Exegesis on Ezekiel

This is my most recent Ezekiel exegesis for my class on the prophets.

Ezekiel 16:1-43

I. Historical/Cultural Context

This figurative narrative or allegory, from the beginning of the monarchy or earlier, [1]is a striking departure from Amos’ and Hosea’s depiction of Israel’s beginnings at God’s call from Egypt, describing her then as innocent. Contrast Ezekiel: Israel viewed as hopeless from beginning, Canaan her origin. “The twists to the familiar theme are designed to shock…people out of their complacency.”[2]

At maturity, Yahweh weds Jerusalem because of “…the contractual nature of marriage, the spousal relationship lent itself to expressing the centrality, permanence, and emotive content of the covenant bond between God and people.”[3] Graphic in nature, an early rabbi, “Eliezer … forbade … liturgical use…though… retained in the lectionary, it was stipulated that it must …be followed by its [greatly sanitized] targum (m. Megillah 4.10).”[4]

II. Analysis of the Passage – God’s “Nymphomaniac Bride”[5]

Scene 1 takes place in verses 1-7. Verses 1-2 show the allegory as confrontation. Verse 3 concerns Jerusalem’s parentage “…reflect[ing] the actual background …Jerusalem was a Jebusite city closely related to the Hittites, and before that …Amorite.”[6] Blenkinsopp states “Unflattering allusion to ancestors is a … feature of vituperative satire.”[7] Jerusalem (and Israel as a whole[8]) is shown as an unwanted child left to die of exposure whose parents treated her as “an obscene excretion…abandoned …to welter in the blood of its afterbirth…”[9] A kind passer-by, God, pities her, making sure she will live.[10] She grew through God’s protection. Verse 7 “’Yet you were naked and bare’ reminds us … we are in … an allegory that has a logic of its own.”[11] Ezekiel has readers remember the child’s sad beginning, compared to her current estate which “far transcends mere physical life.”[12]

Scene 2, verses 8-14 find Yahweh again as a passer-by. Verse 8’s spreading the corner of the garment signified a marriage commitment (cf. Ruth 3:9).[13] God is attracted to the physically matured girl. “The allegory is particularly daring in view of Jerusalem’s proclivity…for the worship of the Canaanite Astarte, the ‘queen of heaven,’ …fertility goddess … consort of the national god.”[14] Yahweh’s marriage is like a prince lifting up the state of the abandoned girl with bride price, gifts, and a royal prince’s favors, well beyond the girl’s imagining. God does everything for her “that had been denied by her parents.”[15]

Verses 15-34 provide the turning point, unfaithfulness flowing from pride in her beauty, portraying Jerusalem and Judah’s apostasy: (1) worship in high places; (2) idolatry; (3) cult of Moloch; (4) intercourse with foreign nations and adopting their ways. “The accusations come in a stream and the figures leap back and forth… not unusual with Ezekiel.”[16] In Western Semitic mythology, the city is the spouse of the patron deity, thus the similitude of faithlessness to marital infidelity.[17] Prostitutes get paid, but wanton Jerusalem pays her lovers, referring to alliances with Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon. Verses 20-21 describe horrendous unfaithfulness: infant sacrifice in the Hinnom Valley, the only reference to this practice.[18]

Wronged husband Yahweh, verses 35-43, shames unfaithful Jerusalem publicly. Israel’s lovers will mete out judgment—adding further shame, showing they never loved her. She ceases prostitution by force, not from repentantance. God’s anger will subside, with “no hint that God will again turn to Israel. Israel is an episode in the divine dealing with humankind that now belongs to the past, with no intimation of any other episodes to come.”[19]

III. Synthesis of the Passage

In this poignant allegory, God confronts Jerusalem and thereby, all Israel. Described as an unwanted, uncared for baby, God noticed her, cleaned, clothed, and loved her, provided what her parents did not. At maturity, God wedded her giving his … solemn oath … enter[ing] into…covenant with [her]… [she] became [his]” (Ezek 16:8b), explaining the spousal metaphor. The bride was unfaithful with other gods and nations, breaking the covenant, heaping punishment upon herself at her lovers’ hands.

IV. Application

God’s rescuing and choosing of one unwanted parallels God’s choosing and calling us. Where others see insignificance, God sees his “chosen ones, holy and beloved” (Col 3:12a). Riches (clothing etc.) bestowed were gifts from her husband, “the result of …unsolicited and unanticipated benefaction”[20] as are God’s riches of his love, grace, and salvation (Eph 2:7). Prideful, we sometimes seek other lovers, wanting that which only the Beloved can provide.

---

[1] Joseph Blenkinsopp, Ezekiel, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, ed. Patrick D. Miller (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1990), 76.

[2] Gordon McConville, A Guide to the Prophets, Exploring the Old Testament, vol. 4 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 91.

[3] Blenkinsopp, 76.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Robert R. Wilson, Ezekiel, The HarperCollins Bible Commentary, ed. James L. Mays (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2000), 603.

[7] Blenkinsopp, 77.

[8] Wilson, 603.

[9] Vawter and Hoppe, 93.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Blenkinsopp, 78.

[14] Vawter and Hoppe, 93.

[15] Wilson, 603.

[16] Vawter and Hoppe, 94.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Ibid., 95.

[20] Blenkinsopp, 78

Bibliography

Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Ezekiel. Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and

Preaching. Ed. Patrick D. Miller, Jr. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1990.

McConville, Gordon. A Guide to the Prophets. Exploring the Old Testament. Vol. 4.

Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002.

The Bible. New International Version.

Vawter, Bruce and Hoppe, Leslie J. A New Heart: A Commentary on the Book of Ezekiel.

International Theological Commentary. Ed. Fredrick Carlson Holmgren and

George A. F. Knight. Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1991.

Wilson, Robert R. Ezekiel. The HarperCollins Bible Commentary. Ed. James L. Mays.

San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2000.

My inability/God's ability: Ezekiel 11:14-21

For my undergrad class on the prophets, this week’s exegesis was on Ezekiel 11:14-21, pitting the self-righteous Jerusalemites against the exiles in Babylon. The more I read, the richer this text became. Several things particularly struck me.

The word of the Lord through Ezekiel for the exiles is one of overwhelming grace. Ezekiel was at the point of despair in verse 13, asking if the remnant were to be destroyed. This passage full of mercy, love and grace is God’s answer. The remnant in exile (verses 19-20) “will be renewed spiritually, so … they will be God’s obedient people … from the heart … an echo of Jeremiah’s New Covenant idea (Jer. 31:31-34).[1] That renewal is wrought “by virtue of an unanticipated and unmerited act of grace.”[2] God will: regather them (v.17a), restore them to the land (v.17b), cleanse the land of abominations (v. 18), and fulfill a new covenant with them (vv. 19-20).[3]

The remnant and true sanctuary being with the exiles corresponds to the true circumcision in the Gentile church (Rom 2:29; Phil 3:2-3). A new heart of flesh foreshadows God’s work through Christ (Rom 2:15, 29; 2 Cor 3:3; Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17 etc.). Grace’s echoes resound as God makes his people new in Ezekiel 11:18-21, a reminder of our inability to merit God’s favor because “A new Israel will arise only through a new creation”[4] (2 Cor 5:17).

Our inability makes room for God’s ability. Luther’s explanation of the third article of the Apostles’ Creed, on being made holy, states:

I believe that in my own understanding or strength I cannot believe in Jesus Christ my Lord or come to him, but instead the Holy Spirit has called me through the gospel, enlightened me with his gifts, made me holy and kept me in the true faith…[5]

---

[1] Gordon McConville, A Guide to the Prophets, Exploring the Old Testament, vol. 4 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 90.

[2] Joseph Blenkinsopp, Ezekiel, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, eds. James Luther Mays and Patrick D. Miller (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1990), 64.

[3] Ralph H. Alexander, Ezekiel, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 6, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 793.

[4] Bruce Vawter and Leslie J. Hoppe, A New Heart: A Commentary on the Book of Ezekiel, International Theological Commentary, eds. Frederick Carlson Holmgren and George A. F. Knight (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1991), 75.

[5] Martin Luther, “The Small Catechism,” in Evangelical Lutheran Worship (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2006), 1162.

The Bible. New International Version.

The Workaround for Postmodernism

God's people face many challenges in living an incarnational lifestyle in today's world. Postmodernism presents us with challenges such as a belief that there are no absolutes. On the other hand, there is an unprecedented openness to spirituality.

In postmodernism, “The issue is the “imposition of one set of cultural ideas upon another.”[1] Oppressive ideologies are taboo. The answer is following Jesus’ example of love. “Through humility, love, and patience … preachers can take measures to dispel the concern of people who have witnessed atrocities and deceptions in the name of truth … and … God.”[2]

Christ reaching out to the marginalized with a “radical embrace,”[3] his inclusiveness, appeals to postmoderns. The universality of the gospel, for all would be a drawing factor.

Regarding metanarratives, “The gospel is not a metanarrative, an ideology imposed on people, but an intranarrative, a reality exposed in one people and one person—Christ.”[4] The collapse of metanarratives is good. The gospel “can represent clarity and stability in a culture adrift without an anchor.”[5] The desire for honesty and reality demands openness and vulnerability on the communicator’s part.

Stories are valued in postmodernism bringing openness to personal testimony. Listeners may not agree; but they will listen “because of the postmodern mentality of legitimizing each person’s view of reality.”[6] Stories “give purpose and shape to social existence.”[7]

Narrative preaching is most suited to postmoderns, as didactic preaching was for modern listeners, resembling personal story more than lecture.[8] The gospel should not be presented as a quick fix or cure all. That would serve as metanarrative, thus risking rejection.

Churches with lively worship are growing because others may “appear far too cerebral and removed from the real world.”[9] Postmoderns are open to faith, but dislike accountability, desire faith, but do not trust institutions, “crave community yet stress personal fulfillment in their lives.”[10] Johnston refers to this as “’have it your way’ spirituality.”[11] The faith must be experiential to be real for the postmodern, the onus being on us to demonstrate God’s love (1 Jn 4:7-8).

---

[1] Graham Johnston, Preaching to a Postmodern World: A Guide to Reaching Twenty-First Century Listerners (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), 107.

[2] Ibid., 108.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid., 109.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid., 110.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid. 111.

[9] Ibid.,120.

[10] Ibid., 121.

[11] Ibid.

The Bible. New International Version.

Everything old is new

Mystery religions are still practiced in contemporary Western culture. “… The New Age movement’s grown, and … with it an embrace of the supernatural often expressed in an anti-intellectual manner with crystals, palm readings, star signs, psychics, and the like.”[1] Some promote goddess worship, singling out the feminine attributes of God.

Ancient and pagan beliefs are incorporated “into modern society … to recapture what technology and science have stripped from the contemporary world,[2] exemplified by the “Force” in the “Star Wars” series. Luke Skywalker was urged to rely on the Force and not his computerized targeting system; thus destroying the Death Star, and saving the day.

Scientology is another cult that has become increasingly high profile, claiming to be an “applied religious philosophy.”[3] Several famous actors and actresses live by and promote it. Mother Earth is worshipped by others in their quest for what is natural. Whatever the form, there is a “new search for the transcendent, anything beyond the empirical realm.[4]

These religions have a great deal of influence on contemporary secular culture. There has been gravitation to religions that do not promote absolute moral standards. One cannot assume previously acceptable behavior as opposed to that once discouraged; coarse language, sexual permissiveness, couples living together and having children without benefit of marriage. This is no longer looked upon as unusual.

We have no right to condemn any behavior, including that of homosexual/lesbian couples. “Morality must allow for people to operate within what is natural for them …. Take, for instance, an issue such as homosexuality. Postmodernity would view the state as a person’s ‘nature.’ … Nature, as opposed to any external moral system, must stand pre-eminent as that which directs life.”[5]

The effect on sacred culture is that there are more alternatives for those who want spirituality without Christ. In postmodernism, anything is ok. Your story, whatever works for you is sacrosanct. Without absolutes, the God of the Bible is one among many options. It seems very narrow minded to many to claim that salvation is through Christ alone.

This inward look has produced a greater realization of the spiritual capacity of human beings. Likewise, it’s cultivated a deeper sense of the mystic element of life … this is a backlash against modernity … Postmodernity embraces a wider perspective of reality, taking into account the spiritual and intuitive aspects of human existence.[6]

Our challenges have multiplied regarding methodologies and means necessary to present the gospel in a way receptors will understand. In modernism, it was important to appeal to one’s intellectual struggles with faith. Postmodernism is not so rational, but more emotional. We must reach out to people where they live. Jesus’ example is par excellence in this respect. Most importantly, Jesus had compassion on the hungry, demonized and sick (Mt 9:36; 14:14; 15:32; 20:34 etc.). He fed, delivered, healed and shepherded them (Mt 15:32-38; 14:14; 9:35-38 and so on). The felt need of wholeness is one we can address with the love of Christ.

---

[1] Graham Johnston, Preaching to a Postmodern World: A Guide to Reaching Twenty-First Century Listeners (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2006), 45.

[2] Ibid., 45.

[3] Wikipedia. Scientology, 2007. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology [31 July 2007].

[4] Johnston, 45.

[5] Ibid., 46.

[6] Ibid., 44-45.

The following question was posed to our Ministry Communication Skills class. My response follows the question. In the question, Adam refers to Peter Adam the author of one of our texts. In the footnote you'll find the complete info. Adam seems to distinguish between the spoken (past tense) message of God and the written and preserved (present tense) message. Is this distinction helpful for Christian communicators? Explain why or why not. If the distinction was not as clearly articulated, that is, if one viewed the written and codified words of God as his (current) speech to us, would this make a difference? Is this something with which Adam would agree or disagree? Adam’s distinction is helpful. Some things were strictly for the culture or people of that time; i.e. the Jewish dietary codes, codes for temple worship. Some were given with the initial listeners/readers in mind, but are also a living word for us today. John 1 exemplifies both the past and present tense of the Word. He was “In the beginning…Through him all things were made” (John 1:1, 3). He was instrumental in creation being spoken into being. That same Word is also present tense in his incarnation and living with humankind. Today he still speaks to us as the Holy Spirit enlightens our understanding of the written Word. The difference between the past and present message is crucial otherwise, our faith would look like that of the Judaizers Paul dealt with so severely. Adam would completely disagree with those who would not differentiate between them because Christianity would be just another Jewish cult. Martin Luther referred to the scriptures as the manger that cradled Jesus. The whole purpose of God’s Word was to point to God’s son. That manger consists of wood from which it was made and straw for cushioning and warmth. Jesus is there too. The wood and straw are important support structures for the baby, but it is really all about the baby, the Lord Jesus. Some parts of scripture are like wood or straw: the Levitical codes, some of the stories in Judges, we would not base our lives today on the wood or straw, as helpful as some of it may be. We do base our lives however on faith in Jesus Christ. [1] “The first great theological foundation for preaching, then, is that God has spoken…The second great foundation for preaching is that It is written.” [2] He still speaks. [1] Rev. Ted Asta, “Lutheran Interpretation of Scripture,’ Rooted for Life: Nurturing Journeys of Faith, New England Synod Workshop Event 2005, 15 October 2005. [2] Peter Adam, Speaking God’s Words: A Practical Theology of Preaching (Vancouver, British Columbia: Regent College Publishing, 1996), 25, 27. So, what do you think? How would your respond to God's speaking being past or present? Is there a difference?

On the Second Coming of Christ

This was last week's theology question. Eschatology is the study of the last things, second coming of Christ etc. My response follows the question.

What relevance does eschatology have for your daily life now? In what practical ways can you be a "personal microcosm of the eschatological new creation" for those around you? What effects might this have upon your relationships with others?

To be honest, I do not see that eschatology has a great impact on my life now. In order to be prepared for the Lord’s coming, we just need to continue drawing closer to him, to become more like him. As we are more continually in his presence, it will not really matter when he returns or whose perspective was right.

I can be a “personal microcosm of the eschatological new creation” for those around me by continuing to do what I am doing now. I want to be more like Jesus. This can only happen by spending time with him. The disciplines of journaling, lectio divina and divine hours are ones I have incorporated into my daily routine. In this way, I can have my ear better attuned to his voice.

If I can be a “personal microcosm of the eschatological new creation,” I will behave in a more Christlike way to others; I will be living an incarnational life so that even if I do not speak a word, Jesus can be seen in me. It is a matter of being Christ to those around us.

When we gather for worship, we confess he is coming again.

Each time the Eucharist is celebrated, the community prays for the coming of the Lord, proclaims the beginning of the time of salvation, and anticipates the blessings of the parousia. The community reminds itself and God that it will celebrate the Eucharist until Christ comes in the parousia, when the eschatological promises will be fulfilled ... the church is an interim community, anticipating the eschatological fulfillment and attempting to inaugurate it in a proleptic way for itself and the world, as a witness that one day this fulfillment will be all-encompassing and evident. [1]

As an “interim community,” [2] we need to follow Jesus’ admonition to “let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven” (Mt 5:16b).

---

[1] Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson, eds., Christian Dogmatics: Volume 2 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 560.

[2] Ibid.

The Bible. New International Version.

Bath and Supper

God cleanses and feeds us by these means of grace.

Baptism is carried out by Christ’s command calling us to “make disciples of all nations, baptizing them” (Mt 28:19).

As a Lutheran, infants as well as adults and children are baptized. I have struggled with this sometimes because my understanding since becoming a believer is that it should follow faith, not precede it. From early church history, however, infants have been baptized. In Acts, entire families were baptized (Acts 16:15, 33). Cyprian of Carthage (200-258) wrote approvingly of the practice. [1] The Book of Concord states, “We maintain that we should baptize children because they also belong to the promised redemption that was brought about in Christ (Mt 19:14). The church ought to extend it to them.” [2]

In The Small Catechism, Luther explains, baptism “brings about forgiveness of sins, redeems from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe it, as the Word and promise of God declare.” [3] Luther continues:

For without the Word of God the water is plain water and not a baptism, but with the Word of God it is a baptism, that is, a grace-filled water of life and a “bath of the new birth in the Holy Spirit.” [4]

Luther concludes his thoughts by quoting Titus 3:5-8.

It has always bothered me how many evangelicals and non-denominational churches refer to the bread and wine (or in their case grape juice) as “elements,” that were simply symbols. The holy supper, Eucharist, communion, what have you was always much more significant than that to me. I could not agree with the Roman Catholic view, but I knew in my heart it was more than symbolic.

Lutherans believe in the “real presence” in the holy meal, but in a different way than the Roman Catholic Church. Luther explained, “It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under the bread and wine, instituted by Christ himself for us Christians to eat and drink.” [5]

Our church offers communion every Sunday. Not all Lutheran churches do. In the past, in this country, some feared it was “too Catholic” to do so or that it would not seem special and would become too commonplace. Thankfully, this attitude is changing among Lutherans today and there is a greater movement toward weekly communion. I find a very intimate sense of God’s presence as the bread is offered, “The body of Christ, given for you” and the cup, “The blood of Christ, shed for you.”

The words “given for you” and “shed for you…for the forgiveness of sin” show us that forgiveness of sin, life, and salvation are given to us in the sacrament through these words, because where there is forgiveness of sin, there is also life and salvation. [6]

I found Hayford’s explanation lacking, but Grudem did a nice job explaining, “Because there is such a sharing in the body and blood of Christ…the unity of believers is beautifully exhibited at the time of the Lord’s Supper.” [7]

---

[1] Steven A. McKinion, Life and Practice in the Early Church: A Documentary Reader (New York: New York University Press, 2001), 14.

[2] Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, eds., The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2000), 320.

[3] Timothy J. Wengert, Luther’s Small Catechism: A Contemporary Translation (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1996), 214.

[4] Ibid., 215.

[5] Ibid., 222.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, 1994) 955.

The Bible. New International Version.

Being filled with the Holy Spirit

We were presented with a very interesting series of questions this week in Principles of Theology. See how you would answer them.

What is your view regarding the topic of Baptism in the Holy Spirit? Specifically, (1) Is it a work of grace distinct from and subsequent to regeneration? Why or why not? (2) Is tongues the initial evidence of Baptism in the Holy Spirit? Why or why not?

My response is below

I am divided on the issue of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. I have experienced this and it has been beneficial in growth in grace, particularly as a relatively new believer. Jack Hayford’s interpretation of the scripture is one I agree with regarding this being a work of grace distinct from and often subsequent to regeneration.

Throughout the book of Acts, in particular, we see the infilling of the Holy Spirit as a separate work. Passages such as Acts 8:14-16; 9:16-18; 10:44-45 and so on speak of this as a separate experience for believers besides the apostles. Some may contend that this was limited along with miracles to the early church, but we are told, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching” (2 Tm 3:16). Acts certainly includes “all.”

I also have some of the same concerns expressed by Wayne Grudem. There has been too much evidence of a “them and us” attitude toward those who have not experienced this work in their lives. There are many fine godly believers who have not been baptized with the Holy Spirit per se (at least not in charismatic or Pentecostal terms), but are certainly filled and overflowing with the Holy Spirit and have a walk with God that I admire. The two tiers, two categories systems are very destructive to the work of God in his church.

As Grudem stated,

Therefore, it is appropriate to understand filling with the Holy Spirit not as a one-time event but as an event that can occur over and over again in a Christian’s life. It may involve a momentary empowering for a specific ministry (as…in Acts 4:8; 7:55), but it may also refer to a long-term characteristic of a person’s life (see Acts 6:3; 11:24). [1]

Tongues can be, but does not necessarily have to be the initial evidence of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. In scripture, there are other evidences. The gospel accounts of Jesus being filled with the Spirit did not result in tongues. In Luke 1:41-45, Elizabeth blessed Mary upon her infilling of the Spirit. Zechariah prophesied according to Luke 1:67-79. In Acts some of the other manifestations are powerful preaching (Acts 4:31), wisdom, maturity and sound judgment (Acts 6:3), powerful preaching and testimony while on trial (Acts 4:8) [2] as well as other evidences.

The bottom line is following Jesus and being conformed to his image in every way possible. “So these are the terms by which a person can receive the fullness of the Holy Spirit: obedience, humility, purity, and receiving: wanting God’s will, wanting God’s way, wanting God’s nature, and wanting God’s fullness.” [3]

A. B. Simpson, founder of the Christian and Missionary Alliance expressed in the song, “Himself”:

“Once it was the blessing, now it is the Lord;
Once it was the feeling, now it is His Word.
Once His gifts I wanted, now the Giver own;
Once I sought for healing, now Himself alone.” [4]

“Himself alone” [5] says it all.

---

[1] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 782.

[2] Ibid., 784.

[3] Jack W. Hayford, Grounds for Living: Sound Teaching for Sure Footing in Growth & Grace (Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, 2001), 166.

[4] A. B. Simpson, “Himself,” Online: http://online.auc-nuc.ca/alliancestudies/ahtreadings/ahtr_s3.html [12 June 2007].

[5] Ibid.

The Bible. New International Version.

God and sanctification

This post was written in response to several questions posed by my Principles of Theology professor. Those questions are:

What role does God play in our sanctification? What responsibility do we have? In what ways will you intentionally foster the development of the fruit of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5) and holiness in your own life in the coming days?

My response is below. What do you think?

******************************

God’s role in sanctification is that he does the work. We can do nothing to make ourselves sanctified or holy. God works and we cooperate. Grudem states, “sanctification is primarily a work of God…” [1] The Father disciplines us (see Heb 12:5-11). Christ is “our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and redemption” (1 Cor1:30) because he earned this for us. He is also our example, “pioneer and perfecter of our faith” (Heb 12:2).

The Holy Spirit has the major role in the sanctification of the saints.

The Holy Spirit must always work in us through the Word, granting us daily forgiveness until we attain to that life where there will be no more forgiveness… All this, then, is the office and work of the Holy Spirit, to begin and daily increase holiness on earth through these two means, the Christian church and the forgiveness of sins. [2]

We can therefore, see that Luther and his associates also agreed that the work was God’s, but God’s people worked together with God to sanctify believers.

Our responsibility in the sanctification process is to work together with God and be open to him. God does not force himself on is and will not make us holy and sanctified if we do not desire it. Numerous places throughout the New Testament our part is taught. We are exhorted to “be holy” in 1 Pet 1:15). 2 Corinthians 7:1 directs us to perfect holiness. Paul told Timothy, “train yourself to be godly” (1 Tim 4:7). There are many other passages as well that encourage us to cooperate with God. Charles Spurgeon said regarding sanctification, “If it is possible, I will attain it.” [3]

Recognizing our struggles in this life, “Now, however, we remain only halfway pure and holy,” [4] and as Paul declared, “For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out…What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death” (Rom 7: 18, 24), I will continue to spend more intentional time in God’s presence. No self effort can sanctify me, but by his grace, I will continue with the spiritual disciplines of daily journaling and lectio divina. This week I began practicing the discipline of the divine hours or daily office. Periodically, I will make use of this discipline.

I have started relating to a spiritual director/mentor. We will primarily connect by phone and occasionally face to face. Once the candidacy process begins through the synod (which should be sometime within the next month or so), I will be assigned a mentor, but that will primarily be for vocational discernment and to assist in the process.

The bottom line is the more time we spend in God’s presence, with open hearts, the more we become like him. Since taking Spiritual Formation earlier this year, my goal has been to more intentionally fellowship daily with the Lord. This has enabled me to handle difficult situations with grace and a greater sense of God’s presence.

---

[1] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 753.

[2] Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, eds., The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2000), 438-439.

[3] David J. Massey, Principles of Theology excerpts of flash lecture by author, 2004. Online: https://regent.blackboard.com/courses/1/70225.RELS.201.02.200770/content/_875417_1/RELS201_Lesson05a.swf?bsession=8757730&bsession_str=session_id=8757730,user_id_pk1=46749,user_id_sos_id_pk2=1,one_time_token=[1 June 2007].

[4] Kolb and Wengert, eds., 438.

The Bible. New International Version.