by an emphasis on
justification through faith alone, in many cases through Tullian's ministry. To then preach a full biblical doctrine of
sanctification, however, is not to undermine their justification and cast them
back into spiritual despair. Justified
Christians are actively to engage in Christ's work of sanctification, including
a zealous warfare against sin and pursuit of good works, while relying on our justification
through faith alone. In other words, to
emphasize Christian activity in sanctification is not to "leave justification
behind," but rather is to engage in the kind of Christian living expected of
justified believers by the New Testament (Rom. 12:1; Eph. 4:1; etc.).
4. To express
concern about a de-emphasis on sanctification is not to question justification. I saw one comment that compared my concern
over sanctification to the hypothetical complaint of Romans 6:1, which suggests
that justification through faith alone may lead to increased sin. Yet I was making no complaint against
justification but only about the teaching that Christians are totally depraved
like unbelievers. I point this out
because there is a tendency to reduce every concern to an assault on
justification. It may help to point out that I not
only have no problem with the doctrine of justification taught by Tullian, which is the standard Reformed doctrine, but in fact I
positively revel in it. My concern is to
argue that Holy Spirit regenerated, Christ-reliant Christians should expect to experience
growth, strength, and increased spiritual competence (however imperfectly) as
the result of God's grace at work in their lives. To encourage Christians to think this way is
in no way an assault on their reliance on Christ's finished work for their
justification.
5. Many
comments suggest that to pursue sanctification seriously will undermine their
assurance of salvation, since they are relying on justification through
faith alone. Biblically, however, the
way to pursue assurance of salvation is not only to rest on your justification
but also to advance in your sanctification.
Consider Peter's approach to assurance in 2 Peter 1:5-11 and John's
approach in 1 John 2:28-29; 3:6. In
light of these passages we see that to downplay sanctification is to undercut a large portion of the
biblical basis of assurance.
I hope these remarks are helpful in
clearing up what I think are misconceptions about justification and sanctification. Let me also point out that here I am not
necessarily addressing things Tullian has written or believes, but have moved
to what I hope is an edifying discussion of the thoughts emerging from the blog
comments.




- Administrator
- Carl Trueman
- Carlton Wynne
- Dai Corleone
- Del Boy
- Derek Thomas
- Digby St. John-Crimond
- Elliott Greene
- Gabriel Fluhrer
- Gareth Baudrillard-Jones
- Guest blogger
- Iain D Campbell
- Jeremy Walker
- Justin Taylor
- Liam Goligher
- Ligon Duncan
- Paul Levy
- Phil Ryken
- Rev Boadicea von Ribbentrop
- Rick Phillips
- Rob Ventura
- Robert Brady
- Rodney Trotter
- Scott Oliphint
- Sean Lucas
- Stephen Nichols
- Thabiti Anyabwile
- Theotis Solpatch













