I’m preaching through Romans right now in my youth group, which means that a lot of issues related to justification and the like have been on the top of my mind. So I suppose that could be part of why I loved Tanner Gish’s post at The Two Cities* about whether or not we over-emphasize justification to the demise of a healthy view of sanctification.
Or maybe it’s just because it’s a great post. Here’s a clip:
In his article ‘Spiritual Formation as a Natural Part of Salvation,’ Dallas Willard suggests that the heightened emphasis and attention the doctrine of Justification has received for 2,000 (but especially 500) years has actually directly contributed to the struggles the believer faces in the area of sanctification and spiritual formation. Why do we have so many complacent or sluggish believers in the Church today? Why do the Scriptural promises of sanctification seem to sludge along so sluggishly in the lives of many ‘saints?’
Willard explains his concern:
‘The background assumption is that justification is the entirety of salvation, that is, if you are justified, your sins forgiven – then you are saved and you will be okay after your death. I submit to you that this is what is offered…by most current efforts (evangelism) to convert people to Christianity, and it is what people generally understand to be essential to the transaction.’
So, what is wrong with this assumption?
You’ll have to go read it there to get Gish’s answer.
And let me say this: I’m pretty Reformed. I think Luther and Calvinism and penal substitution and John Piper are awesome. I don’t much like Roman Catholicism or open theism or Rob Bell or The Shack. So don’t think of me as a different kind of guy than I am.
But Gish (and Willard) have an important point that we need to take seriously.
——————————————-
*Listen: you really need to be reading this blog. It’s still young, but it already has my vote for Rookie of the Year this year. You know, if theological blogging had stuff like that.
