Debates about sanctification are common within evangelical circles. Why? Because the Bible does not present us with a systematic analysis of sanctification and its many facets, but speaks of sanctification within the broader storyline of Scripture, of creation to new creation, of the new birth to final consummation, and of the individual’s progression to becoming a glorious reflection of Jesus Christ.
David Peterson’s contribution to the “New Studies in Biblical Theology” series (edited by D. A. Carson), Possessed by God: A New Testament Theology of Sanctification and Holiness (Intervarsity Press, 1995), tackles some of the most pressing issues related to sanctification by doing a thorough examination of relevant New Testament passages.
Today, I want to summarize Peterson’s book. Tomorrow, I’ll offer some reflections.
What is “Definitive Sanctification?”
In the introduction, Peterson lays out the various perspectives on sanctification and the debates that have ebbed and flowed over the centuries, discussions related to progression in holiness. He lays out his view this way:
“…definitive sanctification is a more important theme in the New Testament than has generally been acknowledged. Rightly understood, this doctrine is a key to holy living and a way through the impasse created by much previous debate. God calls us and enables us in Christ to live as those possessed by God and empowered by his Holy Spirit” (14).
To make his case, Peterson begins with the Old Testament, focusing on God’s holiness: his singularity, his moral purity and perfection, which is to be characterized by the consecration of his people in relation to himself.
“With regard to God’s people, holiness means being set apart for a relationship with the Holy One, to display his character in every sphere of life” (24).
The New Testament builds on this understanding and prioritizes the definitive nature of being set apart for God.
Although theologians often speak of sanctification as a process of transformation following conversion, Peterson argues that the New Testament primarily speaks of sanctification as “God’s way of taking possession of us in Christ, setting us apart to belong to him and to fulfill his purpose for us” (27). He does not deny that sanctification has ongoing effects, but claims the stress of the New Testament writers is on the definitive aspect – the status we are given by God as “saints.”
Four Implications of New Testament Sanctification
From the New Testament, Peterson finds four practical implications:
- Our identity is our being possessed by God “and expressing that distinctive and exclusive relationship by the way we live.”
- Our standing before God is given to us through grace and is not dependent on the degree of our progress in meeting his expectations.
- We must see ourselves as God sees us in Christ.
- We should have patience with other believers as being “already sanctified” in Christ Jesus even if they are struggling with sin (47-49).
Peterson bolsters his case for definitive sanctification by showing how the New Testament usually connects “holiness” to a Christian’s initiation into the called-out, set apart community of faith. One cannot separate sanctification from redemption and conversion, as if it is a subsequent process or (in John Wesley’s view) a process-crisis-process pattern.
What About Pursuing Holiness?
What does the New Testament’s emphasis on definitive sanctification mean for the individual believer who is pursuing holiness? Peterson appreciates J. C. Ryle’s work on holiness, but worries that it could create a “graded form of progress” which spawns unrealistic expectations and leaves Christians in doubt about their final state before God.
In Peterson’s view, an unbalanced focus on progressive sanctification misses the New Testament’s primary method of motivating us to holiness: emphasizing our justification and sanctification by faith in Christ (70). To provide a needed corrective, he works through New Testament epistles, encouraging us to take seriously the Scriptural warnings about neglecting holy living, and urging us to keep our attention from shifting from God’s grace to human effort (91).
The key to understanding the relationship between sanctification and the other aspects of salvation is found in eschatology. “Moral renewal proceeds from our union with Christ in his death and resurrection” (95), he writes, before launching into a lengthy examination of the Romans 6-8 passage’s teaching on sanctification.
“Those who belong to the new age are liberated through Christ, but are not yet entirely free from the old age” (96).
We have died to sin
- in a judicial sense (Christ died on the cross for us),
- a baptismal sense (we identify with Christ’s death),
- a moral sense (we walk as resurrected people),
- and a literal sense (we will be united with him in resurrection) (96-98).
Living as sanctified people in the world that is passing away should inform our behavior: we struggle in a fallen world and yet live with confidence in God’s ultimate plan of redemption.
Sanctification and the Other “-tions”
In the final chapter, Peterson examines the relationship between sanctification and glorification, adoption, and regeneration.
We should not see sanctification primarily as a process that follows justification, but as “another way of describing what it means to be converted or brought to God in Christ and kept in that relationship” (136).
Other terms (renewal, transformation, growth) are used in the New Testament to express the reality of “progressive sanctification,” not the word sanctify. We are called to live out the implications of our sanctification by pursuing holiness as a lifestyle. The picture of what progress entails is not given to us in detail, and therefore, we should avoid simplistic steps of progress in growth and holiness.
Tomorrow…
I want to offer a few thoughts about Peterson’s proposal and the strengths and weaknesses of his view on sanctification.
But for now, what do you think of Peterson’s view of “definitive sanctification?
Pastorally, do you tend to focus more on sanctification as “making progress in holiness” or on the definitive sense Peterson lays out here?
