Truth Magazine

By Jimmy Tuten, Jr.

“Sanctification” in its noun form comes from the Greek word hagiasmos. The lexicons tell us that it has two aspects, basically: (a) Separation to God, 1 Cor. 1:30; 2 Thess. 2:13, through His Son Jesus, Col. 1:13; 1 Cor. 1:2, (b) The course of life befitting those so separated, 1 Thess. 4:3-4, 7. It can be demonstrated that sanctification is through the blood of Christ, resulting from obedience to the Gospel where one reaches the blood in baptism for the remission of sins and is to be maintained throughout the Christian’s life. In spite of what Church of God debaters have contended, sanctification does not demand sinless perfection. There was a time when denominations were the only outlets for error on sanctification. How we have our own brethren to contend with and I strongly feel that these are influenced by Calvinism perhaps beyond their own realization.

I have been following Arnold Hardin’s writings in The Persuader for some time. I have been tempted for some time to reply to some of his erroneous teachings and now I find myself yielding to that temptation. “Free Thinker” or not, his false conclusions regarding “sanctification” needs exposing.

In this writing, I am referring to the July 23, 1978 issue of The Persuader. In this issue brother Hardin tries to do for “justification” and “sanctification” what he and others have done with “gospel” and “doctrine.” He says, “One of, if not the greatest failure among us, has been a clear distinction made between justification and sanctification. This is clearly the reason that so many cannot understand the difference between gospel and doctrinal instructions. The difference between the latter is exactly the difference between the former.” He bases this on the belief that “God gives justification immediately (Emphasis mine, jt), but he gives sanctification by another method” (Emphasis mine, jt. Here Arnold quotes R. C. Bell, Studies In Romans). The error associated with the “gospel-doctrine” heresy has been exposed many times and does not need attention here. However, since brother Hardin has come up with something new (at least to this writer) in trying to parallel justification and sanctification with gospel and doctrine, I feel obligated to reply. Following the reasoning of others whom he freely quotes, brother Hardin says that “justification” is a divine work for us, pertaining to becoming a Christian (this is the claim for the “gospel”) and that “sanctification” is a divine work in us, pertaining to living the Christian life (the claim for “doctrine”). The conclusion is that “justification” makes Christians and “sanctification” makes saints saintly. “Justification” is said to be perfect passive righteousness because it is Christ’s righteousness and “sanctification” is imperfect active righteousness for it is the work of sinful man. He endorses Luther’s conclusion: “The former righteousness is by faith alone; the latter righteousness is by good works engendered by faith. The former is justification; the latter is sanctification.”

If I am misunderstanding what Brother Arnold is saying then I hope he will correct me. If what he has said means anything at all, it says that “justification” and “sanctification” are arbitrarily separated and that they occur at different times in a person’s life. I do not disagree with all that brother Arnold says about these two words, but I do deny that one is justified by faith only and then, at a later date, sanctified by good works engendered by that faith. How in the world can one be justified and then later as a sinful man, sanctified? Mind you, I am not saying that a sanctified man is perfect. What I want to show is that the Scriptures teach that when one is justified at the same time he is sanctified! Both words refer to the redemption of the human race in Christ as they comply with the will of Christ.

When Is One Sanctified?

To answer this question without getting into a detailed discussion, observe that “justification” means the act of pronouncing righteous or an acquittal affected in the death of Christ. While more could be said regarding justification, I do not believe brother Hardin will disagree with this conclusion, unless he wishes to take on Vine and Thayer. On sanctification, brother Hardin needs to do some backing up. His “free thinking” is getting him into trouble. “Sanctification” is also in Christ (1 Cor. 1:2). It involves a separation from evil things and ways to which their sole title is the death of Christ (Vine, Eph. 5:25-27; Col. 1:21-23). Both justification and sanctification are affected in the death of Christ, and both are made possible by the grace of God. It is the will of God that we be sanctified (1 Thess. 4:3-4). For this reason He called us by the gospel (1 Thess. 4:7; 2 Thess. 2:14). Response to this call (said to be a “heavenly calling” in Scripture) involves obedient faith, resulting in justification and sanctification at the same time. Remember, “but of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption” (1 Cor. 1:30). The Corinthians were saints (sanctified in Christ, 1 Cor. 1:2), sanctified to God who chooses us (2 Thess. 2:13). The believer is baptized into Christ (Rom. 6:3-4) and by this act becomes a child of God (Gal. 3:2627). They are accounted righteous because their sins are forgiven, hence justified (Rom. 4:3-8). If they are righteous they are at the same time sanctified. See it illustrated in 1 Corinthians 6: “and such were some of you; but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God” (v. 11). The washing, the sanctification and the justification occur when the believer is baptized! At that time he is acquitted and sanctified.

Conclusion

The Bible does not teach that one is justified by faith only at one point in time and then sanctified at another point by works. Brother Hardin, are you in. league with the Church of God? They take the position that the number converted is one group, the number sanctified is another and those baptized in the Holy Ghost a third group. They make a clear distinction between a converted man and a sanctified man. A man is sanctified when he is converted, and converted when he is justified.

Again, how can brother Hardin argue that the perfect, sinless righteousness of Christ is imputed to the believer so that sins of ignorance and weakness are overlooked, without seeing that this demands the impossibility of apostasy on the part of the baptized believer. Will not brother Hardin have to agree that the sanctified do not sin, as the church of God contends? This appears to be a foregone conclusion of his position. But then he meets himself in contradiction when he writes on sanctification. He can not have his cake and eat it too.

Truth Magazine XXII: 47, pp. 759-760
November 30, 1978

By William Y. Beasley

People today like people of the first century are interested in knowing that they have or do not have eternal life. John wrote that people might know: “These things have 1 written unto you, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, even unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God” (1 John 5:13). To know, from a diligent study of 1 John and from an honest appraisal of one’s life, that one has eternal life is a great joy and comfort. To know, from a study of 1 John, that one does not have eternal life should be a great motivation for good.

Love Not The World (1 John 2:12-17)

Just as 1 John 5:13 tells why John wrote the entire epistle, this tells why he wrote to three groups within the church. All three groups are included in the expression “Little children” (Greek, teknon-“term of affection by a teacher to his disciples”-W. E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Vol. I, p. 187) of verse 12. This is not the same term used for “little children” in the next verse. Forgiveness is “for his name’s sake” (2:12); we are forgiven because of, by reason of the name of Jesus Christ (Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38; 4:12). To the Fathers, John says the same thing twice with the exception of “I wrote” (2:13) verses “I have written” (2:14). Knowing God is all important (John 17:3). The Fathers had known God for a long time-the “little children” (2:14) knew God at the present time. John wrote to the young men because: (1) they were “strong” (2:14)-the strong also need encouragement lest they become weak, discouraged, lest they decide that they have enough strength to do without God; (2) “the word of God abideth in you” (2:14)-this was the source of their strength (Col. 3:16; Heb. 4:2; Jas. 1:21-22) and (3) “ye have overcome the evil one” (2:13, 14)-our adversary, the Devil, can be overcome (Jas. 4:7-8).

The message to all of John’s “little children” was that they “love not the world” (2:15). It is interesting to note that “John uses . . . the love that indicates direction of the will and intelligent, purposeful choice, and not (the love) which is used to denote natural, friendly affection” (R. C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of Peter, John, Jude, p. 423). John is not speaking of love for the physical world (God’s creation), but of the love of wickedness, evil that is in the world. If one decides (by thought or action) to love the world, “the love of the Father is not in hire” (2:15). God still loves us (John 3:16), but His love is not returned. All sin is of the world and is the result of one or more of “the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the vainglory of life” (2:16). An exercise in futility is to try to come up with an exception. Christ was tempted in these exact three areas (Matt. 4:1-11). The important thing is not the world, the pleasures of the world, but the doing of the will of God. One will pass away (2 Pet. 3:10-12) but the other shall abide (1 Thess. 4:17).

Concerning Anti-Christ (1 John 2:18-23)

John warns his “little children” that this is the “last hour” (2:18), i.e., the last dispensation or mercy God would vouchsafe to the world. In John 4:21-23, we find another such use of the word “hour.” Anti-Christ is an apostate (2:19) who denies by word or action that Jesus is the Christ (2:22): Many in the church are not truly converted. Troubles have a cleansing influence (separate wheat from chaff). This is not teaching that doctrine of the Devil, “Once saved, always saved” (see Acts 1:25; Gal. 5:4), which originated in the garden of Eden (Gen. 3:4). Weever stand in need of reminders, encouragement lest we deny the Son, which is to deny the Father (2:22-23).

Abide In Him (1 John 2:24-28)

Six times in these verses, we find the word “abide.” If we abide in the word and the word abides in us, we will also “abide in the Son, and in the Father” (2:24; see also Col. 1:27; 2 Cor. 5:17). With death as the constant enemy of mankind, think of the beauty of the promise of “eternal life” (2:25) if we abide in Him. The abiding ones have boldness before God (2:28) while the non-abiding will “be ashamed” (2:28). Notice that “doeth righteousness” is equal to being “begotten of him” (2:29). This, too, carries the idea of abiding-it is not speaking of a person who does one act of righteousness or even acts of righteousness, but of the one who abides therein (see Psa. 119:172).

Conclusion

The epistle of 1 John was written “that ye may know that ye have eternal life” (1 John 5:13). Do you know? Where is your affection (love) in the world or in Him? Do you know the Father? Have you overcome the Evil One? Does the word abide in you? Are you abiding in the Father and Son?

Truth Magazine XXII: 47, pp. 760-761
November 30, 1978

By Keith Ward

The Bible never adopts those scientific fallacies current at the time of its writing. As often stated, the Bible is not a scientific textbook, but wherever it does touch upon scientific topics, it is accurate. However, the search to produce more evidence of this nature has led to the careless misuse of scripture, if not to the outright wresting of God’s word.

Potential Faith Destroyers

The Bible will stand on the basis of internal evidences, i.e. fulfilled prophecy, the character of Jesus, the veracity of the apostles as witnesses, its unity, et al. External evidences, i.e. archaeology, scientific accuracy, historical accuracy, et al., may enhance one’s faith, but faith should not rest on them. Many times these have been contrary to the Bible record for decades until further evidence came to light. If one tries to build another’s faith by external evidences alone, and he then discovers those evidences still contrary to the Bible, what will become of his external-evidences-faith? Furthermore, if we misuse scripture to make it foreshadow some scientific discovery (wittingly or not) how will the discovery of this misuse affect his faith which was based on what he now sees to be false foundations? What will this misuse do to our integrity and credibility concerning the meaning of other scriptures that relate to his salvation? May not such action even reflect upon the integrity of the Bible?

A Key

A simple guide to our study will prevent much of the current misuse of scripture in this area. Study the passage in its context. Ask yourself, “Would I have drawn the conclusion that it referred to the proposed scientific fact from the passage alone?” To carry the fact to the Bible, searching for a verse to foreshadow it, is no less reprehensible than carrying a doctrine to the Bible, searching for verses to prove it.

Some Valid Cases

To illustrate our key from the positive side, let us notice some cases where either the fact was discovered as a result of Bible study, or where the Bible alludes to the fact in its own context, apart from consideration of our present scientific knowledge. Without doubt, the most dramatic of these is the case of Maury, a seafarer, who read Psalm 8:8 and searched and found paths (currents) in the seas.

Job contains several statements which evidence scientific knowledge beyond that believed to have been current in his time

(1) 26: 7. The earth hangs on nothing. It is not built on pillars, nor does it rest upon a turtle’s back or upon Atlas’ shoulders. Any Bible believer would reject those possibilities, by faith, long before Newton or Copernicus. (Inasmuch as Job said this of his own will, it would behoove us to be cautious in applying Middle Ages ignorance to Bible characters.)

(2) 26:7. The north sky is an empty space. Not only is this observable to the naked eye, but even the most powerful telescopes have found no stars there.

(3) 38:25-26. Lightning causes rain. The statement is clearly not figurative, and we have to accept it, although most of us have seen it rain without seeing lightning. Science says the static discharge must be there or rain will not form.

Other cases of scientific foreknowledge in the Bible are: the stars are innumerable (Jer 33:22), earth is round (Prov 8:27), rain comes from the sea via the water vapor cycle (Job 37:27-28; Eccl 1:7), all living things reproduce after their kind (Gen 1), and life is in the blood (Lev 17:11). In all probability this list is not complete; neither is the following list of abused passages, but it is hoped that it will suffice to arouse a spirit of caution in these matters.

Figurative Made Literal

One of the more common fallacies, whether in the field of doctrine (premillennialism) or in evidences, is to apply a figurative expression literally. By doing this we can prove any doctrine, and greatly expand our list of cases where the Bible anticipates modern science.

In a highly figurative passage, God asks Job where he was when He laid the foundations of the earth, and at that time, “The morning stars sang together” (Job 38:4-7). As incredible as it may seem, some have applied this singing of the stars at creation to the modern discovery that stars emit radio and radar sounds. Next, science will discover a phenomenon that will correspond to the last half of the verse, “All the sons of God shouted for joy!” Or that the sea literally has doors with bars, rather than this being a figure for the bounds of the seashore (vs. 8-11). Even if this passage were accepted as literal, the time is wrong to match the radioemission of sounds by stars today, for the singing of this passage took place when God laid the foundations of the earth, i.e. at creation. The one who finds literal stars emitting literal sounds in Job 38 logically cannot complain when another finds a literal thousand year reign of Christ on the earth in Revelation 20.

Also, in the same passage, God asks, “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? Whereupon were the foundations thereof fastened? Or who laid the cornerstone thereof?” Until 1964, any who read this carefully would conclude only that God created the earth and that the reference to foundations was a figurative equivalent for he “hangeth the earth upon nothing.” But when seismic reports from the 1964 Alaska earthquake established that the continents had foundation-pillars averaging 310 miles deep into the mantle rock, suddenly Biblical scholars (?) discovered that “earth” here contrasted to sea and meant the dry land earth as in Gen 1:10. Sounds good, but since the interpretation came after the discovery, it is, at best, suspect. Like most doctrines which search for a text instead of deriving from one, it fails under careful study.

Note expecially the question, “Whereupon were the foundations thereof fastened?” If God were referring to the continents, then a schoolboy could have replied, “In the inner parts (mantle rock) of the earth.” God’s rhetorical question is intended to be unanswerable, of the type asked by philosophers, “Where did Atlas stand? What held up his standing place?”

Normally, in Job as in other scripture, the term “earth” refers to the globe and is not limited to the dry land. Whenever it is so limited, the immediate context so indicates as in “dust of the earth,” “grass of the earth,” etc. In the absence of such a qualifier here, we conclude that earth is used in the normal sense of the whole terrestrial ball.

If there is a commentary that examines this passage and concludes the dry-land-earth must have pillars fastened within the central parts of the earth, and advises us to accept such on faith since God said it and/or advises scientists to search for proof-bring it forth. Delitzsch concludes, as above, that it is equivalent to the “earth hangs on nothing,” but then he had no post-1964 theory to uphold.

Another stretch of figures is to find literal springs and canyons in the sea in Job 38:16. Consider the verse in light of our key and note the following points. Both the KJV and marginal reading of the ASV have “search” instead of “recesses,” upon which the canyon theory rests. We paraphrase the question thus, “have you known (walked NASV) the extent of the ocean depths.” To get from search (or recess of the deep, the entire ocean, to canyons within the ocean is quite a stretch. The same shifting of prepositions, from “of’ to “in” is needed to make this verse match the discovery of freshwater springs in the ocean. All my limited sources (KJV, ASV, Delitzsch, NASV) agree in the use of “of.” The Missouri river has many springs in it, but when we speak of the springs of the Missouri, we are referring to source. Also note that God points out Job’s ignorance in a series of questions that concern source: “Gates of death, Dwelling of light,” Place of darkness, “Treasuries of the snow . . . of the hail” (vs. 16-24). None of the context is literal. By subject matter and by choice of preposition the Holy Spirit speaks of source. Therefore, to literalize the passage, then to change prepositions to make it match a modern discovery does violence to God’s word.

Twice the scriptures speak of the heavens waxing old like a garment (Psa. 102:26; Isa 51:6). The Psalm is a hyperbolic contrast between their longevity and God’s. Likewise, the passage in Isaiah is an exaggeration to emphasize the abiding nature of God’s salvation and righteousness. That truth cannot be deduced from the exaggerated figure of a hyperbole should be patent. Consider another hyperbole, “It is harder for a camel to go through a needle’s eye than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” Many have deduced there must be a gate in Jerusalem called the needle’s eye where camels had to kneel to enter and this represented the humility necessary for a rich man to enter. It is true, humility is necessary, but if there was such a gate, why did the apostles not understand (since they would know of this hypothesized gate) instead of believing it impossible for the rich to be saved? And why did Christ accept the impossibility of this for men and say it would take the power of God, if the answer were to be found in a narrow, low gate? Archaeology has found no such gate. Do not forget the point this illustrates, “A deduction cannot be made from the figure in a hyperbole.” It does happen that entropy, the law that everything is wearing out, fits with the idea in the figures of the heavens waxing old. However, to say that entropy is inherent in either statement, i.e. that it may be deduced from them, would logically force one to apply the same method of interpretation to all hyperboles and go needle-gate hunting, and take sillv positions on other exaggerations for emphasis found in the scripture. Entropy is true. The heavens are wearing out. In neither context does that phrase point to or foreknow the modern law of entropy.

Some other instances where figures are misused are: radio foreshadowed (Job 38:35), aviation developed beyond present refinement (Isa 60:8), Earth’s rotation revealed (Job 38:14). Check these, and any others not reviewed, carefully within their context lest you repeat error. (Concluded next week.)

Truth Magazine XXII: 46, pp. 748-750
November 23, 1978

By Mike Willis

If one spends all of his time in his study reading the doctrines circulated by journals across the nation, he is inclined to become somewhat pessimistic regarding the prospects for the future for the Lord’s church. In any given month, I received periodicals promulgating the grace-unity heresy in the form of the following: Ensign Fair, Restoration Review, Mission, and Integrity. Then, I receive some periodicals which circulate the idea of the sponsoring church, church sponsored recreation, church contributions to human institutions in the form of the following: Gospel Advocate, Firm Foundation, Gospel Truths, Spiritual Sword, etc. Other periodicals cross my desk designed to teach peculiar views about marriage,, divorce, and remarriage (such as Bible Forum), the one cup arrangement (Old Paths Advocate), “the church-isthe-only-collectivity-authorized-to-preach-the-gospel” (Gospel Anchor), and other peculiar doctrines.

Sometimes I become rather discouraged when reading these periodicals. I tend to think that we are destined to fragment and divide ourselves to death. One man said, “When I was young, I was determined to save the world. Later, I saw the problems in the church and I was determined to save the church. Now, I am just working to save myself.” That is, indeed, a rather pessimistic view of our work. Is there any cause for optimism?

I think that there is. I have been impressed during the recent months that I have added the “Quips and Quotes” section to the paper at the number of reports which I have received indicating the growth of the Lord’s cause in a number of places. We are constantly receiving reports of new works being started, elders being appointed, and growth in hundreds of local churches. Yes, there is cause for optimism among the Lord’s people.

I was privileged to be with the Lyon’s Chapel church in Tompkinsville, Kentucky for a gospel meeting last week (August 28-September 3). On the last day of the meeting, we baptized a young couple into Christ. While returning from baptizing this couple, Brother Earl Robertson remarked that he sees the same thing happening everywhere he is going. He stated that the liberals are baptizing large numbers of children through their work with the bus ministry but that in the churches with which he is working he is witnessing the slow, steady growth of the local congregations through the conversion of young married couples who are won to Christ.

Churches all over this country are experiencing steady growth through their evangelization programs. Their growth does not draw the attention of the world or of the brotherhood but they are, nevertheless, steadily reaping the Lord’s harvest.

Where Are The Lord’s People?

Actually, we need to remember just where the Lord’s people are. Sometimes, we tend to think that the Lord’s people must be doing big things in a big way. Men are impressed when churches have a $2,000,000 contribution on one Sunday; men are impressed when churches report the baptism of 15-20 in one gospel meeting; men are impressed when a congregation reports that it has tripled its Sunday morning attendance through the bus ministry. But, that does not necessarily say that the Lord is equally impressed.

More frequently than not, these types of reactions are caused by worldly promotionalism. A congregation will get someone skilled in PMA (Positive Mental Attitude) who can motivate people to give large sums of money. When the contribution is high, they state that their members are devoted to the Lord; more likely than not, they were simply emotionally stirred in the same fashion as the denominationals stir people up. Or, a group will brag about its numerical growth through the bus ministry. They fail to relate that in order to have this growth that they have bribed young people to ride the “Joy Bus.” Furthermore, they do not relate that they are feeding the children soft drinks and cookies, having to conduct a “Kiddie Church,” and still face problems of destruction of church property and disorder in worship.

My brethren, this is not where the Lord’s people are. I have seen the Lord’s people. They are the handful of brethren who have tried to stop the denominationalism in congregations without success who, in desperation, were forced for conscience’s sake to begin a new work. They located a residence which they converted into a meeting house in which they met for several years until they could afford land. Then, all of the members pitched in and helped to erect a nice meeting house. During this time, they have grown from 30-40 to about 100. In the years immediately following, they soon grow up to 200 members. Their growth has come through dedicated and consecrated Christians winning their neighbors to Jesus Christ. This is where the Lord’s people are.

There is, indeed, a cause for optimism among us. We see these churches all over the country. They are struggling at the present but they are growing. Let the liberals announce the burial ceremony as often as they like, the Lord’s people will not be defeated. In the years to come, we are likely to witness the “anti” churches become more numerous than the “liberals,” even as happened when the split occurred over instrumental music. The “Liberals” and “Progressives” in each instance took the greater number of churches. In time, however, the ones who took their stand with the Lord began to outnumber the “liberals” who forsook the Lord. Brethren were at first attracted by the innovations but soon the new wore off. Then, the thing which attracted the crowd was replaced by something else which attracted the crowd. Each new innovation was further removed from Christ than the one before. Digression curs with rapid speed.

On the other hand, those who are converted by the simple message of Christ continue to be drawn by the simple preaching of the gospel. So long as God’s word is expounded they will continue to support the work and try to win others to Christ. There will continue to be cause for optimism so long as the gospel is preached. God has promised that His word will accomplish the purpose for which He sent it (Isa. 55:8-11); it will not return to Him void. Let us trust His promise and continue to be dedicated the preaching of the word.

Truth Magazine XXII: 47, pp. 755-756
November 30, 1978