Five Views on Sanctification

Counterpoints

by Stanley N. Gundry (Editor), Anthony A. Hoekema, Stanley M. Horton

Christians generally recognize the need to live a holy, or sanctified, life. But they differ on what sanctification is and how it is achieved. Five Views on Sanctification brings together in one easy-to-understand volume five major Protestant views on sanctification. Writing from a solid evangelical stance, each author describes and defends his own understanding of the doctrine, and responds as well to the views of the other authors. This book addresses such practical questions as: How does one achieve sanctification in this life? How much success in sanctification is possible? Is a crisis experience following one’s conversion normal—or necessary? If so, what kind of experience, and how is it verified? The Counterpoints series provides a forum for comparison and critique of different views on issues important to Christians. Counterpoints books address two categories: Church Life and Bible and Theology. Complete your library with other books in the Counterpoints series.

Genres: Theology, Christianity, Christian Living, Christian, Nonfiction, Religion, Academic

258 pages, Kindle Edition

First published April 19, 2011

Reviews

[Marti Wade · Rating 3 out of 5]

As an editor myself, I have to say this book could use one. Practically no introduction and considerable evidence that the contributors were not on the same page as what they were to provide or who they represented - themselves? the Bible? a whole religious tradition? Moreover, most went out of their way to moderate their views and affirm one another's. This may show evidence of their own sanctification but it also weakened this work as an educational or persuasive book.

Note: It appears that some of the GoodReads reviews attached to this book refer to a different one. I am speaking of the book by Dieter, Hoekma, Horton, McQuilkin, and Walvoord.

[Chad · Rating 4 out of 5]

This books provides a helpful overview of the contours within the discussion on sanctification. Coupling claims with critique and simplicity with scholarship, these contributors offer varying perspectives which will guide the reader through some of the essential distinctions between positions.

[Cale Manley · Rating 4 out of 5]

A difficult book to get through for me as I worked through how I personally agreed and disagreed with each perspective. The contributors agreed more than disagreed with one another, but did disagree on some key issues. They all agree on the need for Christians to live holy lives, the need for gradual sanctification or growing in grace, and the need for dependence on the Holy Spirit for this to be a possibility. They disagree on what can happen to the sinful nature in this life, how sin should be defined, what the baptism with the Holy Spirit is, and whether or not sanctification should involve a crisis experience.

1. The Wesleyan Perspective by Melvin Dieter. I thought this was an excellent summary of the Wesleyan concept of sanctification as taught by Wesley and how it was developed in the Holiness Movement. In John Oswalt's book Called to Be Holy he recommends reading Dieter's summary. The definitions of entire sanctification and sin are well-stated and in harmony with Wesleyan theology.

2. The Reformed Perspective by Anthony Hoekema. This perspective may have used the most Scriptures and have employed more biblical theology than the others. His view that the man in Romans 7 is unregenerate is admittedly not widely held by Reformed scholars.

3. The Pentecostal Perspective by Stanley Horton. I enjoyed reading the history of Pentecostalism, but I found this view the least biblically and theologically convincing (particularly that the baptism with the Spirit is evidenced by tongues). His statement that conflating the baptism with the Holy Spirit with the conversion experience results in a downward trend of person's emphasis on the Holy Spirit's involvement in his or her life was very interesting.

4. The Keswick View by J. Robertson McQuilkin. I found this chapter to be the most spiritually powerful. It made me hunger and thirst after "the normal Christian life" the author was describing and is described in the New Testament but is often neglected. Many have found Keswick teaching to be spiritually enriching through teachers such as R. A. Torrey, F. B. Meyer, Oswald Chambers, and A. W. Tozer. McQuilkin asserts that J. I. Packer misunderstands and misrepresents Keswick teaching in his book In Step with the Spirit.

5. The Augustinian-Dispensational View by John Walvoord. I had never heard of this perspective before reading this book and did not find it very interesting or convincing. I did, however, really appreciate the section on the filling of the Spirit.

Some of these authors' disagreements are more about terminology and semantics than major substantial differences. Despite the technical nature of this discussion that may seem to be splitting hairs, this topic is of utmost importance, for "without holiness no man shall see the Lord" (Heb. 12:14). This is a topic that requires great care and biblical precision, yet equally great humility.

[Phillip Hardy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Wesleyan
Disorganized, contradictory concepts, word salad (the whole essay could have been 10 pages). The second half felt off topic. I think it was a mistake to make this about "Wesley". Every other paragraph starts with talking about what Wesley thought. Though I appreciate this is a view derived from Wesley's influence, I'd have preferred a closer reliance on scriptural quotations, historic church understandings, and logical proofs. This essay was written before AI chatbots, but it would have fooled me.

Reformed
Well organized, clear and logical. Not over reliant on Calvin's writings. Was confused by this idea that we "responsibly participate" in sanctification and "work it out" but we don't "cooperate" in it. What is participation if not cooperation? What is working out our sanctification if it is not work? The emphasis on this distinction is lost on me, though many Christians speak on it endlessly. The section against perfectionism was very effective, though I don't take the Lord's prayer to be relevant in this case.

Pentecostal
Innovation, discord, schism, doubt. These are the words that came to me as I read the first half of this essay. If the Pentecostal world can't agree on seemingly anything, why is it considered a perspective at all? This is an interesting history lesson on the Pentecostal movement, not a persuasive essay on the Pentecostal view of sanctification. The second half of the essay is better, and the sections with the sanctification headings are good.

Kenswick
Impressively clear. Gets to the point. Makes sense. I went in having no knowledge of this view. It's far and away the winner. Helpful clarity on the two classes of sin that cloud this discussion.

Augustinian-Dispensational
This essay is the most philosophical, which is a weakness of mine at the moment. As a result I found it challenging, though refreshingly different from the other essays. As one of differing opinion of Romans 7, I didn't find those portions convincing. I felt unclear on how exactly Augustine was related to Dispensationalism. The explanation of Spirit baptism was clear and I think defeated the Pentecostal position. The portions on sanctification/spirit filling were good. After that I got a bit lost.


Overall this book needed better editing. Some of the essays were just not on topic or really padded the word count. Also the views when you boil it down were difficult to distinguish. You could listen to one of these guys talk for 10 minutes and not yet even know which camp he's representing, with the exception of the Augustinian.

[Steve Irby · Rating 3 out of 5]

I just finished "Five Views on Sanctification," by "The Publisher," or some dude at Zondervan.

Contributors are as follows:

Melvin E. Dieter, representing for team Wesley.

Anthony A. Hoekema, representing for team Calvin.

Stanley M. Horton's, representing for team Azusa.

J. Robertson McQuilkin, representing for team Keswick.

John F. Walvoord, representing for the predestiniarian dispensationalist Baptist team.

My main goal is to see what each tradition defines as the goal sanctification; what is its telos; sanctification, yes, but what does it do?

Argument 1, Wesleyan:
Telos:
It seems the Wesleyans see sanctification as growing in perfect love for the end goal of being loving persons replicating the person of Christ in our lives. Later on I believe he gets closer to the reality when he says that sanctification gets us closer to God so we can serve Him with all our beings, but he doesnt developed the concept further.

Argument 2, Reformed:
Telos:
That as sanctified we are able to think Gods thoughts after Him, to do what is in harmony with His will and to live lives that are pleasing wo God and all for the glory of God. And also so that we should be conformed to the image of Christ for more of an eschatological purpose.

Argument 3, Pentecostal:
Telos:
For growth unto maturity for works such as apostles, prophets, evangelists, teachers, or pastors.

Argument 4, Keswick:
Telos:
Healthy Christians live sanctified.
So far the Keswick presentation is the best written.

Argument 5, Augustinian Dispensational:
Telos:
To be christlike for empowerment and as evidence of ones salvation.

Personally, I believe they all have a good telos and one need not choose one but rather have them all. I believe sanctification is essential to mission.

[Harvey · Rating 4 out of 5]

This excellent discussion leaves the reader with more questions than answers. The validity of each portrayal of the doctrine of sanctification across holiness, dispensationalist, and calvinist theological systems is difficult to evaluate from the materials provided, but this much is clear:

In my own estimation, a Christian doctrine of sanctification is to reflect the biblical text it must:
1. Acknowledge that sin is not just a problem of actions, but a state of being that requires rescue and transformation beyond any human ability
2. Admit that sin is both a conscious act of transgression and anything that consciously or unconsciously falls short of God’s perfection.
3. Acknowledge that sanctification is participated in actively by the free agency of a believer
4. Acknowledge the sovereign work of God's grace in a human life
5. Teach that the result of sanctification (holiness) in the believer's life is to the glory of God alone with no credit to the Christian's efforts

This leads me to a stronger agreement with the Reformed author than others in this book.

[Hether Wright · Rating 3 out of 5]

It gives a clear view of the five different views presented; Wesleyan, Reformed, Pentecostal, Keswick and Augustinian-Dispensational. However, the text is very dry and thick and at times very hard to read through. It is a good text book, but if I had not been required to read this book I would have stopped after the first view unless I was very interested in sanctification points of view.

[Nicholas Abraham · Rating 3 out of 5]

These counterpoint books are often helpful to some degree. This one is helpful in various capacities. Unfortunately, a couple of the essays are not as well-focused on the sub-topics of sanctification as they could have been.

[Tina Mackey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great histories and expositions on different sanctification viewpoints. Note that this is an informational book, not a process book. A highlight was each authors reaction tot he previous authors explanation.

[Drake Barnhill · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good content. Couldve been 50-100 pages though.

[Caleb Nedimyer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some helpful reviews and responses. I'd suggest reading fuller treatments of each perspective but for introductions to the views of sanctification it is profitable.

[Michael Vincent · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some interesting discussions but some is confusing. Many ideas and issues about the work of the Holy Spirit and sanctification which are important to consider.

[Anna Enderle · Rating 4 out of 5]

My professor gave us two assignments with this book:
pages 11-103 due Thursday
pages 105-235 due Tuesday
That’s the entire book in two nights

[Jon Cheek · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book provides generally helpful summaries of the differing perspectives. In the end, each view generally agrees with the others regarding the distinction between positional sanctification and progressive sanctification. The primary difference between the perspectives is in what some perspectives add to progressive sanctification. Methodists add entire sanctification and perfectionism. Pentecostals add Spirit-baptism and speaking in tongues. Keswicks add the crisis moment initiating a higher life. The essays by Walvoord and Hoekema seemed more complementary rather than representative of different perspectives. Their main differences are in their emphases. Walvoord and Hoekema also seem to provide the most thoroughly biblically-based presentations of the theological issues involved in sanctification. Overall, this book serves as a helpful introduction to the spectrum of belief in the doctrine of sanctification.

[Tim Woody · Rating 2 out of 5]

Overall this book was not what I was expecting. Out of the five views represented they only differ on a few distinct points. Where the authors diverge there inst enough dialogue, while the commonalities get a lot of pages. I felt from a reformed perspective that the representation given by Hoekema was solid but a more prolific writer should have been sought out. Out of the five views the representation of the Keswick position by McQuilkin was the most practical. Readability 2 out of 5 stars. Informative 3 out of 5 stars. Arguments presented 2 out of 5 stars. There should have been more dialogue on the points of difference.

[Andrew Mcneill · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting read although not remarkably helpful. The writers share more commonalities than differences and spend little time discussing those differences. Part of the reason why there are little differences is because they are all clearly theologically aware and careful in their exegesis. This of course means that you get the best arguments from each of the positions which is always a good thing. To be honest, I wouldn't really recommend it if you're wanting to learn more about sanctification on a personal level. However at an academic level I'm sure the book will be moderately helpful.

[Sam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good book. Read for theology of christian holiness with Dr. Chris Bounds. At times, the authors are frustratingly confusing or contradictory, but it was helpful to understand various views of sanctification. Interestingly, the Wesleyan-Holiness position is the only one to advocate entire sanctification as a second work of grace as a crisis experience by faith where God deals with our sinful nature. I wrote two essays from this book.

[G Walker · Rating 1 out of 5]

Not bad... not great... Hoekema has some good insights... not his best work though... would have like to have seen them engage a broader range... dealings too much with "fundamentalist" and american categories... would have liked to have seen more historical models addressed, maybe even some broader global perspectives... but that would have required engaging Orthodoxy : ) and at that time of publishing it would have been unheard of.

[Elizabeth Johnson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good overview of some of 5 mainstream Protestant views of sanctification - Wesleyan, Keswick, Reformed, Pentecostal, and Augustinian-Dispensational (aka, Chaferism). A little dated, but still relevant enough for today. Would recommend to someone studying the issue of biblical sanctification, if they are spiritually discerning enough to compare with Scripture itself.

[Rose · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good resource for a basic introduction to five perspectives on sanctification. Would have replaced the Keswick discussion with a Lutheran discussion though. There was difficulty in distinguishing what each author personally believed in comparison to the general position of their denomination/philosophy.

[Justin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This discussion mostly highlighted the similarities between the views, rather than the differences (though there are enough of those for an engaging read). A follow-up book might be something like "Five Views of Baptism in the Holy Spirit" or similar. Walvoord's final chapter does a nice job of approaching the issue from a different angle.

[Pj Berner · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dieter on the Wesleyan View: "Entire Sanctification" - process-crisis-process; Wesley never argued for complete eradication of sin nature; simply argued for the doing away of our bent toward sin. (difference?)

[Tyler Hochstetler · Rating 4 out of 5]

The comparisons and contrasts between the representatives of the five churches presented in this book are thoroughly interesting. I thought this work to be very deep and an important work, especially considering the topic. A worthwhile read.

[Rachel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very helpful in discussing the differences 'entire sanctification' and 'progressive sanctification' as well as two natures in one man.

[Miss Lily · Rating 3 out of 5]

Frankly, I don't understand why they wrote so much about this.. Because none of what they argue about the nit picky stuff affects one's salvation...

[Pieter Lombaard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book, certainly sharpened my perspective on sanctification.

[Chris Whisonant · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a slightly older book, but it still offers a good, succinct overview of 5 differing views of Christian sanctification. Definitely a good place to start.

[Josh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Generally helpful, though sharing the weaknesses of the five views series of books. This does serve to give a general orientation to some of the key areas in discussing progressive sanctification.

[John Lawless · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good view from the Charismatic side

[Jrod]

Wesleyan Sanctification

Dieter may have accurately represented Wesley’s position on sanctification but may have failed to reflect the biblical teaching on sanctification. Dieter argues in p. 30 that the basis for the Wesleyan sanctification view is not on any specific verses or propositions but on a holistic view of Scripture. Such assertion may sound noble, but any holistic view of Scripture (biblical theology approach) is always (and must be) grounded by exegesis of specific verses. While there are weaknesses in proof-texting certain doctrinal positions, not having any text of Scripture fails to necessarily be the better option.

The two key problems with the Wesleyan sanctification view are 1) the fusion of justification and sanctification and 2) the redefinition of “sin” and “perfect.” The problem is that their definition is not how the Bible defines sin and not how one typically understands what it means to be “perfect.”

Reformed Sanctification
The Reformed view, in my estimation, is the only view that seeks to begin with pure biblical data on sanctification. Dieter and Horton begin their position based on historical theology. Dieter presents Wesley’s view of sanctification. Horton begins with a historical view of Pentecostal sanctification. Both Keswick and Augustinian-Dispensationalist begin their argument by asking a systematic theology question. McQuilkin asks the question of the problem of unsaintly saints and finds the answer in the need for more faith. Walvoord begins his approach questioning whether a believer has two natures or not. His sanctification view then is in keeping with the two nature idea of the believer. Hoekema, on the other hand—while not void of systematic theology conclusions—describes biblical data and exegesis to support his view of sanctification.

Hoekema faithfully presents the paradox of sanctification being both definitive and progressive and being God’s work and man’s active participation. He demonstrates that it is the work of the Spirit, but also of the Father and the Son. In the responses section, it is of little wonder that the other writers agree with Hoekema’s presentation (because it is what the Bible says), and their only quarrel is what Hoekema did not say (e.g., Horton and Walvoord want more discussion on the Spirit).

Pentecostal Sanctification
Like all critical responses to Horton, I object to the Pentecostal view on the Spirit. I find Horton’s presentation to be deceitful. He begins with the history of his denomination and selecting the points of doctrine that would be consistent with orthodoxy, and when you are already in agreement with him, he ends with his unique and errant teaching on the Spirit baptism. In his responses to others, he doesn’t present his view clearly, but ambiguously comments that he wishes the writer would talk “more about the Holy Spirit.”

Keswick Sanctification
McQuilkin seems to downplay the question “How long can you be ‘carnal’?” which means either “How long before you lose your salvation?” or “How long before you realize that you were never really saved?” (p. 160). He argues that “it may be legitimate to by-pass the question, at least for the time being.” Yet Paul seems to be clear that persisting as what McQuilkin calls “unsaintly saints” is an indication not of a lack of sanctification, but a lack of justification (1 Cor. 6:10; Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:5). This is not as difficult to detect as McQuilkin imagines. While believers clearly sin (1 John 1:8), there is a persistent and blatant sinning that is inconsistent with Christianity and worthy of confrontation to repent or church discipline (1 Cor. 5; Matt. 18:15-18).

Dispensational Sanctification
Walvoord’s view is not too problematic. I find it to be somewhat consistent with Hoekema. The Augustinian-Dispensationalist perspective, however, emphasizes the distinction between indwelling and filling to the extreme that may imply that some believers who are indwelt by the Spirit never get filled with the Spirit (p. 215). Granted that filling is subsequent to indwelling, a true believer indwelt by the Spirit would naturally be filled with the Spirit. Though the level of consistency may vary, all true believers at various moments in their life yield to the Spirit’s guidance, and desires for consistency in this matter.

Conclusion
While many of these perspectives have different nuances that I find inconsistent with my understanding of Scripture, I applaud with the authors’ desire to teach sanctification and their zeal for the holiness of God. The irony is that it is easy to defend one’s theological view on sanctification in a very unsanctified way. It is also easy to talk about sanctification and have a more biblically accurate view of it, yet not being diligent in pursuing it. This reading on The Five Views of Sanctification is not only an academic and theological exercise but should also stir the readers’ hearts to strive for sanctification “without which no one will see the Lord” (Heb. 12:14).

For detailed review see: https://leejaredgarcia.com/2018/08/27...