I do what I don't want to do an exploration of holiness,part one

There's a thought that has been haunting me for a long time now. I've alluded to it a few times, but have not quite blogged about it yet, and still won't now. But it falls under a category of our role and God's role in our salvation and lifestyle. It frightens me that in our effort to avoid anything that would seem that we think we can have anything to do with our salvation we avoid Jesus' teaching and God's commands. I know that statement is bold and requires explanation. I'm working on it. Where this thought sits with me now is different than it was even a few days ago.
We're in the middle of a sermon series on holiness. In planning and preparing worship sequences for this series, I've had some big questions raised by the scriptures I've been dealing with. As much as I hate to admit it, often, I scour the scriptures looking to refute or correct something that I feel people have come to adhere to without thinking. Usually these things grow out of a truth, but become applied where they don't belong. God is God and we are not. This is true. But there are things that can be said about God that can also be said about us. We are terrified of this statement because we try to avoid anything that sounds like we are trying to put ourselves on God's level. But can I not say, "God thinks and I think." God exists and I exist. These may not be too scary. But I hear, "only God is holy." Why then does God command us to be holy? Surely, there must be a level at which we can be holy, or set apart, or as Greg recently put it, called out. I understand that my holiness and God's holiness are very different in that God is set apart even from those who are set apart. He's the holy ONE of a holy nation, the King of kings, Master of masters. God's command of us to be a lower case something that He is, doesn't assume equality with Him.
I have thought about the way we use, "holy", "sanctus", "sanctified", "set apart", constantly for a couple weeks now. I tend to think of sanctus and holy the same, but "sanctified" implies something that has to be done for us. I've had trouble reconciling our use of "holy" and "holified". A couple weeks ago, this presented no problem for me. I assumed that only God could make me holy and it had nothing to do with my ability or behavior. Then I had to deal with how God seems to be defining the term in various scriptures. At first I was just proving to myself that I, a man, could in fact be holy. I find that not only can I be, I'm commanded to be. Throughout Leviticus as God is giving the law, He continually states that the rules are given because Israel must be holy because God is holy. Following these rules sets Israel apart. God's ubiquitous phrase, "… for you must be holy, because I am holy." There are instances when God says, "I am the LORD, who makes them holy."
So in some way, obedience is a part of being holy, and that is something that I have to do. But at the same time, it is God who makes us holy. Does this mean that He enables us to be obedient? Or in our obedience He will make us holy? Why is it all confusing? Simple, you say? Just one of those things that we chalk up to our inability to understand the sequence of God's call, our response, His enabling, our doing? Did I use a dirty word - doing?
It seems to me that our positions on such issues and concepts are always extreme. We reside at the far reaches of the pendulum swing. I feel that residing in the center of the swing is not the answer either. Our problem is that we don't understand the concept of an interactive relationship with the Holy One.
God asks of us things that we can't possibly do, but enables us do them. He requires of us the impossible, but makes it possible. In our inability, we find excuse to stop trying. We don't allow God to work in and through us.
These thoughts took me from Leviticus to Romans, chapter 7 as I prepared for this past Sunday. That is where I'll take up tomorrow…