Skip to main content

Holiness is Part Of The Gospel

From an observational point of view, compare the average Christian to the average non-Christian and generally speaking what do you see? One goes to church on Sunday, the other might, but likely doesn’t. One shows some level of interest in Christian theology, the other likely has very little interest at all. One anticipates attending some sort of mid-week, Christian corporate gathering, the other probably doesn’t. Now we could go on, but let me stop to ask a question. Where do you see similarity between the two? In how they live. These days, it’s become increasingly difficult to discern any real difference between the way Christians and non-Christians live. It’s a question of ethics.

Those who make claim to the holiness of Christ, but show no manifestation of the Holy One who indwells them, are close to Jesus in their profession, but closer still to the atheist in practice. Such people are not fooling the Holy God of heaven. Paul couldn’t be more to the point. “They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for any good deed” (Titus 1:16). How can a person whose lifestyle is basically indistinguishable from the heathen world be certain of his salvation? He may confess a new life and that the Spirit of holiness now occupies him like a guard, but if what he professes isn’t seen to bear testimony with his outward acts, then how can this man, or any who observe him, have confidence that God has truly separated him unto Himself? What the puritans and Jonathan Edwards called “Experiential Religion” is not to be confused with charismatic affectations of body and soul in worship. Its concern is a passionate desire to be separate from the world and one with God and with godliness.


  1. John,

    A much needed word for many of us. I'm wondering though, based on this being a question of ethics ... How would you counsel a brother or sister who sees signs of grace and godliness, yet still struggles in various ways to ethically walk opposite of the world? What would your counsel be to those who wonder, well, pastor ...If Christ lives in me why do I still sin?

  2. Jeremy, Christ does not promise perfection this side of heaven, but sanctification, in which the lusts of the flesh are more and more weakened. That a child of God is aware of his sin is proof that Christ is performing this act of continuing grace, for apart from it, men are not anxious over their sin.

  3. Dying more unto sin and living more unto righteousnes ... and yet the process in progression is different for every believer. I was thrilled to read this post. It seems that the evangelical church at large today is finding it hard to hold God's grace and holiness in the same hand of principle and practice. Saved by grace to good works prepared before hand that we might walk in them. Keep writing, John. See you Sunday.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Andy Stanley and the “NEW Hermeneutic”

The problem of faith and reason is longstanding in the history of theology. Augustine held that faith aids reason (credo ut intelligam) and that reason aids faith (intelligo un creadam). The church father is, however, inclined to stress the later over the former. It was with Thomas Aquinas, and his Summa Theologica, that the effort to reconcile faith and reason reached its apex. Rejecting the medieval doctrine of double truth, he placed natural reason prior to faith in effectively every area of the Christian life. The restrictions are the mysteries of the faith that reason cannot penetrate.
Thomas’ affirmation of the high role of native reason in Christian belief is linked to his stress on dialectical method in study, seminally set forth by Peter Abelard. The form of study is dependent largely on logic to argue both sides of a theological question. Christian belief is thus the proper result of process or synthesis. Faith then assents to the final proposition arrived at by reason.

Pat Robertson is Warned!

Pat Robertson is taking it on the chin again. Seems each time he opines on why bad things happen to us, there is someone to call him on it.
Most recently, Dr. Richard Mouw has taken up the challenge in response to Robertson's recent statement on the Las Vegas shooting, in which at least 59 people were killed and more than 500 were wounded in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
In a piece, titled, "You've Been Warned, PatRobertson!" Mouw, for whom I have deep respect, pens,

"It didn’t take long for some preachers to start telling us why God caused the horrible mass murder in Las Vegas to happen. Pat Robertson led the way, declaring that it was divine retribution for the widespread 'disrespect' for Donald Trump in America."
If Robertson had limited his rationale for the Vegas shooting to God punishing us for people dissing the President, I'd be smacking him on the chin myself. But he didn't.
Robertson's brief remarks f…

Is Our Knowledge of God Analogical of Univocal?

As a matter of first principles in apologetics, we can ask, “What does the unbeliever know about God?” However, the biblical apologetic is shaped not only by what Scripture says the unbeliever knows, but also by what it reveals he can know; is capable of knowing, as a believer. So we might also ask, “Is it our hope that the unbeliever can know God as God knows himself or that he can know God reflectively, in a creaturely way?” This is the univocal/analogical problem in Christian epistemology. 

The question arises in the context of the structure of human thought. It bears its own unique dilemma. If we stress too excessively that knowledge of God is univocal we run the risk of lowering the incomprehensible God to the level of the finite and make God as one of us. But if we stress too emphatically knowledge of God per analogiam we may very well deprive God of all likeness to the humanity he has created with the result that all we are left with is a barren, abstraction.

To a considerable…