The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Eternal Justification

There has been some disagreement concerning the doctrine of "Eternal Justification" here lately. In the hopes of clarifying the biblical teaching on this matter, I am providing a section for Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology as an attachment for those interested. It is a .pdf document, so everyone should be able to open and/or save it, since most everyone has Adobe's free "Acrobat Reader" nowadays. For those that do not have Acrobat Reader, I hope to have an online HTML version available later on today, D.v. It will be included in the list of articles in the Sola Fide section of Calvinism and the Reformed faith.

In His Grace,

The online version of the article, "Eternal Justification" by Louis Berkhof is now available here: Eternal Justification.

NOTE: The online version includes a section not found in the attached .pdf version due to size restraints for attached files. In the online version, there are 3 sub-sections compared to only the first 2 in the attached file.

The 3 sub-sections are:

• Justification from Eternity
• Justification in the Resurrection of Christ
• Justification by Faith

In His Grace,

Here is a different opinion.


Justification and Election
While we do not believe that God's people are actually justified in eternity, we do believe that there is a very close relationship between election and justification. They are justified by faith, not by election. Nevertheless, their justification cannot be separated from their election.
First, having chosen them to be His own, God also decreed to justify them and them only. He not only decreed that they should be holy, but that they should be without blame (Eph. 1:4), which is nothing more nor less than the decree of their justification.
Second, insofar as they are chosen in Christ according to God's eternal love, He also saw in eternity them as justified and without guilt. Only having foreseen them without sin, could God set His love upon them. And in giving them to Christ in eternity, God gave them to Him as those whom He eternally saw without sin.
Numbers 23:21 is especially important here. The same past-tense language is used, "He hath not seen iniquity in Jacob," that is used in Romans 9:13, "Jacob have I loved." This language has always been understood by those who believe in sovereign grace to refer to God's eternal decrees.
Numbers 23:21 is the answer to Balak and Balaam's attempts to curse God's people. Though Christ had not yet come, nor the blood of atonement been shed, God's people could not be cursed because of what God had foreseen in eternity.
It is in this sense that we are willing to speak of eternal justification, or better, of justification from eternity. Indeed, we believe it is of the utmost importance to emphasize this eternal background to justification.
To separate justification from God's eternal decree of election, is to end up with a justification that is available to all, if only they will believe, i.e., a conditional justification that in some way depends on the sinner's response to the gospel. That is not the free, gracious justification of which Scripture speaks.
Third, it is according to the decree of election, therefore, that justification is made available in the death of Jesus for the elect, and for them only. And, according to that same decree of election, they and they only are given the gift of faith by which that justification becomes their own.
There is no justification or righteousness possible for the non-elect. No forgiveness is available for them. What does not exist, either according to God's decree or the cross be Christ, cannot be offered to them without doing violence to Scripture's teaching concerning the truthfulness and unchangeableness of God.
Such a close connection there is between election and justification, that we know our election by way of our justification. Experiencing through faith the forgiveness of sins, we also know that we have this forgiveness from Him who "hath not seen iniquity in Jacob" nor "perverseness in Israel."
Praise be to His Name who sovereignly justifies His people. Rev. Ronald Hanko

Yankee,

Hanko's comments are in full agreement with those of Berkhof and many others. God did decree the elect's justification, but the decree is not the actual justification which is accomplished when the elect sinner believes upon Christ in time. God decreed ALL things, but the actualization of what He decreed must and will occur. For example, God decreed the time of your birth and your death. But you would be hard-pressed to say that you had no need of being born and/or you are now already physically dead. The death of Christ was decreed, prophesies where given of its sure coming, but Christ wasn't crucified in eternity; the Son of God (second person of the Trinity) took on human flesh in time and thus the Lord Jesus Christ came to be. It was this second Adam who was born, grew in stature, taught multitudes and shed drops of blood in contemplation of the NOT YET crucifixion.

My only criticism of Hanko is his typical paranoia when it comes to the "Free Offer of the Gospel". There was absolutely no need to even mention that, but he was no doubt compelled to do so, since the PRC has continued to make this one of the two issues (which was the basis for breaking away from the CRC) which they seem to want to be known for. One can proclaim there is free justification in Christ to all who believe, universally, without any contradiction of the doctrine of the eternal decree(s) of God. His position is without merit and always has been. And the opposite is erroneous too; e.g. the "gospel" of the majority of Evangelicals and para-church organizations, e.g., Billy Graham Ministries, Campus Crusade, Promise Keepers, etc., etc., which all say that God loves everyone, Jesus died for everyone, and thus all you have to do is raise your hand, repeat a little prayer and you will be a Christian.

In His Grace,

Pilgrim,

What's your read on or have you read The Doctrine of Eternal Justification (1) – John Marcus in November 2004 Protestant Reformed Theological journal?

Justification is an act in God, , and imputation of righteousness, should not be considered as the birth of time, but is eternal, because all His immanent acts are so. Is actual Justification the same with personal, and cannot persons be justified before they exist? Then they cannot be personally elected, before their actual existence. If there is a personal election from eternity, there also may be a personal Justification from eternity.

If by actual Justification, or the application of that benefit, when realized by God's elect, for their consolation and joy, it certainly follows faith; and is that Justification by faith which the Scripture speaks of, when faith is taken in a proper sense, but is no evidence that Justification itself is not eternal.


http://www.prca.org/sermons/romans8.29-30.html


I found this very helpful

Joe

Joe,

I read through that sermon by the PRC minister and he makes the same error; i.e., he negates the temporal and actual justification of a believing sinner in time by claiming that the justification occurred in eternity. And how does he make that error? He says this:

Just a few things about that wonderful work of justification. In the first place, we teach (and we are firmly convinced that this is Scriptural) that there is eternal justification. You will find that many who teach the "free offer of the gospel," deny eternal justification. Eternal justification again takes us back into the eternal Council or purpose of God. When the Bible says that we are "chosen in Him (Christ) before the foundation of the world," there is the element of eternal justification. We are chosen IN CHRIST. This means that we are chosen in connection with the cross. We are chosen in connection with sin and grace--eternally!

Here he clearly commits "eisogesis", i.e., he has read INTO the text that which is not there; referring to Rom 8:29, 30. Although it is true that God's decree includes justification, it doesn't mean that ALL that He decreed was accomplished. In the case of justification, the redemption intended was not existent in eternity but rather only after Christ's crucifixion and resurrection. If it was complete in eternity, then there would have been no purpose in God becoming man and suffering a vicarious substitutionary atonement, for it would ALREADY have been a "done deal".

He further says:

But as here justification follows out of the "calling," the emphasis in the text is on the conscious experience of the child of God. When God calls, draws, by the power of His Holy Spirit, He also assures us in our minds and in our hearts that we are justified. The child of God who is on his knees, who cries with the publican, "Oh, God, be merciful to me the sinner," that child of God has flowing into his consciousness the assurance that Jesus died for him.

This type of thinking is very similar to that of Karl Barth's idea of election, who embraced neo-Orthodoxy, where he taught that although election is universal, it is the "elect-elect" who come to realize their election in time; i.e., salvation for them was an experience. The similarity here is that the PRC, after the teaching of Abraham Kuyper and a few others, teach that justification is universal (for the elect) and that in time, the elect come to "experience" their eternal justification and not a real and individual justification. Once can easily see the fallacy here from myriad texts which contradict this type of thinking. For example, we have these two examples:

Ephesians 2:3 "among whom we also all once lived in the lust of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest:--"

2 Corinthians 5:20 "Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] by us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

If the elect were justified in eternity, then they could not be said to be "children of wrath" even as the reprobate were under the wrath of God. And, if the elect were justified in eternity, why would Paul urge them to be "reconciled to God"? To be reconciled, one must first be justified, i.e., be declared righteous. For God cannot be united to that which is evil or wicked. (Hab 1:13).

Perhaps even more convincing is the text itself from which he took his sermon:

Romans 8:30 "and whom he foreordained, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

He spoke about God's "calling", which he specifically said was temporal, i.e., it consisted of two elements; regeneration and the outward and effectual call. This "call" is temporal and surely not eternal; that which was decreed doesn't occur until the appointed time when the Spirit comes upon the elect sinner. Skipping over "them he also justified", we read that "and whom he justified, them he also glorified." Again, this glorification, although decreed in eternity doesn't take place until the consummation of all things, when the Lord Christ returns to gather together all His own. Now, returning to "them he also justified", this justification in the text is specifically marked out as being inextricably bound to these other two elements: calling and glorification. One first needs to be called in time in order to be justified. And it is only those who are justified in time, who are then later glorified, in time. It is grammatical and linguistic suicide to posit that the calling is temporal, the justification eternal and the glorification temporal.

Now, I took the time to read the sermon you suggested. Will you extend the same to me and read the article by Berkhof I referred you to previously, which can be found here: Eternal Justification and provide your comments and/or objections?

In His Grace,

I haven't read it, <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/sorry.gif" alt="" /> But if is consistent with the "official" position of the PRC, then I would no doubt find it in error.

In His Grace,

Pilgrim:

I see absolutely nothing inconsitant with the sermon and Scripture. Are we not chosen in Christ from the foundation of the world? Was not the Lamb Slain from the foundation of the world? I am still not settled in this issue completely and probably never will be. I see it as a both and, not an either or.

I read Berkhoffs treatiste. As usual He is very clear and concise, but a cookie cutter none the less. I have read the same article by 37 others pilgrim. I do nto believe he is correct in one major point. Justification is an IMMINENT act of God and not transient.

How could the Old Testament saints have been acquitted of their sins? For if we cannot be discharged, unless our sins be imputed to Christ, and they could not be placed to his account, till he "was made of a woman, and made under the law (Galatians 4:4, 5.)," as is suggested; then not one soul was justified before Christ’s incarnation. And nothing could be more false.

they are children full of wrath, or enmity against God, while in unbelief, And in that sense they may be called children of wrath.

they are also children of wrath in a passive sense and are are under a sentence of condemnation by the law before regeneration.

Zanchius said in his excellent book de natura Dei, that the
wrath of God is to be taken in different senses: "First, it signifies the certain and most just will, and decree of God, to avenge or punish the injuries done to himself and his church; thus with John 3:36. He that believeth not on the Son, the wrath of God abideth on him: That is, just vengeance against him is confirmed by the decree of Godf26." The elect are not objects of God’s wrath in this sense, but "are vessels of mercy, which God has afore prepared to glory Romans 9:23.)." "Secondly, it intends
the threatnings of punishment. Lastly, it imports the effects of wrath, or penalties, and the avenging of injuriesf27."

Now the elect are secured from the punishment due to their sins, by God’s decree; for "they are not appointed to wrath, but to obtain salvation by Jesus Christ 1Thessalonians 5:9.):" And also by Christ’s satisfaction, "who has made peace for them by the blood of his cross (Colossians 1:20.)."

Therefore it is only in the second sense that they are children of wrath, which is perfectly consistent with their interest in God’s love and delight, and members of Christ, and with their complete Justification in him, their foederal head. The law does not consider men as elect, or nonelect, but as transgressors; and, condemns them. But as God put the elect into Christ, or united them to him in eternal election, he views and considers them in him, and so justifies them, and takes infinite pleasure in their persons as members of the Mediator, in whom he always had the fullest satisfaction and delight even though they are under a sentence of condemnation by the law, as violaters of it, while in unbelief.


Grace and Peace

Joe

Joe,

I'm wondering why you have chosen not to interact with what Berkhof's "cookiecutter" defense of the biblical doctrine of justification? And it's interesting that you have read the exact same thing written by "37 others". You are obviously far more read than I. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Once again, and for the last time, the decree of God doesn't secure anything in and of itself until it is executed. Thus, in the matter of justification, it was decreed that a specific remnant from Adam's fallen race should be redeemed in Christ. However, that decree only guaranteed that which God purposed would come to pass. It is in the execution of the decree in time and through various means that it is secured. Professor John Murray has nailed this down perfectly in his excellent book, Redemption Accomplished and Applied. If you haven't read this little book, I would strongly encourage you to do so.

Lastly, you have failed to make your case from the biblical record and offer your exegesis of such texts as Rom 3:28-30; 4:2-5; 5:1; 9:30; Gal 3:6-8, 24, in order to refute the traditional view. If you can do so, I would really like to read it.

In His Grace,

What do you mean interact? Pilgrim I have interacted with his and a lot of others. And I doubt I am much more read than you. I know I am nto as well versed.


I agree it is an excellent book.


The case for eternal justification is nto only based on the decree. IT is based on the covenant of redemption made in eternity. I believe I have offered an explination in regards to the children of wrath scripture. I would much rather approach this from a matter of one text at a time pilgrim. and instead of getting invloved in biblical hop scotch, let us approach this all for the Glory of God. All the scriptures you provided say we are justified by faith. I have read them and understand them to mean exactly what they say. Faith =Grace=His Blood. Paul uses all interchangeably. We are justified by His grace, In fact, scripture also says we are justified by HIS faith. A translation you have refuted in previous threads. Which BTW creates a whole other issue of understanding. One that cannot be thrown out as trivial as you have done. What is the faith of Christ? anyway I am digressing.

by faith does not equal because of faith. I still insist that faith wqould be a work then if God justified people after showing their faith.

I also believe there is merit in the distinction of being justified before God and Justified before men and Justified before conscious.

I will also state that this is a both and, not either or. If we have been given to Christ from the foundation of the world, would that not mea that the elect in the Cov of Redemption are not under condemnation while in Christ?

In Adam, we are all sinners deserving of His wrath. In Christ there is no condemnation Paul says. So if we have been in Christ from the foundation of the world, then that would mean in Christ we are not condemned ie; we are Justified.

I believe the traditional understanding has merit also Pilgrim, but I also believe the deeper truth rests in the eternal covenant within the triune Godhead.

Joe

Joe: Just curious...Who are you quoting here and not giving credit? Where did you get this?


and..in your previous post....who is saying this that you are not crediting..so we can all read from the same article?


Dave

Sounds like JOHN BRINE (Hyper-Calvinism?)

Joe k,

Well, again you have offered basically nothing to refute the traditional view which the vast majority of orthodox Calvinists have held and of which I too hold tenaciously from my study of the Scriptures. I can only conclude that you either don't have the time to exegete all or any of the myriad passages I have offered, you have no interest in doing so, or you simply cannot. Further, you have not offered any cogent refutation of the myriad reasons I have given in defense of the traditional/biblical view either. But whatever the reason is for you not bring forth a biblical, rational defense of "Eternal Justification", I see no possibility of me considering casting off that which cannot be refuted.

FYI, I spent a very unhappy period of my life studying at a hyper-Calvinist seminary and was exposed to this and other errors in great depth. I found their defense of there views to be more than wanting, for they were based more on deductions rather than sound exegesis of Scripture. That is why I was hoping YOU could offer something more substantive than a few potpourri cut & paste quotes from unmentioned authors.

Undoubtedly, you have read this too, but I am moved to offer it nonetheless: Justification by Faith Alone: The Relation of Faith to Justification, by Dr. Joel Beeke.

In His Grace,

John Brine. Defending the Doctrine of Eternal Justification. As Znanchious which I stated

OK I shall read it Pilgrim.. Thank you

Pilgrim. Why does EVERYTHING have to end up in a belabored thesis of conjecture? I have in no way presented anything tha is contrary to scriopture. And I do nto have the time to prepare a 90 page thesis on every verse.

I have asked you a simple question.

If those in Christ are not under condemnation, and we are given to Christ in eternity, why can I not conclude the we are justified in eternity?

Quoting and not giving credit is presumptious oif you dave. You can ask the questuion without accusing me of claiming this as my own. I have tried numberous times to paste a link like others in here but cannot figure it out. So I paste a whole link http; I apologize for my lack of forum understanding

Pilgrim is your stay at a "Hyoer camp" causing you to deny eerythign that may hint of that bent? Do not throw the baby out with the bath water Jeff.

My goodness. This issue has been defended by the most learned divinies and to just call it complete error or heretical is wrong.

I am not at all denying the traditional understanding. WHat I do deny is faith being a condition for justification. Again by faith does nto equal because of faith.

In all honesty, can you show me where I asked you to produce a 90 page thesis on every verse? What I DID ask is if you would exegete at least ONE text, preferrably more but one at a time would suffice. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes2.gif" alt="" /> And if this means a 90 page thesis to do so, then 1) you need to learn what "exegesis" means, and 2) you should really strive to improve your articulation of what you believe so that it is, precise, profound and cogent. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Because one is not "in Christ" until one believes upon Him. Faith is that which unites one to Christ and which reconciles one to God in Christ.

In His Grace,

Because the Scripture says you are justified NOW> There is no condemnation when?

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus.

Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, shall we be saved from the wrath of God through him.

Romans 5:11 and not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.

Romans 6:22 But now being made free from sin and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto sanctification, and the end eternal life.

Excellent article by Beeke Jeff. I will meditate on it tonight while eating homamade Manicotti!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you, I found it very enlightening. Too long to read in depth at work though.

But I have to say, I am a hyper in some issues. But actually more of a non conformist.

You enjoy giving directions dontyou? Ask my wife, I am not good at receiving them.

WEll I find believing is missing in the scripture Jeff. All it says is there is no condemnation for those in Christ. And relating that to "Given to Christ from the foundation of the world' I do nto see believing there.

Anyway, I have a meeting to go. Come up with more pious directions for me to follow. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/sleeping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/sleeping.gif" alt="" />

Now does nto imply that we have not been Justified in eternity. Now can also mean the realization to our assurance.

Again, I may be wrong, but how were the OT saints justified prior to the historical even of Christs death?

Joe

In the "Welcome Message" PM (Private Message) you received after registering and logged in here, it was strongly suggested that you read 3 sections to familiarize yourself on how this Board functions. One of them was the FAQ. Secondly, in the "Advanced UBBT Code" box, there is a menu named, "Url/Mail/Picture" in which you can simply click on the "Webaddress" item and fill in the blanks with the URL. Thirdly, and no doubt the easiest method to include a "hot" (clickable) link to a webpage, is to either type or paste the URL in the body of your message and it will be automatically configured. It doesn't get any easier than that, IMHO. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/giggle.gif" alt="" />

You love this dont you. I tried. I will retry again.

Really? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/Ponder.gif" alt="" /> Did you have faith in eternity, though you did not exist?

Rom 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

They looked forward to the Cross, we look backwards....
Read Romans 4, Hebrews 11, etc

Well if one can be elect in eternity, then one could be justified in eternity. Existence has no bearing on our election, or our sin in Adam.

I know they look forward and we look backwards. THis is my point. If the OT saints were justified prior to the event, then just because the event took place historically in our past does not mean there is another hurdle for us to jump.

Please STOP asserting your opinion above Scripture and prove your point from Scripture. God's Word reveals we were elected prior to being born, where does it SPECIFICALLY say we were justified prior to us being born? Please give us an exegetical defense of ONE Scripture that supports this?

Pilgrim,

This thread has been very stimulating for me. I think I am this close (making a gesture with thumb and forefinger) to ........ well we'll see. Could someone here pray for me tonight.
Bill

Joe: I won’t belabor the point...but if you can’t figure out how to post a link...quotation marks (“ “) would let us know whether it’s you or someone else.....and at the end credit to the author. For example:

“....how could the Old Testament saints have been acquitted from their sins? For if we cannot be discharged, unless our sins be imputed to Christ, and they could not be placed to His account, till He "was made of a woman, and made under the law," (Gal. 4:4,5), ..” (from A defence of the doctrine of eternal justification by John Brine)

Dave

This close to what, Bill? . . . a nervous breakdown? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/giggle.gif" alt="" />

I'd be privileged to pray for you even though you didn't specify in what regard. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

In His Grace,

Joe k,

Please learn to spell "not" !! "nto" is driving me crazy!

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bash.gif" alt="" />

Thanks!

Ruth

Dave I mean they way jeff and Joe put a piece of paper in the post. or an undelined name of a person. hats what i am trying to do

JoeK read this and use the Graemlins >>> or to purchase additional smilies go here. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/compute.gif" alt="" />

Spellll Checkkkk is freeeee here. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/3stooges.gif" alt="" />

it is NTO...... That was for Ruthy.

Not <------------= (notice the spelling?) only do you have an issue with orders, you also seem to have an aversion to listening to directions, taking advice, and even accepting the answers given to your very own questions. You want to know how to do these things? I've already told you in another reply to a similar question concerning making "clickable links". But I'll repeat it one more time:

Click here: FAQ

Or, you can simply use the items found in the "Font Style" dropdown menu in the "Advanced UBBT Code" box, which is found just below the blank space (aka: textbox) where you type in your message.

Or, you can ask these type questions in the [b][color:blue]HELP Forum[/color][/b]

HAHAHAHAHA Jeff. I can be very grating and frustrating. Everything you said would be confirmed by my blessed wife!!!!!!!!! I need to be more diligent. Perhaps I can find one to do it for me, then I would be satisfied...


Grace and Peace

Joe

Thanks

Joey k!!!!



Ruth

Ruthy:

It must be the New Yawka in me to add a y at the end of everyones name!!!!!!!!!! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/BigThumbUp.gif" alt="" />

Pilgrim

Years ago when I was wrestling through this and other issues related to it, I felt like I was going to have a nervous breakdown. The only support group I had at the time, was forums such as this.
I have a feeling that my experience was/is not unusual.

Tom

Hello all:

I am in the process to reveal my conclusion on when an elect person is justified. When I have more time I will elaborate. I have looked at the strengths ond weaknesses of eternal justification and the traditional justified by faith positions and find they both are wanting from the correct scriptural support. Also I may be concluding that there is no warrant for a 3 fold process of justification. One conclusion I have reached is our faith does not cause justification, nor is it the condition of our justification. I will attempt to clearly show that our faith is a fruit of His elect being justified at the cross.


Grace and Peace

Joe

Joe k,

Before you reveal your conclusions, please reread the entire thread, with an open mind. No one has said that faith causes justification! The Word says that we must believe to be justified,

John 6:29 "Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent."


Romans 4:3-6 "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,".

Nor has anyone said that faith is a "condition" of justification, it is element that the Lord has proscribed with which we are to apprehend the justification that He is imputing to us. For if we are justified in eternity, why would we need to repent? Why are we called "children of wrath"?

Mark 1:15 "And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel."

John 1:12 "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:"


Again, please do more study of the Word before you come to any "conclusion". <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bingo.gif" alt="" />

In His Hands,

Ruth

Ruth an issue of such importance as justification needs to be addressed carefully and prayerfully. I will show you what i am speaking of when I have more time. Again, I stand corrected and will say that I am not at all comfortable about eternal justification as I once was. Nor am I comfortable with the traditional understanding of justifed by faith as prescribed by many.

I agree and have reread the thread. What continues to bother me is saying it is not caused or conditioned by faith, but God waits for our exercising of faith then justifies us. I sincerely believe that we are justified prior to faith or repentance. And I believe a correct interpretation of scripture will show this.


And Ruth, Do not forget verse 13 in John 1. This preceedes verse 12.

Joe

JUSTIFIED BY FAITH


“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law”. Romans 3:28



The Reformers made the expression ‘justified by faith’ the ground and pillar of their doctrine. Much of mainstream Protestantism has therefore adopted this terminology into their confessions of faith. The problem is in how most interpret this biblical phrase. There are three particular interpretations propagated, two of which are false.



1. The Reformed doctrine teaches that Christ secured the justification of the elect in His death at the cross, but that His righteousness is not actually imputed until those elect are brought to faith in Christ. Therefore they teach ‘justification upon the act of faith.’ Although they do not make faith the cause of justification, they make it the instrument for justification. This is the view of most ‘Calvinists.'



2. The Free-will Arminian doctrine teaches that Christ died to make salvation possible to all, and that those are justified who ‘make Jesus the Lord and Master of their lives and give Him first place in their lives. Then He is able to give them His righteousness, which makes them justified before the Father.’ This view teaches ‘justification because of faith.’



3. The Biblical doctrine teaches that when Christ died, God the Father then and there justified the elect once for all. He did not merely secure their justification. Justified by faith then means ‘justification REVEALED by faith,’ Romans 1:17. Faith is not the instrument of justification. It is the result.



Faith however must be understood in one of two ways, depending on the context. Sometimes it is used as a synonym of the Gospel itself, i.e. ‘the faith which was once delivered unto the saints,’ Jude 3. That is not speaking of faith as a result of the Spirit’s regenerating work, but faith whose object is Christ, and whose substance declares His blood and righteousness as the only ground of justification before God. In other words, the justification of sinners is revealed by faith (the Gospel of God’s Son). That is certainly the sense of Romans 3:28 where faith is used in opposition to the ‘law of works.’



Faith may also be used in the subjective sense, i.e. the work of grace in the heart, as in Romans 5:1. However, even there, faith is not the instrument or cause of our justification, but the fruit of it. The instrument of our justification is always the righteousness of Christ, once for all established by Christ, accepted, approved and imputed to the account of all the elect of all time there and then, Hebrews 10:10. Therefore being justified, it is by faith (the gift of faith to believe) that redeemed and justified sinners come to learn of their redemption, justification, and forgiveness of sins and enter into the peace with God in their spirits, souls, and consciences. However, it is not then that God imputes the righteousness of Christ. That was already done on their behalf at the cross! 2 Corinthians 5:21


More to follow.


Joe

Hmmmmm, I have to object strongly to this notion of yours on exegetical grounds. Can you please EXEGETE this text and show that it warrants your new-found view?

Romans 5:1 "Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ;"

Again, I must reject your conclusion based on sound exegesis of this text. Please EXEGETE this passage and thus warrant your view, and especially that it is even speaking of "justification".

Hebrews 10:10 "By which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

What you are have said here is very much like that asserted by neo-Orthodoxy's adherents, e.g., Karl Barth. He held that there is a group called the "elect-elect" who differ from the "elect-reject" in that the come to know, experience, realize that they are elect when they believe. In other words, faith is simply the apprehension of what has already occurred and doesn't actually effect the person's standing before God. What I could easily conclude is that there is no real need of the elect to believe since they are already justified; their judicial punishment has been assumed by Christ and His righteousness imputed to them. The only benefit of one's believing is subjective; e.g., an appeased conscience.

but there is simply an overwhelming amount of passages which perspicuously state that one is justified, i.e., made right, declared righteous, by (through) the means of faith and not before.

Philip Eveson's incontrovertible exposé on justification is something you really should read. Click here: The Great Exchange.

Justification: "If the purity of this doctrine is in any degree impaired the Church has received a deadly wound and brought to the very brink of destruction. Whenever the knowledge of it is taken away, the glory of Christ is extinguished, religion abolished, the Church destroyed and the hope of salvation utterly overthrown. - John Calvin "The Necessity of Reforming the Church" p. 42

In His Grace,

Jeff:

I knew you would disagree. But there is not much exegesis needed to support this view. According to you and most, this view teaches that although Christ bore the sin of His elect at the cross, He does not justify them, or impute Christ’s righteousness to them until they believe. Many interpret Romans 5:1 to mean that faith is the cause of God justifying the sinner, and thereby make justification simultaneous with faith. However, the context reveals that God conditioned the justification of the sinner entirely upon the work of Christ in His death and resurrection, NOT FAITH. “Therefore,” refers back to the preceding verse in Romans 4:25- “Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.” By putting the comma after justified rather than faith, which is how it should read, the meaning is “Therefore being, or having been declared just, (based on the redeeming work of Christ alone), by or, out of faith we have peace with God…” In other words, the peace with God, enjoyed in the sinner’s conscience, is the result of God-given faith, that sinner already having been justified by the death of Christ. The peace of God enjoyed by the justified sinner comes by God-given faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith is not the reason that God justifies the sinner; it is the result of God having justified him through the blood and righteousness of Christ. Faith is the evidence of the justification that Christ has obtained by His righteous life and death. Those whom God justified by the blood (death) of His Son, He will most certainly in time cause to believe because their sins have already been put away, and He declared them righteous at the cross, Romans 5:9. Colossians 2:13 clearly shows that the reason God regenerates sinners is not in order to justify them, but because they have been justified in Christ through His redemptive work-“And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;”
Again, some might conclude then that faith is not necessary in the grand doctrine of justification, if Christ already accomplished it at the cross. The answer is that it has no part as our ground of justification before God; however, it is clearly the EVIDENCE that God has justified that sinner in Christ by His obedience unto death. In time, every justified sinner will by God’s grace and Spirit come to Christ in repentance, believing the record God has given of His Son and submitting to Christ as the end (fulfillment) of the law for righteousness.

We dare not make faith the cause of justification; any more than one would make the will of man the cause of saving grace. The meaning is that in His time, all whom God has justified in Christ, through the death of His Son, He will most certainly cause to believe on Christ. If you are a believer, it is the righteousness and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ that already justifies you before God, not your faith. If my justification is in any way conditioned on or tied to my faith, what then when my faith is weak, or seems completely gone. To found justification upon even the grace of faith is to lay it on weak knees at best, and in that, there is no comfort. No! Faith is the result of the Sovereign Spirit’s work in your heart, causing you to enter into the peace, joy, and fellowship established already for you by Christ’s work at the cross. If you are His by grace, faith is the evidence of God having justified you already in Christ. When Christ cried, “It is finished,” it is!

The best definition of the justification is that found in Scripture itself,

Romans 3:24 “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus”
Romans 5:9 “Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.”


When the Scriptures speak of the blood of Christ, it is synonymous with His death. Note how the Scriptures tie our justification before God directly to the death of Christ and redemption in Him. Why would someone say that Christ redeemed sinners at the cross but God did not justify them there?

To say that Christ died, and yet the benefits of His death are not actually accounted until one believes is a conditional salvation message and foreign to Scripture.

There is only one justification of sinners before God, and that accomplished by Christ in His cross death. Like the orange cone, we must not confuse the different views of justification as different types of justification or times of justification. Ken Winmer There is but one, whether viewed from eternity, by faith, or through works. It was all accomplished at the cross

This is as exegetical is it will get from me Jeff. There is enough there to chew on.

Joe

I hope your continuous plagiarism of other people’s writing is covered in your unscriptural form of justification. We will get to the chewing of “your” positions shortly…. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/puke.gif" alt="" />

Sorry Joe,

But all that is hardly "exegesis". You surely can pontificate, but unfortunately you haven't been able to offer any meaningful defense of your spurious view(s) from the actual passages quoted. In all honesty, what you have displayed is a classic case of "eisogesis", i.e., you have added your preconceived ideas INTO the texts rather than wrestling with them historically and grammatically to derive of their actual meaning.

Yes, we are justfied "by grace", which includes the means of "through faith" (Eph 2:8, 9).

The scholarship of those in the past, e.g., Luther, Calvin, Goodwin, Owen, Edwards, Boston, Warfield, Hodge, Dabney, Gerstner, Sproul, Eveson, White and so many others, too many to mention, far exceeds anything you have offered and is most likely, what you are even capable of offering in this matter of justification. The "traditional" Protestant doctrine of Sola Fide was born out of great adversity which necessitated a depth of study I would confidently say is beyond you. And then, of course, there is my own personal study of this doctrine, which certainly pales in comparison to those mentioned, from which I have concluded that the Scriptures teach nothing other than the "traditional" and orthodox view. And so, I leave you to your musings and your departure from that "faith once delivered unto the saints" and pray that your eyes will be opened to that magnificent and pure truth which has sufficed in saving countless others who have put the destiny of the souls upon it.

This unique doctrine in a special way distinguishes the church from all other nations and religions....[Justification] is the pinnacle and chief bulwark of all teaching and of the Christian religion itself; if this is obscured, adulterated, or subverted, it is impossible to retain purity of doctrine in other loci. On the other hand, if this locus is securely retained, all idolatrous ravings, superstitions and other corruptions are thereby destroyed - MARTIN CHEMNITZ (1522-1586) Loci Theologici II, p. 443

In His Grace,

Joe k,

A simple question: Was Abraham justified before he trusted God or when he trusted God?

Joe: I still don't understand why it is so hard to add to your post....quoted entirely from "Justified by Faith",Ken Wimer Shreveport Grace Church

http://www.shrevegrace.org/

I just give up guys in attempting to create an attachment. THis is getting to be a bit of a pain for me. I did it once and I tried the same thing again, but nothing. My apologies. There was suppose to be a piece of paper in the end of the article, and it did not appear.

If you notice I attempted to edit the post, but to no avail.

So plagerism is not my intent Joe. So stop with the false witness please.

AS far as the belief. That is where I am now.

In fact if you look closely, Kens name is in there at the end.

Before. That is why he believed.

Jeff:

I see ample support for this. In fact, it is much better to believe that God in His grace justifies His elect completely at the cross. That is the point the righteousness of Christ is imputed to His elect. Exactly like it was imputed to those prior to the hiostorical event.

So far as I look at scripture I see Paul speaking of many distinct things.
1) Justified by faith
2) by the faith of Christ
3) His blood
4) His grace
5) His death

That is why I am led to believe both eternal justifiation is not very scriptural, and the trqditional understanding puts to much emphasis on faith. If Faith is a gift OF God, then He is the author of it anyway, so why would He wait to impute the righteousness of Christ to us until one believes? Doesnt this make God mutable? How can God hate His elect after electing them? I cannot grasp this at all. Therefore in order to maintain His love, He elects in eternity, justifies at the cross completely, regenerates in time, converts by the Gospel, Sanctified both immediate and continuous, then glorifies. I cannot see it any other way.

I now see the shortcomings of eternal justification after studying Ken and Steve Baloga. Scriptures allows for no other option than to believe we are justified, Christs righteousness is imputed at the cross when He said it is finished.

And Joe and Dave, these are my own words


Joe

And why are you so intent of adding an attachment? Why not simply post a LINK/URL to the site where you copied the material? Can it be THAT difficult to either type or copy/paste an Internet address?

Attachments are limited to a maximum size on this Board so as to preserve database server space. Of course, it may be that you aren't following the instructions for adding an attachment.

And as for the "piece of paper", might that have been an image? If so, you can't simply copy/paste those into any Board. You would need to use the UBBT Code or HTML image tags.

For if Abraham is justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness" (Rom. 4:2,3).

Abraham was justified WHEN he believed, not before.

Tom perhaps if you had read this by Spurgeon you could have save yourself some grief <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I was taught that Spurgeon considered John Gill a "hyper-Calvinist." Using my computer, I checked every reference that Spurgeon ever made in print about John Gill. There is not a single inference by Spurgeon that Gill was a hyper-Calvinist. One of the things that was always used to prove Gill's guilt was his view of "eternal justification." The following quote from Spurgeon is not meant to convince you of eternal justification. At this point I am not convinced that either Spurgeon or Gill was correct. I am concerned that some men who love their creeds more than Christ Himself are far too quick to stick an odious label on anyone who dares to challenge their understanding of truth. A man with an inflexible man-made creed cannot hear or honestly look at anyone that does not "fit into his mold." Spurgeon never quit learning even as he never moved an inch from the essentials of true sovereign grace. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bow.gif" alt="" />
JGR—Editor


But there are one or two acts of God which, while they certainly are decreed as much as other things, yet they bear such a special relation to God's predestination that it is rather difficult to say whether they were done in eternity or whether they were done in time. Election is one of those things which were done absolutely in eternity; all who were elect, were elect as much in eternity as they are in time. But you may say, "Does the like affirmation apply to adoption or justification?" My late eminent and now glorified predecessor, Dr. Gill, diligently studying these doctrines, said that adoption was the act of God in eternity, and that as all believers were elect in eternity, so beyond a doubt they were adopted in eternity. He went further than that to include the doctrine of justification and he said that inasmuch as Jesus Christ was before all worlds justified by his Father, and accepted by him as our representative, therefore all the elect must have been justified in Christ from before all worlds.
Now, I believe there is a great deal of truth in what he said, though there was a considerable outcry raised against him at the time he first uttered it. However, that being a high and mysterious point, we would have you accept the doctrine that all those who are saved at last were elect in eternity when the means as well the end were determined. With regard to adoption, I believe we were predestined hereunto in eternity, but I do think there are some points with regard to adoption which will not allow me to consider the act of adoption to have been completed in eternity. For instance, the positive translation of my soul from a state of nature into a state of grace is a part of adoption or at least it is an effect at it, and so close an effect that it really seems to be a part of adoption itself: I believe that this was designed, and in fact that it was virtually carried out in God's everlasting covenant; but I think that it was that actually then brought to pass in all its fullness.
So with regard to justification, I must hold, that in the moment when Jesus Christ paid my debts, my debts were cancelled—in the hour when he worked out for me a perfect righteousness it was imputed to me, and therefore I may as a believer say I was complete in Christ before I was born, accepted in Jesus, even as Levi was blessed in the loins of Abraham by Melchisedec; but I know likewise that justification is described in the Scriptures as passing upon me at the time I believe. "Being justified by faith," I am told "I have peace with God, through Jesus Christ." I think, therefore that adoption and justification, while they have a very great alliance with eternity, and were virtually done then, yet have both of them such a near relation to us in time, and such a bearing upon our own personal standing and character that they have also a part and parcel of themselves actually carried out and performed in time in the heart of every believer. I may be wrong in this exposition; it requires much more time to study this subject than I have been able yet to give to it, seeing that my years are not yet many; I shall no doubt by degrees come to the knowledge more fully of such high and mysterious points of gospel doctrine.
But nevertheless, while I find the majority of sound divines holding that the works of justification and adoption are due in our lives I see, on the other hand, in Scripture much to lead me to believe that both of them were done in eternity; and I think the fairest view of the case is, that while they were virtually done in eternity, yet both adoption and justification are actually passed upon us, in our proper persons, consciences, and experiences, in time,—so that both the Westminster confession and the idea of Dr. Gill can be proved to be Scriptural, and we may hold them both without any prejudice the one to the other.
From: C.H. Spurgeon, Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Vol. 7, Page 180, 81 <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scared.gif" alt="" />

"Gill is the Coryphaeus of hyper-Calvinism, but if his followers never went beyond their master, they would not go very far astray."

Charles H. Spurgeon, Commenting and Commentaries: Two Lectures Addressed to the students of The Pastors' College, Metropolitan Tabernacle, by C. H. Spurgeon, President. London: Passmore & Alabaster, 1890.

I hope that those that read your post can get past the inaccuracies of the author of that comment. I tried to find Spurgeons comment on Gill in it's entirety online but could not. The focus was to be on what Spurgeon wrote on eternal justification. Thanks for the correction. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Commenting and Commentaries

Enjoy