# Sanctification Necessary to Prepare Us For Heaven?



## heartoflesh (Mar 7, 2005)

Would you side with J.C. Ryle or A.W. Pink?



*J.C. Ryle- "Holiness" pg.28-29*

(12) Sanctification, in the last place, is _absolutely necessary, in order to train and prepare us for heaven._. Most men hope to go to heaven when they die; but few, it may be feared, take the trouble to consider whether they would enjoy heaven if they got there. Heaven is essentially a holy place; its inhabitants are all holy; its occupations are all holy. To be really happy in heaven, it is clear and plain that we must be somewhat trained and made ready for heaven while we are on earth. The notion of a purgatory after death, which shall turn sinners into saints, is a lying invention of man, and is nowhere taught in the Bible. We must be saints before we die, if we are to be saints afterwards in glory. The favorite idea of many, that dying men need nothing except absolution and forgiveness of sins to fit them for their great change, is a profound delusion. We need the work of the Holy Spirit as well as the work of Christ.; we need renewal of the hearts as well as the atoning blood; we need to be sanctified as well as to be justified. It is common to hear people saying on their deathbeds, "I only want the Lord to forgive me my sins, and take me to rest." But those who say such things forget that the rest of heaven would be utterly useless if we had no heart to enjoy it! What could an unsanctified man do in heaven, if by any chance he got there? Let that question be fairly looked in the face, and fairly answered. No man can possibley be happy in a place where he is not in his element, and where all around him is not congenial to his tastes, habits, and character. When an eagle is happy in and iron cage, when a sheep is happy in the water, when an owl is happy in the blaze of noonday sun, when a fish is happy on the dry land-- then, and not till then, will I admit that the unsanctified man could be happy in heaven.


*A.W. Pink, Spiritual Growth pg. 23-24*

4. _Christian progress does not make us meet for heaven._ ......Thousands have been taught to believe that when a person has been justified by God and tasted the blessedness of "the man whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered" that much still remains to be done for the soul before it is ready for the celestial courts. A widespread inpression prevails that after his justification the believer must undergo the refining process of sanctification, and that for this he must be left for a time amid the trials and conflicts of a hostile world; yea so so strongly held is this view that some are likely to take exception to what follows. Nevertheless, such a theory repudiates the fact that it is the new-creative work of the Spirit which not only capacitates the soul to take in and enjoy spiritual things now (John 3:3, 5), but also fits it experimentally for the eternal fruition of God.
One had thought that those laboring under the mistake mentioned above would be corrected by their own experience and by what they observed in their fellow Christians. They frankly acknowledge that their own progress is unsatisfactory to them, and they have no means of knowing when the process is to be successfully completed. They see their fellow Christians cut off apparently in very varied stages of this process. If it be said that this process is completed only at death, then we would point out that even on their death-beds the most eminent and mature saints have testified to being most humiliated over their attainments and thoroughly dissatisfied with themselves. Thier final triumph was not what grace had made them to be in themselves, but what Christ was made to be unto them. If such a view as the above were true, how could any believer cherish a desire to depart and be with Christ (Phil. 1:23) while the very fact that he was still in the body would be proof (according to this idea) that the process was not yet complete to fit him for His presence!



[Edited on 3-8-2005 by Rick Larson]


----------



## TimV (Mar 7, 2005)

Pink is right on this point. How can it be otherwise? How many times do we need to remember the thief on the cross, or our own selves?


----------



## heartoflesh (Mar 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by TimV_
> Pink is right on this point. How can it be otherwise? How many times do we need to remember the thief on the cross, or our own selves?



Pink would be my choice too. To be fair to Ryle, however, he quotes John Owen in a footnote in his section:

"There is no imagination wherewith man is besotted, more foolish, none so pernicious, as this-- that persons not purifed, not sanctified, not made holy in their life, should afterwards be taken into that state of blessedness which consists in the enjoyment of God. Neither can such persons enjoy God, nor would God be a reward to them... Holiness indeed is perfected in heaven: but the beginning of it is invariably confined to this world" John Owen on "The Holy Spirit," _Works_, wol.III, p. 575, Goold's edition.

I have a feeling that Ryle (and Owen) are primarily against the view that a person can be justified, and henceforth live a life which is no different from an unbeliever. I am confident that all of us on this board would share their concern. But to say that a person on their death-bed, who merely pleads for forgiveness (for what else can they possibly plead for) cannot be happy in heaven because they had no opportunity to experience progressive sanctification (as Ryle seems to imply) is going too far, In my humble opinion.


[Edited on 3-8-2005 by Rick Larson]


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Mar 7, 2005)

I agree with Ryle. Even the thief was being sanctified in his short time. Certainly that sanctification is rapidly completed at death, but this life here in earth is preperation for life in eternity. We are citizens of that heavenly kingdom. We are to live as such now.


----------



## heartoflesh (Mar 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by puritansailor_
> I agree with Ryle. Even the thief was being sanctified in his short time. Certainly that sanctification is rapidly completed at death, but this life here in earth is preperation for life in eternity. We are citizens of that heavenly kingdom. We are to live as such now.



I would agree with that, but then how do we know if the death-bed person in Ryle's scenario couldn't be sanctified in the same way? He seems to be shutting the door on the possibility of such a conversion, possibly implying that there needs to be a certain amount of time after regeneration for the heart to be "made ready".


----------



## turmeric (Mar 8, 2005)

Proximity to death can have a sanctifying influence. Even in the unregenerate it seems to have a focusing influence. It does so even more in the Christian. Having said that, I agree with Pink, because he gives more credit to grace. A person on his deathbed who is dissatisfied with his progress and is only trusting Christ is probably in a good place. Our progress is a gift, not meritorious on our part. I know Ryle wasn't saying it is meritorious, but "can't get to heaven without it" sounds like a slippery slope.


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Mar 8, 2005)

I agree with Ryle.


----------



## Brian (Mar 8, 2005)

*BOTH/AND*

In an attempt to split the either/or...

I Corinthians 1:2
"To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints..."

_hagiasmenois_ present passive participle "who have been made holy"
Its a bit difficult to render it in English, but the point comes through easily - its an already accomplished act. Nevertheless, though they are ALREADY sanctified, they are called to be saints.

I Corinthians 1:30
"He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom and our righteousness and *sanctification* and redemption."

Doubtless, other texts could be enlisted, but the point is this: Ryle is arguing for actual (ontological) holiness, and Pink for experiential. The holiness without which no one will see the Lord is bought for us in Christ, and applied at our justification. Our actual sanctification guarantees our continued, subjective, growing santicifcation. Therefore, what Christ began is brought to completion in us. Ryle is on target: no one will enter the eschatological Sabbath without being sanctified. And Pink swings true: surely, the man who with his dying breath confesses Christ as Lord will that day be with Him in paradise. 

I haven't added anything especially helpful, just a meager attempt to clear up some muddy water. Your comments have already alluded to as much. 



> I agree with Ryle. Even the thief was being sanctified in his short time. Certainly that sanctification is rapidly completed at death, but this life here in earth is preperation for life in eternity. We are citizens of that heavenly kingdom. We are to live as such now.



Agreed. The thief was being sanctified in his short time (experientially), even as he had been ontologically sanctified.



And BTW, John Owen is superman. He is always saving the theological day.

For Christ's sanctification, wisdom, and redemption,
BRIAN


----------



## Brian (Mar 8, 2005)

*Owen\'s hero*

So John Owen is THE superman, but he took his cues from the ubermensch:



> Meanwhile, by these two epithets, he points out what sort of persons ought to be reckoned among the true members of the Church, and who they are that belong of right to her communion. For if you do not by holiness of life show yourself to be a Christian, you may indeed be in the Church, and pass undetected, but of it you cannot be. Hence all must be sanctified in Christ who would be reckoned among the people of God.
> 
> Now the term sanctification denotes separation This takes place in us when we are regenerated by the Spirit to newness of life, that we may serve God and not the world. For while by nature we are unholy, the Spirit consecrates us to God. As, however, this is effected when we are engrafted into the body of Christ, apart from whom there is nothing but pollution, and as it is also by Christ, and not from any other source that the Spirit is conferred, it is with good reason that he says that we are sanctified in Christ, inasmuch as it is by Him that we cleave to God, and in Him become new creatures.




_John Calvin; Commentary on Corinthians, Vol 1_


I love that Calvin brings in the Spirit too, and does so in a manner that does not divorce the Spirit from declarative justification.

Thankful for God's supermen, and longing to be holy like Christ (and them),
BRIAN

[Edited on 3-8-2005 by Brian]


----------



## heartoflesh (Mar 8, 2005)

When Ryle states:



> It is common to hear people saying on their deathbeds, "I only want the Lord to forgive me my sins, and take me to rest." But those who say such things forget that the rest of heaven would be utterly useless if we had no heart to enjoy it!



Perhaps we can assume what he has in mind is a person who doesn't have any repentance, any real change of heart, and subesquently any real faith? Somewhat akin to the No-Lordship believer in the Zane Hodges paradigm?

I think we would all agree that the babe in Christ is every bit as "complete in him" (Col. 2:10) as the most advanced saint. As the Calvin quote alludes to: "This takes place in us when we are regenerated by the Spirit to newness of life". 

Nothing "extra" need be attained to -- but there will undoubtedly be a genuine change of life, to an undetermined degree, in both. Perhaps it's not wise to use deathbed scenarios since these are the exception rather than the rule. Again, I will assume that Ryle has in mind the person without real, saving faith, and therefore no "separation unto God" whatsoever, in any degree.

[Edited on 3-8-2005 by Rick Larson]


----------



## heartoflesh (Mar 8, 2005)

More from *A.W. Pink, Spiritual Growth, pg. 24-25*



> If by "progressive sanctification" be meant a clearer understanding and fuller apprehension of what God has made Christ to be unto the believer and of his perfect standing and state in Him; if by it be meant the believer living more and more in the enjoyment and power of that, with the corresponding influence and effect it will have upon his charatcer and conduct; if by it be meant a growth of faith and an increase of its fruits, manifested in a holy walk, then we have no objection to the term. But if by "progressive sanctification" be intended a rendering of the believer more acceptable unto God, or a making of him more fit for the heavenly Jerusalem, then we have no hesitation in rejecting it as a serious error. Not only can there be no increase in the purity and acceptableness of the believer's sanctity before God, but there can be no addition to that holiness of which he became the possessor at the new birth, for the new nature he then received is essentially and impeccably holy. "The babe in Christ, dying as such, is as capable of as high communion with God as Paul in the state of glory" (S.E. Pierce).
> 
> Instead of striving after and praying that God would make us more fit for heaven, how much better to join with the apostle in "giving thanks unto the Father who _hath made us meet_ to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light" (Col. 1:12), and then seek to walk suitably unto such a privilege and dignity! _That_ is for the saints to "possess their possessions" (Obad. 17); the other is to be robbed of them by a thinly-disguised Romanism.



Agree, disagree, or are we splitting hairs?

[Edited on 3-8-2005 by Rick Larson]


----------



## heartoflesh (Mar 8, 2005)

More from *J.C. Ryle, Holiness, pg. 37*



> (b) The righteousness we have by our justification is _not our own_, but the everlasting perfect righteousness of our great Mediator Christ, imputed to us, and made our own by faith. * The righteousness we have by sanctification is our own righteousness, imparted, inherent, and wrought in us by the Holy Spirit, but mingled with much infirmity and imperfection.*



I am confused with Ryle's terminology here. How can sanctification be _our own_ righteousness, and at the same time be imparted, inherent, and wrought in us by the Holy Spirit?


----------



## tdowns (Mar 8, 2005)

*I like Pink*

Pink seems to have the better (clearer) understanding for me. I love Ryle though, reading through Practical Religion slowly but surely.

TD


----------

