Carnal Christians?
A proper understanding of I Corinthians 1:1-3
By Moses Flores
It is often
asserted, especially by Dispensationalist and those adhering to Non-Lordship
Salvation, that there are two types of Christians: those who are spiritual and those who are carnal. Those who are
“spiritual” are those Christians who have accepted Jesus Christ as their savior
and as their Lord. The latter are those
who are trusting Christ as their savior, but are not
yet submitted to His Lordship. Thus, the
“carnal Christian”, though trusting Christ for salvation still continues to
live his life experiencing no radical change, or repentance from sin. He lives his life as though he were “natural”
– carnal.
I believe
this position to be unbiblical and contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as
taught by Christ Himself, by Paul, by Peter, by James, by John and the other
apostles. The following will be a
refutation of the case for a “carnal Christian” category. In particular, it is argued from I
Corinthians 3:1-3 that the use of the term “carnal” being applied to the
believers there justifies the category of “carnal Christians”. Thus, this paper will be an exegetical
understanding of the text of I Corinthians 3:1-3 in its immediate context and
in the light of the totality of Scripture.
The passage
reads:
“And, I brethren, could not speak to
you as to spiritual people but as to carnal , as to
babes in Christ. I fed you with milk and
not with solid food; for until now you were not able
to receive it, and even now you are still not able; for you are still
carnal. For where there are envy,
strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men? For when one says, ‘I am of Paul,’ and
another, ‘I am of Apollos,’ are
you not carnal?”
Before
entering into the exegesis of this text, we must recall Paul’s address to the
Church in
First, in
1:2 Paul writes: “to the
Furthermore,
Paul says to them that he is confident that Jesus Christ will “confirm [them]
to the end, that [they] may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ”
(1:8) because “God is faithful, by whom [they] were called into the fellowship
of His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1:9).
These verses show that Paul believed in the final perseverance of the
saints of the Church at
In the
light of these considerations, Paul clearly believes this Church to have been
justified and even anticipates their final glorification through their present
sanctification in Christ. However, Paul
has heard news that there are divisions in this Church (
Paul does
not hesitate to rebuke them for their sinful behavior, yet he does not imply
that they have lost the Spirit of God or have become “carnal”
again. Indeed, he does not hesitate to
still refer to them as “brethren” in verses 10, 26 and 2:1. In 1:30 he tells them that they are “in
Christ” because of God – and not the leaders that they claimed in their divisions- and that Christ was, for
them, wisdom, righteousness and sanctification and redemption from God. Thus, all that they are, they are because of
Christ and not now, or ever, because of their works or behavior.
In Chapter
2, Paul goes on to say that the Corinthians have received “wisdom” from God through His Spirit (
“no one knows
the things of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the
world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things t hat have
been freely given to us by God…But the natural
man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are
foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually
discerned.”
When Paul
says that “we” have received the Spirit of God, he is referring both to himself
and to his Christian audience. In doing
this, Paul makes the distinction between “believers” and “non-believers”;
between the “Spiritual man[2]” and the “carnal” or “natural man[3]”; between the ones who have received (aorist
tense) the Spirit of God and those who do not have the Spirit of God. Thus, the dichotomy is clear: Either one is Christian and has the Spirit of
God or they do not have the Spirit of God and are not Christian. Anyone devoid of the Spirit of God is not
Christ’s (Romans 8:9-11). This is
further supported by verse 14 which clearly teaches that Spiritual things
cannot be understood by the “natural man”.
After this
distinction - created by the words “we” and “natural man”- Paul goes on to say
that Christians “have received” the Spirit of God. One of the greatest events
in the history of the Church is the pouring out of the Holy Spirit. Joel prophesied that it would come to pass
that God would “pour out His Spirit upon all flesh” (Joel
Now, after
all that has been said about the nature of these Corinthians we must not assume
that they were perfect. Indeed , they were far from it as most Christian on this
side o heaven often are. Thus, Paul’s
purpose in this letter is to address problem in the Church and even sinfulness
that must be dealt with. But we must not
jump to the conclusion that the presence of sinful behavior in the Church
implies that those who commit the sins are not Christians or are without the
Spirit of God. With this understanding,
let us no engage I Corinthians 3:1-3.
First,
Paul’s address: “And I, brethren…”
Again, notice that Paul has not lowered their “spiritual status” so as
to consider them “non-Christian” or even as Christians without the Spirit. They are still his “brethren” in the Lord in
the fullest meaning that Paul uses and are still the “
Secondly,
Paul does not explicitly say that these Christians are not spiritual, for if he
did he would have to negate all that was just said in chapter 2 about them
having the Spirit of God and being able to comprehend the deep things of
God. What Paul does say is that he must speak to these Christians as if they were carnal. He says, “I could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal.” It must be strongly pointed out that Paul
does not create a third category of Christians here, for he later says to the
same audience that he is now rebuking that their bodies are the temple of the
Holy Spirit who “I sin you , whom you have from God…” (I Cor.
6:19). The indwelling of the Holy
Spirit, as has been noted previously, is the mark of a spiritual person. Rather, he is condescending to them because
of their behavior. Thus, his tone is
disciplinary in nature and categorical.
Third, Paul
clarifies his thought a bit further by saying that he had to speak to them as
“to babes in Christ.” Again, we note
that these people are “in Christ.” These
who are “in Christ” are also all partakers of the Spirit of God. The Scriptures say, in the same letter, “For
by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body…and all have been made to
drink into one Spirit” (I Cor.
We may ask
of the text, what does Paul mean when he calls his audience “carnal”? This Paul himself answers. He says, “for you
are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?” But it must also be pointed out here, that
Paul is rebuking their divisions over who is the better spiritual teacher!! These
Christians were “boasting in men” (
The problem
that these Corinthian are experiencing, if it may be said in theological terms,
is that although they have been justified and regenerated, their sanctification
has not progressed very far since they were first saved because they are
boasting in particular leaders, and therefore, could not realize that all was
theirs “in Christ” and not in any particular leader of the Church. Paul reassures them that the men they wished
to follow were irrelevant to the covenant promises of God. “For all things are yours…and you are
Christ’s, and Christ is God’s” (
Finally,
the way in which Paul refers to the Corinthians after calling the “fleshly” in
3:3 clearly does not mean that they are “not spiritual”. For instance, after his immediate rebuke and correction,
Paul tells the Corinthians, “Do you not know that you are the
To be
consistent with the rest of Paul’s writings in the Scriptures, his
soteriological writings in Romans are equally emphatic on the points that those
who live according to the flesh do so because they do not have the life of God
in them and are devoid of the Spirit of God.
Those who live according to the flesh stand condemned (cf. Romans 8:1).
Those who are “carnally minded” are in a state of spiritual death (cf.
Romans 8:6). The “carnal” mind is at
enmity toward God and is not in submission to the law of God NOR can it be (cf.
Roman 8:7, 8)! Christians are not in the
flesh (Romans 8:9; cf. Romans 6:5-11). The
person, therefore, who is living according to the flesh
has no reason to think of themselves as Christian. Even in I Corinthians 5:9-11, Paul exhorts
the Corinthians to not keep company with members of the Church who profess to
be Christian, yet are living in a manner that is consistent more with the
flesh.
Further, in
I Corinthians 6, Paul says:
“Do you not know that the unrighteous
will not inherit the
The person
who is actively living such a lifestyle does not have a legitimate hope for
heaven. Paul explicitly says not to be
deceived by thinking that such a lifestyle is consistent with the Christian
profession. John echoes this same view
in I John 3:6: “Whoever abides in Him does not
sin.” The word “sin” here is a third
person, present tense, active verb form meaning that the one who I sin Christ
will not live a life characterized by ongoing, continual sin. For the one who lives such a life “has
neither seen [Christ] nor known Him” (cf. 3:6b). John even echoes the same warning as Paul: “Little children, let no one deceive
you. He who practices righteousness is
righteous, just as [Christ] is righteous.
He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned
from the beginning …whoever has been born of God does not sin…and he cannot sin
because he has been born of God” (3:7-9).
Many more
references could be provided with similar testimony but these statements should
suffice. An exhaustive list and exegesis
of the supporting text is well beyond the scope of this paper. However, a few final points are in order.
Some Final
Thoughts
First, if
there is such a category of “carnal Christians” – who still walk according to
the flesh and are not submitted to their Lord nor are
baptized in the Spirit of God – how does one distinguish between this type of
Christian and the non-Christian? The
difference cannot be a mere profession of faith, for the Scripture are filled
with examples of many who outwardly professed the Christian faith yet were
never truly converted to Christ (cf. Matt. 7:21-23, 13:1-9, 18-22; Acts 8:9-23;
20:29-30; Hebrews 10:26-31; James 2:14-26; II Peter 2:1-5; I John 2:19). James especially is more than emphatic on
requiring that one’s faith be not merely professed but displayed as well. James says, “what
does it profit, my brethren, if someone says
he has faith but does not have works?”
He continues:
“Can [that kind of] faith save
him? If a brother or sister is naked and
destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Depart in peace, be
warmed and filled,’ but you do not give them the things which are needed for
the body, what does it profit? Thus also
faith by itself [i.e. mere profession] if it does not have works, is dead.
But
someone will say, ‘You have faith, and I have works.’ Show me
your faith without your works and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well.
Even the demons believe - and tremble!
But do you want to know, O foolish, man that faith without works is dead?
Was not Abraham our father justified by wo9rks when he offered Isaac his
son on the altar? Do you see that faith
was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says,
‘Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness.’ And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by
works, and not by faith only. Likewise,
was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when
she received the messenger and sent them out another way?
For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works
is dead also.”
Before one
gets the wrong idea about what is being said, James is not talking about our
justification before God so as to be contradicting Paul’s exposition of
justification by Grace alone through faith alone in Romans 4. What James is addressing is the implications
of such a professed justification before God and how one’s life should appear before men. We see this when James asks, “what does it profit…if someone SAYS he has faith but does
not have works?” Also he asks the reader
to prove their faith before men by saying, “show
me…”(v18).
What James
is saying, then, is that mere profession of faith – even the ability to profess
correct Christian doctrine – is demonic faith at best. This is not to say that it is not necessary
to believe and profess correct Christian doctrine. James himself says, “You do well,” when you
do this. However, if a person is not
able to demonstrate their faith before men, then such a faith is a “dead.” Essentially, this kind of faith is not saving
faith. When James says, “can faith save
him?”, we are to understand, from the context, that James is referring to a
faith that is professed but not “working by love” (cf. Gal. 5:16). “Faith” that does not bring about a changed
life and repentance toward God is not true Christian faith.
What James
is doing here is removing any false security and assurance of salvation from
those who merely profess to be Christian but do not truly live the Christian
life. James does not acknowledge that
such people are “carnal Christians.” He
simply implies that they are not Christian since a person cannot be saved by
mere theological or “creedal” faith. The
proof of a Christian life is not professing it, but actually living it. Nowhere in Scripture is there comfort for the
“carnal Christian”. Rather, the one who
has been born of God who is living the life of Christ is the one who is offered
assurance of salvation from the Scriptures.
Summing up
this first point, then, we see that the practicality of allowing the category
of “carnal Christians” leaves no way to distinguish between the Christian who
is “carnal” and the non-Christian. Yet
we know that Scripture has many “tests” – if you will – to distinguish the
saved from the non-saved; the Christian from the non-Christian; the spiritual
from the carnal.
The second
concern is two-fold. In the first place,
the category of “carnal Christians,” of necessity, will create a system of
legalism for the Christian who is to be “spiritual.” Second, allowing one to be Christian and
carnal, at the same time, leads inevitably to antinomianism, or a Gospel that
is without law. Allow me to elaborate on
these.
In regards
to legalism, the mentality is established by the presupposed distinction
between “carnal Christians” and “spiritual Christians”. If there is a distinction, then there are
further requirements that may be done in order to be a spiritual
Christian. That is, one may be a
“sufficient” Christian by professing Christ as their savior. They may live with such “faith” and still
gain entrance to heaven, although “by the skin of their teeth” so to
speak. Their rewards will be slim if
they get any at all. However, if they
want to live a “fuller” life, they there are certain other things that must be
done. For instance, they must “clean up
their life” by changing their ways, do more spiritual activities such as attend
church more, read the Bible, pray, etc…
Somewhere as they are engaging in these activities, God will fill them
with the Holy Spirit and allow them to experience a fuller Christian life. The legalism is like that of the heresy of
Their
justification – even their fullness of the Christian graces – were theirs not
by doing some things that other Christians do not do, but were theirs by virtue
of the life and work of Jesus Christ alone given to them on the basis of grace
alone and received by faith alone.
However, the Judaizers told them that there was a “fullness” missing in
their life and, thus, they needed some “extras” in order to experience them. Paul, however, sharply rebukes the Galatians
as having “departed” from Christ (1:6) and believing “another Gospel” (1:6.7)!
This is the
same kind of error that inevitably takes place when one makes the divide
between “carnal” and “spiritual” Christians.
The Gospel becomes changed and perverted into a system of legalism for
those who wish to be “spiritual”.
Instead of relying on the finished work of Jesus Christ alone, they must
inevitably look to their own works done after justification to gain more
Christian benefits. The Bible knows of
no “gospel” of this sort and condemns, even, any deviation – no matter how
slight – from the one and only true Gospel (Gal. 1:8,9). This is certainly not the intention and
motive behind such teachings but it is the inevitable result.
In regards
to the antinomianism, this is easily seen in the fact that “carnal Christians”
are able to live a “carnal” lifestyle.
That is, they may , for all practical purposes,
continue to live their life of sin so long as they profess Christ as their sole
savior from their sin. This perversion of
the Gospel was the most commonly addressed perversion that the apostles dealt
with being that it is a topic mentioned in several letters of the New
Testament. The mentality that creates
this false view of the Gospel is the created dichotomies between forgiveness
and repentance/conversion; salvation and holiness; justification and
sanctification. That is, many believe
that the Gospel is only a message about being forgiven for all their sins while
things like holiness, repentance and sanctification are left out as
optional. The Gospel is falsely
presented as an “escape hatch” from the eternal consequences of one’s
sins. As such, it is logically concluded
that if that is all salvation is, then one may live their life in any manner
that they see fit and always rely on the “escape hatch” to be saved. Thus, there is the separation of faith from
repentance, thereby, ignoring the commands of Christ and the Scripture to
repent (cf. Matt. 3:2; Luke 13:1-5; Acts
2:38; 17:30; 2 Peter 3:9). Paul deals
with this issue explicitly in his exposition of the Gospel in the sixth chapter
of the book of Romans.
At the end
of the fifth chapter of the book of Romans, Paul says, “where sin abounded,
grace abounded much more…”(
“What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may
abound?”
That is, he
anticipates his audience saying, “if it is true that I am justified through
faith alone in Christ’s completed work, and it follows that the glory of grace
is revealed in God forgiving sin, then it would seem to follow that if one were
to sin more, then more grace would be shown by God. Thus, one may live thief life sinfully after
justification that ‘grace’ may appear all the more gracious.”
Paul’s
answer to this reasoning is emphatic:
“Certainly not!” (v2). The reason
for this negative answer is what is most significant. His response deals with the nature of salvation and its effects on
the justified sinner. He says,
“How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?”
Paul’s
reason reveals an essential aspect of the Gospel and salvation not widely
presented. That is that salvation is not
merely the cancellation of the former debts of sin and the imputation of the
righteousness of Christ. There is also real change that takes place in the
sinner, namely their death to sin as Paul expounds here in Romans 6 and 7 as
well. Paul continues to expound our
death to sin as a result of our union with Christ in his death:
“Or do you now know that as many of us
as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore, we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was
raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in the newness of life.” (v3-4)
The effects
of the work of God in us that result in salvation are our death to sin and the
impartation of new life through the Spirit of God which results in a new
outward life. This pattern is easily
seen in the rest of Romans six. In
verses three and four we have already seen that salvation includes our being
“buried with Him through baptism into death” resulting in our willingness to
“walk in the newness of life.” Further
we see:
“For if we have been united together
in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall be in the likeness of His
resurrection…our old man was crucified with Him…that we should no longer be
slaves of sins…For he who has died has been freed from sin…for the death that
He died, He died to sin once for all…likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be
dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord…” (v 5-7, 10-11)
Paul’s
summation of the Christian being one who has died (aorist tense) to sin and is
alive now to God in that the Christ is not to let sin reign over them
(v12)! Paul reminds his audience that –
even for Christians – the wages of sin is death (
Misunderstanding
the nature of salvation is a tool for distorting the Gospel. Paul clearly shows that salvation involves a
life being changed by the sovereign grace of God as a life that crucifies the
“old man” and is raised to a new life that seeks to walk in holiness. The “carnal Christian” surely finds no
acceptance for his doctrine nor lifestyle from these
passages of Scripture. In fact, what the
“carnal Christian” finds is a condemnation of his lifestyle; their standing
before God and their false assurance, or hope, of salvation all taken from
under their feet.
Summary
The
Scriptures give no support whatsoever for a category of believers called
“carnal Christians”. The text offered
most as proof for “carnal Christians” (I Cor. 3:1-3) is concerned with Paul’s manner of speech toward the
Corinthians and not with their nature.
The context itself does not support Paul as talking about their
nature. Rather, it is in the context of
Paul’s disciplinary approach to the Corinthians. He rebukes them “as if they were carnal”
(clearly a hypothetical statement).
Furthermore, the concept of “carnal Christians” is not consistent with the whole of
Scripture, especially with those passages of Scripture that explicitly deal
with justification and sanctification.
The error most
notable with the concept of “carnal Christians” is the separation of
justification from sanctification. It is
Christianity without discipleship.
Interestingly enough, Rome objected to this misunderstanding about the
doctrine of Justification by Faith Alone (Sola Fide) at the council of
Trent. Rome believed that belief in
justification by faith alone (albeit they misunderstood the doctrine
altogether), apart from works, would inevitably lead a person to believe that
they could become justified by simply believing they were justified by Christ
and continue to live their life any way they wished. Thus, it seemed that the doctrine of
justification by faith alone was a license to sin and still be saved.
This,
however, is NOT the correct doctrine of Justification. It is a caricature and perversion of it and
the Protestant understanding of the Gospel.
The doctrine, correctly stated, is that by a free act of God’s sovereign
grace a sinner is legally declared to be righteous on the basis of the perfect
righteousness of Jesus Christ imputed to the sinner and, thus, forgiven of
their sins on the basis of the substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ which
is received and applied by the sinner through faith apart from works. But this is only one part of the work of God
that is called salvation. Salvation, in
its totality, is the eternal work of God whereby in time He sovereignly and
completely saves sinners[9].
Sanctification is also part of the salvific process of which no man will
be saved without (Heb. 12:14). Salvation
is a great thing, but we must understand what we are being saved from and the
nature of it. If we understand that we
are being saved from the wrath of God that comes upon sinners because of their
“carnality”, we would understand that salvation involves that “carnality” being
removed from sinners and not glorifying the carnality in them. Salvation is from sin not to sin and
it can only take place by regenerating and renewing the sinner into the image
of Jesus Christ (Romans 8:29, Eph. 2:1-3, 10; Titus 3:5).
[1] According
to Paul’s other writings about the nature of a Christian, and what Paul
believes one to be, we can observe from Romans 8:1-17 the following:
1) A
Christian is “in Christ Jesus” (v1)
2) A
Christian is one who walks “according to the Spirit”
3) A
Christian is one who is “in the Spirit” (v9)
4) A
Christian is one in whom the Spirit of God dwells in (v9, 11)
5) A
Christian is one who is “led by the Spirit of God” (v14)
These are all positive aspects
of what a Christian is. Negatively, Paul
says that a Christian is one who is:
6) not
walking “according to the flesh” (v1)
7) does
not live according to the carnal mindset which is enmity toward God (v5-7)
8) can
not please God (v8)
9) is
not a debtor to the flesh (v12)
On
the basis of Paul’s description of what a Christian is and is not from this
portion of Scripture, it is easy to draw the presupposition in 1 Corinthians
that when Paul says that these members of the Church are “Christian” – in so
many words – he means to say that they are indwelt by the Spirit of God and
they should be living not according to the flesh. Thus, they are “spiritual” by virtue of the
fact that the Spirit of God indwells them and not by their behavior.
[2] It
is all to often the case that some Christians wish to distinguish those who are
“spiritual” from those who are not on the basis of the actions that are
performed by the person. However, the
Bible does not support this. Neither
does the Bible support the idea that merely because one has thoughts of God and
things as such that such a person is “spiritual”. This type of thinking finds no support in the
Bible. Instead, what it does support is the proposition
that the spiritual person is one who possesses the Spirit of God as is
exhibited here in I Corinthians 2. All who do not possess the Spirit are “carnal” and are NOT Christian. But to be Christian is to be in possession
and possessed by the Spirit of God.
Furthermore,
the standards that are placed upon Christians to be considered as “spiritual”
also find no support in the Scriptures and they lay the standard of
“spirituality” entirely upon man so that man is the standard of what is
spiritual and what is not! This is
unbiblical and a practice that was condemned by Jesus in his condemnation of
the Pharisees (see Matt 23, especially v13, 25).
[3] “In using the generic term “man” (anthropos), the apostle now shows
the is peaking of unsaved man in general, governed as he is only by his “soulish-human” (psychikos) nature, not accepting the enlightenment and
truths from the Spirit of God (Mare, W. Harold, The Expositor’s Bible
Commentary, Vol. 10, edited by Gaebelein, Frank E. , Zondervan Publishing, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1976, pg.
202)
[4] Kistemaker, Simon J. New Testament Commentary: I Corinthians,
Baker Book House, Grand
Rapids, Michigan, 1993, pg. 88
[5] Hoekema,
Anthony A., “Saved By Grace”, Eerdman’s Publishing
Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1989, pg. 24
[6] This is a good point.
Remember that Paul is rebuking the Corinthians ,
at this point, for the many divisions that are breaking out in the Church. Some were saying they were of Paul, some of Peter , some of Apollos, and some
of Christ (cf. 3:4). It would be
horribly hypocritical of Paul to now want to introduce a division within the
body of Christ! These divisions are even
the reason that Paul cannot get these Corithians to
the “meat” but has to keep them under the basic “milk” of the Gospel. Paul wants them to move onto maturity but
they cannot as long as they remain divided.
Thus, division of the body of Christ into “carnal” and “Spiritual” would
actually negate Paul’s commands and pleas for Christian maturity in faith.
[7] “In the Greek, Paul uses the adjective sarkinos (fleshy)
in verse 1 and the adjective sarkikos (fleshly)
in verse 3. Although the difference in
both the English and the Greek is only one letter, there is a distinction in
meaning. Using another example, one
commentator suggests the distinction between leathern and leathery. An article made out of leather is leathern,
but when it has the appearance or feel of leather the
article is described as leathery. Thus,
the expression fleshy (sarkinos) refers to the essence of substance of flesh
while the term fleshly (sarkikos) describes its appearance and
characteristics. The first term states
an unchangeable substance; the second a characteristic that can be altered.”
(Kistemaker, pg. 102)
[8] oiJkei
is 3 pers.,
sing., present tense, imperative. Thus, Paul believes the Spirit of God to be
presently dwelling in the Corinthians even after he has had to deal with them
as if they were “fleshly
[9] In theological terms, this is known as the “ordo salutis” (order of
salvation) and it comprises the “sequence” of events in the salvation of
sinners. Beginning in eternity, God first elects sinners unto salvation and
predestines them to be conformed to the image of Christ (cf. Eph. 1:4-5, 11;
Romans 8:29; Romans 9:10-13). Next, in
time, God works out His plan of salvation and, through the person of the Holy
Spirit, He sovereignly calls sinners to life thereby effecting their
regeneration. Immediately upon being
quickened to new life by the Gospel call, the sinner repents and places their
faith in Christ which leads to the justification of the sinner. Following the sinners
repentance, faith, and justification is the sinners sanctification. The Reformers used to say, “though we are justified by faith alone, the faith that
justifies is never alone,” meaning that there is always evidence of
justification, namely the sanctified life and inevitable growth in Christ. Finally, ending in eternity, all those who
are sanctified will be glorified by Christ in the final day
of judgment. The basis of this
entire “chain” is found in Romans 8:29-30 and explicitly teaches that nobody is
saved apart from partaking in each of these “links”. That is to say, no one will be saved who was
not first elected by God unto salvation, nor will they be glorified who do not
partake in sanctification (cf. Heb. 12:14).