“Already” but “Not Yet,” Not Contrary to the Law of Non-Contradiction

It occurred to me that my response to a comment here would be instructive for readers of this blog, given recent postings here and here. The portion of my response, which I post here with some additional material, concerns a quote attributed to F. Scott Fitzgerald who wrote,

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function (The Crack-Up, 1936).

I regard Fitzgerald’s statement a classic example of denying the law of non-contradiction. Therefore, it hardly describes what I affirm concerning justification [eternal life, redemption, salvation, et al.], both already and not yet, in the blog entry to which the comment is attached. I do not "hold two opposed ideas in [my] mind at the same time" in any of what I posted in my blog entries linked above.

I firmly believe in the law of non-contradiction. I also believe that Jesus believes in the law of non-contradiction. I still believe that two antithetical propositions cannot both be true at the same time and in the same sense. I still believe that Y cannot be non-Y. This is crucial for understanding what I am affirming in my blog entry.

As I state in my entry here, Christ’s first advent sweeps forward two correlated acts of God from the Last Day—resurrection and judgment.

Therefore, all the biblical imageries that portray salvation in Christ, whether salvation, eternal life, resurrection, judgment, justification, et al., have their framework of already come but not yet consummated fully oriented to the two-phase coming of God’s Son. Thus, his coming with two distinguishable phases locates, determines, and defines the already and the not yet aspects of salvation, of eternal life, of resurrection, of judgment, of justification, et al.

Christ Jesus is come already; not yet come is Jesus Christ.

It is self-evident that in order for these two statements, arranged in a chiasm, to be truthful, the second affirmation cannot mean that Jesus Christ is “not yet come” in precisely the same way and in the same sense that the first statement asserts that he “is come already.” Such an assertion would be irrational. The Scriptures are not irrational but they do present Christ’s two-phase coming in riddle-like form that beckons understanding that requires belief.

Jesus presents such a riddle when he announces, “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live” (John 5:25).” Because, Jesus has “life in himself” and authoritatively claims, “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 5:26; 11:25), he issues his riddle: Resurrection is come already; not yet come is resurrection. It is a riddle, but it is not contradictory. It is not contradictory because Jesus' second affirmation does not mean that resurrection is not yet come in the same way and in the same sense that his first affirmation declares that resurrection is come already. Jesus' riddle does not violate the law of non-contradiction. Contradiction is only in the mind of the one who accuses the riddle of contradiction. The mind that imputes contradiction to Jesus' riddle fails both to believe and to understand.

Jesus’ riddle calls for belief. Understanding comes through faith. Yet, many Christians find it difficult to hold in proper balance this biblical tension that Christ’s two-phase coming gives to the salvation that he has already inaugurated but has not yet consummated. Instead of reconciling their beliefs and thinking to Scripture’s portrayal of salvation as a single integrated whole that Christ brings to his people in two aspects or phases—already and not yet—because the tension seems unbearable, many Evangelicals adjust Scripture’s portrayal to fit their shrunken conception of salvation. They tend to grasp hold of the already aspect as from grace and exaggerate it out of biblical proportion. And they tend to recast the not yet aspect as a non-integrated and non-essential phase of salvation but instead regard it as a bonus earned by only some believers who through their own achievement merit a reward.

TRSBU, Not Read or, Not Understood By Some Readers?

Particular Redemption, The New Perspective, and More with John Piper (and Bruce Ware!)
By: Dr. John Piper 3/1/2007

John Piper offers his thoughts on the New Perspective and other prominent topics today. He also briefly interacts with Bruce Ware on the extent of the atonement.

At 108:20 a question is asked of John Piper concerning my beliefs that justification is fundamentally eschatological in orientation. Given the response, one may reasonably wonder if he has read The Race Set Before Us. It seems quite reasonable, given Mark Dever's question, that he has likely not read The Race Set Before Us.

HT: JC

What do I mean when I say that justification is fundamentally eschatological? What do I mean when I say that justification fundamentally derives its character from the Last Day?

For answers, look here and here.

Briefly put, justification is fundamentally eschatological or fundamentally derives its character from the Last Day because justification is fundamentally and inherently forensic in nature. Justification has to do with judgment. Justification is God's verdict of "not guilty," "acquitted," and "declared righteous" from God's judgment seat in the Last Day. Must we wait until the Last Day to hear God's verdict? Of course not. Why not? This is because God's Son, has brought forward God's verdict of judgment from the Last Day into this Present Evil Age. This is the good news, that God has already rendered his Last Day judgment over everyone who is in Christ Jesus. Likewise, as justification is already issued to all who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 5:1), so also, condemnation, God's Last Day verdict over all who do not believe in Jesus Christ, is already spoken over them, too (John 3:18).

Think of the court room. There is no waiting for God's verdict. God's verdict is in. The verdict is in because God has issued his Last Day verdict of judment in Jesus Christ. This is what the gospel, the good news, is about; it is God's Last Day verdict announced already in the proclamation of Jesus Christ.

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God (John 3:17-21).

Does this subvert assurance? No! Absolutely not! Rather, belief in Jesus Christ is inseparable from and integral to assurance that when I stand to be judged in the Last Day, I shall stand acquitted. Already, I am confident and assured that I shall stand acquitted in the Last Day.

Responding to Questions Raised by Daniel Eads

Daniel Eads asks some important questions.

Hello, I am new to your website. I have read TRSBU (at least twice), and agree with much of it. I am soundly Baptist in my convictions, but as I am deciding my own understanding of salvation, I am trying to develop a response to Vatican II theology. While I know that your field of study is biblical theology, I wonder if you would be willing to answer a systematic theology question. In what ways would you distinguish your position on justification according to works from the Roman Catholic view of justification (through infused grace, one is given the enablement to do the works necessary to be deserving of a declaration of righteousness in the completely not-yet)? You would obviously disagree in many ways with their theology as a whole, but what are the most important ways that you would contrast your soteriology from its? I think that we would agree that the issue of merit is very serious here (your differentiation between “according to works” and “on the basis of works”). The question arises because much of Protestant reaction to the Church's views of salvation that I have read has been written by men that argue from one of the four positions that you critique in your book (particularly the loss-of-rewards view), and one of the key ways that they distinguish their position from the Roman Catholic’s is their retrospective view of salvation, rather than the prospective view that you advocate. A note of interest in light of this question is Zane Hodge's ministerial background (predominately Catholic evangelism) and its influence on the formulation of his theology.

Also, I am having trouble finding the passage in TRSBU right now but I remember specifically where you wrote that the warnings were “a vital means” to the salvation of our souls. Because of the indefinite article, it made me think that you may see other means to salvation (persecution, trials, or baptism?) that God uses to accomplish the perfection of his saints. If you could tie your response to this second comment back to the first question as well (the Church’s doctrine of the sacraments as the means of saving grace), that would be great. Thanks in advance for commenting.

As I begin to respond, I need to restate the question slightly. The initial question is--"In what ways would you distinguish your position on justification according to works from the Roman Catholic view of justification (through infused grace, one is given the enablement to do the works necessary to be deserving of a declaration of righteousness in the completely not-yet)?" Perhaps I have not adequately expressed my position in earlier entries. My earlier distinction between according to works and on the basis of works concerned judgment rather than justification. Given this, I trust that I do not wrongly assume that this is what was intended in the question. Thus, in lieu of responding to an inquiry about my position on justification according to works I will respond to an inquiry about my position on judgment according to works.

To be sure, justification and judgment are inseparably bound together, as I have argued elsewhere. Yet, as inseparable as they are, the two are distinguishable. Judgment concerns God's great assize, his scrutinizing discrimination of the secrets of human hearts (Romans 2:16). God's judgment will issue a verdict for each one of us, either condemnation or acquittal, reprobation or justification. As I understand Romans 2:6, God will judge each of us in accordance with our deeds. In my estimation, however, this does not mean that God will justify us according to our deeds. As I understand Paul's argument in Romans 2, it seems to me that the apostle is speaking of whom God will justify not of the basis of justification or even how we will be justified. Whom God will justify is at the core of what Paul is saying when he affirms, "For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but the doers of the law who will be justified" (Romans 2:13).

Now to return to the question about distinguishing my position from the Roman Catholic position. Given my comments above, I believe that the RC view of justification is misguided in that it confuses the biblical imagery of the courtroom with other biblical imageries. Indeed, there is such a thing as infused grace, but infused grace is not properly identified with forensic imagery of justification. Nowhere does the New Testament represent believers as deserving of God's final verdict of justification in the Last Day. On the contrary, Jesus teaches us to take the posture of undeserving servants who, when we obey, do what is commanded of us (cf. Luke 17:7-10).

I am grieved over Protestants who stand apart from the RC view by rejecting the future aspect of justification, as though to hold to the future aspect of justification implicates one as secretly embracing notions that we merit grace by our deeds. It is lamentable that too many Protestants have forged their formulations concerning justification from an anti-Roman Catholic hermeneutic that virtually nullifies a large number of biblical passages that compel us to acknowledge readily that justification is fundamentally eschatological in that justification fundamentally concerns God's Last Day judgment. See for example Matthew 12:36-37.

Your instincts are correct concerning our use of the indefinite article instead of talking about warnings and admonitions as the means of salvation. God employs numerous means to bring about our salvation. Persecutions, tribulations, trials, sufferings, the proclamation of the gospel, friendships, familial relationships, the Lord's Table, baptism, etc., etc. are all means that our God employs to bring us to salvation that is nearer now than when we first believed. Baptism is a means of God's grace as is the Lord's Table. By saying this, I most assuredly do not mean that baptism or the Lord's Table function ex opere operato, effectually conferring grace. To say that baptism and the Lord's Table are indispensable means of God's grace for us is not to say that baptism and the Lord's Table effectually confer God's grace. Unfortunately, much of Protestant theology makes the same mistake Roman Catholic theology makes in reasoning that if these are indispensable then they are effectual. Thus, lamentably, too many Protestants virtually denegrate baptism and the Lord's Table because they overreact against Roman Catholic theology.

Response to Jerry's Question on the Interplay between God's Sovereignty and Human Accountability

Jerry posed the following question in the comments feature.

I know this probably isn't a question that you would delight in answering, but it is one that I have been talking with the guys in my hall quite extensively as of late, and I was wondering if you would be gracious enough to give your opinion.

In chapter 8 of your book, "Running by Divine Appointment," you discuss the tension between the Biblical admonitions for human exertion and the certain hope we have in God's promise of election. You write, "The pronounced emphasis on human exertion and determination could easily lead us to the conclusion that finishing the race is our work. But we have already observed that the call to perseverance sandwiches the famous chapter of faith (Heb. 11).

Forgive my ignorance, but why does the Bible give calls for us to persevere in our faith? If God is sovereign, what is the purpose of the callings? How are we to explain the tension between God's work and our responsiblity?

Basically, this is my question, if God predestines some to salvation (for salvation is truly and thoroughly from him), it implies that he also predestines some to eternal condemnation. How is God not then the author of evil? He was the one who hardened Pharaoh, yet he still held him accountable and responsible for his actions. How do I understand God's sovereignty and human responsiblity?

Because the question is crucial and at the heart of the issues we address in The Race Set Before Us I want to respond here, as a regular blog entry, rather than conceal it in the comments feature.

The question you ask is the age-old question concerning the interplay between God's sovereignty and human accountability. In biblical and theological considerations, the issue, of course, emerges at numerous crucial points. As I have often said in conversations on this question, the truest measure of whether one believes in the sovereignty of God and in authetic human accountability is not one's belief in unconditional election and in the free offer of the gospel. The truer test is whether one believes in both the irrevocable promises of God to preserve his elect ones and God's unalterable and urgent warnings and admonitions to his elect ones that we must persevere to the end lest we perish. The reason it is the truer test is that it is immensely personal. It goes to the essence of our personal beliefs concerning our own salvation or perdition. If we persevere in loyalty to Jesus Christ to the end, we will be saved. If we lapse and fail to persevere in faithfulness to Christ Jesus, the end will be eternal destruction for us. This is the perpetual call of the gospel to us and upon us.

I need not doubt that God has declared me righteous in Christ Jesus in order to feel the full impact of the most urgent warnings that Scripture brings my way. I need not disbelieve that I am justified in Christ Jesus to feel fully the weight of warnings that I will perish eternally, if I abandon holiness and the way of obedience. God's warnings serve God's promises. Warnings nurture resolute belief in Jesus Christ as my only hope for salvation. The truthfulness of God's warnings stands firm. Anyone who fails to persevere in Christ Jesus will surely come into eternal destruction.

I need not doubt the truthfulness of God's urgent and strong warnings against eternal perishing in order that I might be confident that I am in Christ Jesus and that, as one in him, I will not perish. I need not disbelieve God's warnings that I will perish eternally, if I forsake Christ Jesus and pursue disobedience and ungodliness in order that I might know that I have eternal life in Christ Jesus. Urgent calls of the gospel bolster firm belief that apart from remaining in Christ Jesus I will perish eternally. The truthfulness of God's promise remains. Anyone who believes in Jesus Christ will irrevocably receive eternal life.

Essentially, your question is: If God preserves his elect ones safely to the end, then why does God warn his elect to be cautious lest they fail to persevere and thus perish? Briefly put, God warns his elect this way because it is God's way to preserve his chosen ones safely to the end. God's sovereignty does not subvert human accountability. Human accountability does not subvert God's sovereignty.

We see this at numerous points throughout Scripture. Consider the example of Pharaoh. You mention of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart to refuse to let God's people leave Egypt. Consider Exodus 4:21-23.

The LORD said to Moses, "When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go. Then say to Pharaoh, 'This is what the LORD says: Israel is my firstborn son, and I told you, "Let my son go, so he may worship me." But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son.'"

Observe that God specifically tells Moses, "When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do." Yet, the Lord also tells Moses, "But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go." Herein is the tension between divine sovereignty and human accountability. Heightening this tension, the Lord also says, "Then say to Pharaoh, 'This is what the LORD says: Israel is my firstborn son, and I told you, "Let my son go, so he may worship me." But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son.'"

Our discussion concerning Philippians 2:12-13, in The Race Set Before Us addresses the correlation of divine sovereignty and human responsibililty. The biblical evidence obligates us to acknowledge that we act because God acts, as John tells us in 1 John 4:19, "We love because he first loved us." Can we express the correlation more deeply, more fully, more exactly? Do we need to be able to do so? I do not know that we can or must. Do we fully comprehend? Nonetheless, we are obliged to believe it. We must believe in order that we might understand. The gospel, yes, even the Scriptures, oblige us to believe that we bring to completion our own salvation because God is at work in us that we will both desire and do his good pleasure (Philippians 2:12-13). Furthermore, the gospel, yes, even the Scriptures, oblige us to believe that we who are in Christ Jesus shall never perish (Romans 8:31-39). We must come to believe both without contradiction, because the two do not subvert or nullify one another. The gospel compels us to teach and to preach both without contrariety, because the two are entirely harmonious in God's ordering of his ways.

Nick's Question about Justification Now and Not Yet--Part 7

It has been awhile since I last posted an entry. I return to Nick's question and offer the following as an extensive reply to his question concerning the relationship between justification now and not yet.

What follows are forty theses that I first compiled more than twenty years ago as I began to work on what would eventually become The Race Set Before Us. Many, if not most, of the individual theses are fuller than they ought to be for public consumption. Keep in mind that I drafted the document initially to provide order for my own thoughts. I present it here with some editorial changes to make it more readable for others. I trust that it will be helpful and useful for all who read it.

I will need to return to this to restore italics, bold, etc. But for now, I will post the document as it is.

---

Forty Theses on Perseverance

1. Every human when born is by nature a sinner in rebellion against the God and Father of Jesus Christ and enters the world under God’s wrath and condemnation, apart from Jesus Christ (Rom 1:18).

2. No human can, by one’s own endeavors, do anything to escape God’s wrath, nor does anyone have a moral ability to do anything that might endear one to God and attract his favor (Rom 3:9-20).

3. There is one alone who has the authority to render a verdict of acquittal for sinners, and that is God, who justifies the sinner on the basis of Jesus Christ, the obedient one, who voluntarily gave himself up to die the death of the sinner and criminal in order that we might be released from God’s wrath. God’s righteousness, that is his loyalty to the promise he made long ago to Abraham, is revealed from heaven in Jesus Christ, the obedient one, who took upon himself the full measure of God’s wrath as he showed his justice so that at once he is both righteous and the one who declares sinners to be righteous, that is sinners who entrust themselves to Jesus Christ (Rom 3:21-26).

4. God’s verdict of justification (i.e., forgiveness of sins) is biblically conceived as God’s verdict that issues from his judgment of sin. Justification is essentially eschatological; it derives its meaning from the judgment that God has appointed for every human at the end of the age. Thus scripture repeatedly turns the believer to the coming Day of Judgment as it appeals to us to Christian obedience and faithfulness (Matt 12:36, 37; Rom 2:13; Gal 5:5; 2 Tim 4:7, 8).

5. The whole New Testament accents a focus upon the Day of Judgment as the day of redemption (Luke 21:28; Rom 8:23; Eph 1:14; 4:30), as the time of adoption as God’s children (Rom 8:23), as the point of entrance into eternal life (Mark 10:30; Luke 18:30; Rom 2:7; 6:22; Gal 6:8; Jude 21), as the day when salvation will be ours (Rom 13:11; Phil 2:12; 1 Thess 5:8, 9; Heb 1:14; 9:28; 1 Pet 1:5, 9; 2:2), as the giving of the crown which is life (James 1:12; Rev 2:10) and righteousness (2 Tim 4:8). A wide range of imageries direct us to focus fully upon the Last Day as the time that we will be found not guilty but be found in Christ Jesus (Phil 3:9; e.g., cf. the race imagery).

6. The scriptures focus our attention upon the fact that the salvation promised to us in the Last Day is “not yet” ours as they exhort us to persevere in holiness and righteousness, to hold fast to Jesus Christ. While this “not yet attained” (Phil 3:12) perspective upon our salvation is universally present in the New Testament, it is not the only perspective that we need to lay hold of. “Already” in the “present time” God has revealed his righteousness (Rom 3:21ff) and has begun his good work (Phil 1:6) by calling rebellious sinners through the gospel to believe “in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead” (Rom 4:24). It is to those who believe in the God who “gives life to the dead and calls things that are not as though they were” (4:17), in imitation of Abraham, that God credits righteousness (4:22f).

7. The Day of Judgment has not yet come, but rather God has graciously revealed his righteousness through the gospel (Rom 1:17), for the gospel announces that God’s obedient son, Jesus Christ, has already appeared in the flesh (Rom 1:3f) and has already borne God’s wrath for us as he became a sin offering (Rom 8:3). Thus, God has already rendered his judgment for sin in Christ at the cross. The cross of Christ brought to light God’s Day-of-Judgment verdict by executing judgment for sin in the present time in the sacrifice of his unique son. The eschatological gift of righteousness (Rom 5:17) is given in Christ Jesus (3:24).

8. For since God has revealed the verdict of his judgment in advance of the Last Day (John 3:19), whoever believes in Jesus Christ, the one who has taken upon himself God’s condemning sentence of wrath, that one already stands not condemned in advance of the Day of Judgment. However, everyone who refuses to acknowledge God’s verdict upon sinners as announced in his gospel but rather continues to do evil, that person already stands condemned in God’s courtroom (John 3:18ff). This is so because God has disclosed ahead of time that acquittal in the Day of Judgment is irrevocably bound up with the sinner’s acknowledgment of God’s judgment of sin in Jesus Christ upon the cross. One who refuses to acknowledge God’s verdict as it is revealed in Jesus Christ will never be raised to eternal life but remains under God’s wrath forever (John 3:36). To believe in Jesus as God’s condemned sinner and criminal who took God’s wrath in our place as sinners is to be assured already that no condemnation but only acquittal will be ours when we stand in God’s courtroom in the Last Day (John 3:18; Rom 5:1; 8:1).

9. Therefore, as far as the believer is concerned, the verdict of God’s judgment is already in; it is acquittal (Rom 5:1; 8:1, 30-34). Precisely because God in Christ has rendered his judgment for sin at the cross, the believer may, with resolute confidence, face the entire future, for since Christ Jesus died and was raised to life, there is no one in all earth and heaven who can successfully prosecute the believer in God’s court (8:33ff; cf. John 3;18; 5:24).

10. Not only has God’s judgment, already rendered in Christ at the cross, function to give believers such confidence now to face the Day of Judgment, but we are also assured that God who has already begun his good work of restoring us into his image will surely renew us to reflect fully the likeness of his Son, Jesus Christ (Rom 8:29f) who is the last Adam (1 Cor 15:45ff), the Creator of the “new man” (Col 3:10).

11. Furthermore, on the basis of God’s judgment already rendered in Christ at the cross, the scriptures not only assure us that God’s work of restoration will be invariably and fully realized (Rom 6:5), they also exhort us to become what we already are in Christ (6:11ff; 12:1ff; Col 2:6; 3:9ff; Eph 4:20ff; 1 John 3:1-2).

12. Yet, though divine judgment against sin is already rendered in Christ at the cross, the New Testament never relinquishes the Old Testament Judgment-Day-orientation concerning justification; justification remains the eschatological verdict of acquittal. Therefore, scripture exhorts us to fasten our gaze upon the Day of Judgment in hope that we shall receive the promised salvation (Rom 8:23-25; 13:11-14; 1 John 3:2-3), promised to those who persevere to the end (Matt 10:22; Heb 1:14-2:4; 3:14; 6:1-12; 10:19-31; 12:14-17).

13. This Judgment-Day-orientation is heard throughout the New Testament whenever the gospel of Jesus Christ calls people, whether believers or unbelievers, to heed its announcement of God’s gracious verdict in Christ. God’s voice in the gospel appeals to all with a range of exhortations and admonitions. Consider these: “strive to enter through the narrow door” (Luke 13:24); “overcome” the world (Rev 3:21); “hold fast the word” (1 Cor 15:2); “do not grow weary in doing good” (Gal 6:9); “persevere in doing good” (Rom 2:7); “remain in Christ” (John 15:5; 1 John 2:28f); “forgive others” (Matt 6:14). Every one of these admonitions has in view eternal life as the thing we are to gain as the outcome of obedience to the gospel.

14. This Judgment-Day-orientation is also the basis for threats or alarms addressed to all people, especially to all who profess to be Christians, whether baptized or not. The threat of judgment and of condemnation is universally present in the New Testament. We are repeatedly warned against neglecting to forgive others (Matt 6:15), indulging the flesh (Rom 8:13), being cut off from the covenant of promise (Rom 11:22), putting confidence in the flesh (Gal 5:4), disowning Christ (2 Tim 2:12), neglecting God’s great salvation (Heb 2:3), falling away from Christ (Heb 6:4-6), deliberately sinning (Heb 10:26ff), missing the grace of God through bitterness (Heb 12:15), subtracting from scripture (Rev 22:19), and many other similar warnings.

15. All these threats of the gospel, frequently expressed by conditional expressions (e.g., “if”), call upon all people indiscriminately, without separating people into the “elect” and “non-elect,” “genuine believers” and “spurious believers,” or “regenerate” and “unregenerate.” The gospel does not make any room for anyone to presume, “I am of the elect” or “I am a genuine believer.” We are all sinfully prone to disconnect God’s election from obedience (contra 1 Pet 1:1-2), as if salvation is ours apart from perseverance. The entire gospel cries out against the exercise of presumptive logic that, though not always verbalized, is nonetheless often thought:

    “I am a genuine believer! Therefore the warnings are not for me! The warnings of scripture must be addressed to those who merely profess to be Christians but are not genuine. Those people, alone, are in danger of eternal death, of being cut off from the promise, of being severed from Christ, of failure to escape punishment, of failing to be brought back to repentance, of facing God’s raging fire of wrath, of missing the grace of God, of having snatched from them a part in the tree of life and of the holy city. I am safe without the warnings and exhortations! The warnings are superfluous for me. I do not need to be warned against loss of eternal life because I already have it! I need no caution against missing the grace of God because it is already mine! It is wasted breath to warn me against losing my share in the tree of life and in the holy city because these are already mine!”
    
    This reasoning is fundamentally flawed. It presumes that since eternal life, salvation, and justification before God in the Last Day are already ours. It presumes upon God’s promise in the gospel that they all are irrevocably ours apart from heeding the conditions of the gospel as if deliverance from every snare and conquest over every obstacle that lies between the present and the Last Day is ours apart from obedient perseverance. Such a view collapses the not yet consummation of God’s salvation into the already realized aspect so that there is no need to persevere in obedience to Christ in order to attain the promised salvation. People who adopt such a view of things have fallen into the same presumptive error that Paul endeavors to correct when he rebukes the Corinthians: “So then, you who think you stand, watch out lest you fall!” (1 Cor 10:12).

16. The call of the gospel is always to persevere in faith and not to presume upon God’s grace. The exhortations that call us to endure in good deeds and the warnings that appeal to us lest we fall away from Christ function, not to cause us to doubt our justified standing before God in Christ, but rather to elicit steadfast obedience which is faith’s authentic behavior (cf. Rom 1:5; 6:16-17; 16:25-26). Thus, they establish by the Spirit bold confidence that we who obey the gospel are precisely the ones to whom the promise of justification unto eternal life is given.

17. The gospel’s call to persevere in obedience is in full agreement with the gospel’s promise of justification unto eternal life and salvation. The promise of righteousness before God is to those who, like Abraham, do not waver in their belief in the God who “gives life to the dead and calls into existence things that formerly did not exist” (4:17). It is to this kind of faith, persevering faith, that God credits righteousness (4:22f). The gospel promises eternal life “to those who by perseverance in doing good seek glory and honor and immortality” (Rom 2:7). The hope of salvation held out to us in the gospel becomes ours by persevering through tribulations, for perseverance yields character that is proven which assures us of the thing for which we hope (Rom 5:3-5), namely deliverance from God’s wrath that will come upon all who disobey the gospel (Rom 5:9; cf. 1 Thess 1:9-10; 2 Thess 1:6-8).

18. Therefore, as the gospel continues to appeal to us all throughout our earthly pilgrimages, it frames the call in keeping with the way the promise is cast. As the gospel’s promise is conditional, so the gospel expresses its exhortations and warnings conditionally. If the gospel promises—“Whoever overcomes will be clothed in white garments, and I will not erase that one’s name from the book of life, and I will confess this one’s name before my Father and before his angels” (Rev 3:5)—it is only proper that the gospel should use the conditions of the promise to exhort us to overcome and to warn us against slacking off and failing to attain the promised salvation. If the gospel promises that God will reward faithfulness to Christ unto the end with eternal life, it is entirely right that the gospel should exhort us, “Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown which is life” (Rev 2:10).

19. The gospel’s threats against failure lest we lose eternal life and its admonitions for us to persevere in order to attain salvation function to emphasize the inseparable connection between perseverance in holiness and attainment of salvation. The gospel inseparably links by obedient and persevering faith the attainment of what we have not yet received with what is already ours. According to the gospel, on the Day of Judgment there will be no admission into God’s kingdom for anyone who has failed to do “the heavenly Father’s will” (Matt 7:21). Furthermore, in this passage Jesus makes it abundantly clear that our election to be God’s children will be demonstrated at the judgment only by doing “the heavenly Father’s will.” For apart from works of obedience, Christ the Judge will disown those who presume that election theirs because of religious activity. He will disown them with the eternally resounding words, “I never knew you!” (Matt 7:23).




20. The scriptures provide examples of some who apparently had a good beginning in the gospel but failed to persevere (cf. John 6:70; 17:21 Tim 1:19; 2 Tim 2:16ff; 4:9f). This apparently good beginning is even described with the verb “believe” (cf. Luke 8:13f; John 2:23-25; 8:30ff). However, the scriptures indicate that those who fail to persevere in belief are not examples of God’s failure to preserve them unto the salvation to be revealed in the Last Day (1 Peter 1:5). Rather, they are examples of people who failed to believe and thus failed to be saved (cf. Heb 10:39). They are examples of people who loved this world more than they loved Christ. Just as Christ’s gospel calls for radical devotion to him that eclipses all other affections so that love for others looks like hatred (Mark 10:29-31; Luke 14:26ff), so anyone who begins to follow Christ but gives in to affections for things of the world is regarded as one who has failed to persevere. Scripture explains such failure of faith as a failure from the beginning. “They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us” (1 John 2:19).

21. We need to allow the various expressions of the gospel to function as scripture intends. Consider a passage such as 1 John 2:19. True as it is, we must not superimpose it upon exhortations and warnings to interpret them. What do I mean? To explain a warning, such as Hebrews 6:4-6, by appealing to the truth that people who fail to persevere were never really members of God’s people is to prejudice how one hears the warning. The tendency is to nullify the warning’s effect by treating it as if the thing warned against has already become a reality in the persons warned. That is precisely not the function of a warning. The function of a gospel warning is to keep those warned from doing the thing against which it warns.

22. Therefore, the conditional “if” warnings and admonitions indicate a cause and effect relationship. The cause is not the effective cause or ground of one’s salvation with God. Rather, the cause is the instrumental cause or the cause of means. Thus, all gospel warnings and exhortations (whether an explicit or implied “if”) express the inseparable connection of the end with the appointed means.

23. We who believe find that our justification and hope of standing justified in the Last Day is exclusively grounded in the obedience of Christ Jesus (Rom 5:19). At the same time, the gospel unequivocally affirms that our obedient faith, which was the condition called for initially by the gospel, is the necessary condition or means by which we shall finally be welcomed into God’s presence as justified and blameless (Col 1:21-23; Gal 5:1-5; Acts 13:43).

24. Therefore, Christian obedience and holiness is not only the evidence of salvation or of authentic faith; obedience or perseverance in holiness is also the means or pathway that the gospel requires us to follow in order that we might enter into eternal life and salvation in the day Christ finally calls us heavenward (Heb 12:14; Phil 3:9-14; John 5:28-29).

25. Obedience is not only the evidence that God has begun his good work of salvation in us (Phil 1:6) but it is also the means of salvation precisely because, according to the gospel, faith, repentance, obedience, and good works are inextricably bound together though distinguishable. So when the gospel calls upon us to do good deeds which are profitable (Titus 3:8; 1 Tim 6:17-19) or to forgive others (Matt 6:14-15) or to obey God’s commandments (Luke 18:19; 10:25-28), the gospel is commanding the activity of belief, the kind of belief that is required in order for anyone to be saved. What the gospel requires is obedience of faith (Rom 1:5; 16:26). All obedience is the obedience of faith so that only those who obey Christ receive his gift of eternal salvation (Heb 5:9).

26. How can we affirm at once that “good works” are both the evidence and means of salvation without irremediably confounding the gospel’s proclamation of salvation by “grace through faith”? Wherever scripture exhorts us to ponder the coming judgment as an appeal to obedience, the formula that is invariably used states that we shall be judged according to our deeds: “Surely you will reward each person according to what he has done” (Ps 62:12; cf. Eccl 12:14; Matt 16:27 John 5:22-30; Rom 2:6; 14:10-12; 2 Cor 5:10; Rev 22:12-13).

27. Nowhere does scripture say that God will judge us on the basis of our deeds; everywhere the formula is “according to our deeds” (kata ta erga autou, e.g., Rom 2:7). Were God to judge us on the basis of our deeds, every one of us would be condemned. But the gospel of Jesus Christ inseparably links together God’s one free act of acquitting sinners in both the already and not yet aspects. This linkage is drawn through the one obedient Man, Jesus Christ, for it is on the basis of his one obedient act that the many will be set in order as righteous (Rom 5:19). We who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of righteousness through this one man already have this eschatological hope of being constituted righteous (Rom 5:17, 19). This hope of being made righteous is ours only through the kind of faith that Abraham exercised (Rom 4:17-25). Our hope is grounded in the fact that we are already declared righteous (Rom 5:1; 8:1). We who shall be constituted righteous are already declared righteous and are in process of becoming what we are (Rom 6:2-6). God’s verdict of righteousness, which is already ours on the basis of Christ’s obedience and not our own, is our assurance that in the Day of Salvation God will thoroughly transform us from the sinners we became through Adam’s disobedience to fully righteous people through Christ’s obedience. God’s power, which is the gospel, will invariably and finally transform us fully into the image of his Son just as God has predestined us to be (Rom 8:29) so that Christ’s one act of obedience will finally reverse the effects of Adam’s one trespass just as the gospel announces to everyone who receives the gift of righteousness.

28. Consequently, without doubt, the basis upon which anyone can or will stand justified before God is Christ’s obedient act alone. Therefore, the gospel never announces that we shall be judged on the basis of our deeds but only according to our deeds. Paul’s gospel affirms two realities simultaneously. First, his gospel announces that we shall be declared righteous if we believe in the God of Abraham who raised Jesus Christ from the dead (Rom 4:22-24). Also, his gospel affirms that God will judge us according to our deeds (Rom 2:6) and will reward with eternal life only “those who by persevering in doing good, seek glory, honor, and immortality” (Rom 2:7). The reward is not earned, for the judgment rendered will not be grounded upon those deeds but upon one deed alone, namely Christ’s obedience. Rather, the judgment is rendered according to or in keeping with the deeds that the gospel requires and enables. So, God’s judgment in the Last Day is a judgment in keeping with our deeds precisely because his judgment will expose us for what we really are, obedient slaves of righteousness (Rom 6:16-18). We who are already justified find that our faith is already obedient (Rom 1:5; 6:16-17; 16:25-27), and we shall find that we are the ones who will pass through the judgment according to deeds and will be revealed to be God’s children (Rom 8:12-21), made in the likeness of our elder brother—Jesus Christ, glorified and made righteous (Rom 8:29-30; 5:19). In the day that has not yet come when God judges all humans, God will spare no one from his scrutinizing eye that looks for the thing that his powerful gospel has already begun. Only those who do the truth and come into the light already will, in the day, that has not yet come, be exposed by the same light to be the ones whose deeds have been done by God (John 3:21).

29. The obedience of faith we are describing, which is necessary for justification in God’s heavenly courtroom, is not already a perfect obedience, for we all sin daily (Phil 3:12ff). Instead, it describes our basic life-orientation, so that our change of character is evident, though less than perfect. The imperfection of us as believers in this present age stands under the already but not yet eschatology of the New Testament. We believers already are cleansed, we already stand justified (1 Cor 6:11), but our salvation is not yet perfected or consummated and will not be until the Day of Salvation which is nearer now than when we first believed (Rom 13:11). Thus, we most certainly agree with Paul that we do not now nor will we ever in this present life consider ourselves to have already laid hold of perfection (Phil 3:12-13). We are not saying that anyone can or must live a sinless life or perfectly submit to the lordship of Christ in order to be saved. We are saying that the change of character, brought about by the gospel that is God’s power for salvation, is truly observable, significant, substantial, and necessary, but not perfect.

30. Because faith that is neither obedient nor active is dead (James 2:17), and because repentance is necessary to receive God’s pardon for sin (i.e., justification), and because remaining in Christ by keeping his commandments (John 15:5, 10; 1 John 3:12, 24) are essential evidences that we are already God’s children (Rom 8:12-17; 1 John 3:1-2) and are necessary conditions to inherit the adoption that is not yet ours (Rom 8:18-25; 1 John 3:2-3), we should preach these things urgently to all in order that all may lay hold of God’s salvation in Jesus Christ.

31. Scriptures never disparage good works. Instead, the gospel calls us to acknowledge the following: that good works are profitable for us (Titus 3:8), that being rich in good deeds is inseparably linked with laying hold of eternal life (1 Tim 6:18-19), that those who do good deeds will be rewarded with eternal life (Rom 2:7), and that only those who have done good deeds will be resurrected to eternal life in the Last Day (John 5:28-29).

32. Never does scripture confuse “good works” with the kind of works that are contemptible to God (e.g., Eph 2:9; Rom 3:28; Gal 2:16; Titus 3:5). Rather remarkably, in precisely the same contexts where certain kinds of works are rejected, “good works” are praised (see esp. Eph 2:10; Titus 3:8). God is just, for he takes note of our good deeds and works of love (Heb 6:10) and will grant to us our inheritance in due time (Heb 6:11-12) in keeping with these deeds.

33. “Good works” are precisely what God in Christ has brought forth in us, his “new creation.” God prepared our good deeds beforehand in order that they should be our pattern of behavior (Eph 2:10). We do good works from true faith (1 Thess 1:3). We accomplish good works only by the power of the residing Holy Spirit (Rom 8:9; Gal 5:22-23).

34. We who do the “good works,” that God appointed for us, find no place for boasting as if we have produced them from our own strength or resources. The gospel plainly tells us that whatever good we do arises not from ourselves but from God who is at work in us. Both the desire to do good and the ability to accomplish the good we desire comes from God (Phil 2:13). Now this is not a disincentive to persevere but rather a strong incentive, for it is the basis upon which we are exhorted to “bring to an accomplishment our own salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil 2:12). Because our God is at work in us both at the level of desires and actions we who practice the truth are glad to come into the light of God’s verdict that it might be fully disclosed to all that our deeds have been done by God (John 3:21). With Paul, while we do labor in the deeds commanded by the gospel, we are pleased to affirm that all our labors that are called “good” originate not from us but from the “grace of God which is with us” (1 Cor 15:10). We openly confess our complete impotence to do any good out of our own strength and we candidly affirm with gratitude to our God: “all that we have accomplished you have done for us” (Isa 26:12). Though we may express surprise (Matt 25:37-39) in the Day of Judgment when the King will praise us for deeds of love done toward him, we will not begin to boast then. For after we have completed everything that we have been commanded to do, we will humbly say, “We are unworthy servants; we have only done our duty” (Luke 17:10).

35. The inseparable linkage of faith and obedience and of being declared righteous and being made righteous is spanned by the gospel’s promise and by its incessant calls framed as warnings and exhortations. The gospel that promises salvation to all who obey its urgent call also marks out the pathway that will lead us from where we are already to the place of salvation to which we have not yet arrived. This, then, is the function of the many warnings and exhortations. Warnings function as signs that caution against the multitude of dangers that lie on every hand. Admonitions function as signs that point us to the right path as they exhort us to press forward in order that we may enter into God’s kingdom and inherit the life that has been promised (cf. Heb 6:12).

36. The gospel that warns and exhorts is the same gospel that promises eternal life and provides the Spirit for us who enables us to obey the call of the gospel with all its appeals (Rom 8:1-12). The eternal life, for which we strive, and the promised Spirit, for whose fullness we eagerly hope, are already ours. Therefore, we are not left helpless to obey the gospel, but rather we obey the gospel only because it is the Spirit of God that already enlivens our mortal bodies with heavenly life; it is the same Spirit who enlivened Christ in his resurrection (Rom 8:11). It is only by this enlivening Spirit that we, then, can understand and heed the paradoxical call of the gospel: “if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live” (Rom 8:13).

37. It is this same Spirit, who in conjunction with enabling us to obey, also testifies with our spirits that we are God’s children (Rom 8:15-16). The Spirit of sonship does this only for those he leads in the path of righteousness. Spirit-given assurance is not restricted to what we already are (God’s children) but it also encompasses what is not yet ours (our inheritance). Thus, we are assured that we are not only on the right pathway but that we who have already been declared righteous will not be condemned by God at the close of this journey (Rom 8:31ff).

38. The gospel assures us that we belong to God’s elect only as we adorn our faith with the Christian virtues that God’s Spirit is pleased to work in us (2 Pet 1:5-11). We assure our own hearts that we are God’s elect children only as we exercise obedient faith. Assurance that we are truly God’s children does not come to us by logical deduction; it is ours only as we walk the pathway of obedient faith. Assurance is not the happiness to be found at the end of the course; it is our divinely implanted joy that accompanies us in the journey itself.

39. God promises that he will finish the good work he started (Phil 1:6). God also promises that nothing can separate us from Christ’s love (Rom 8:35-39), that all whom he calls and justifies will be glorified (Rom 8:30), that God will keep us from apostasy (Jude 24-25), that those who have eternal life will never perish or be snatched from the Father’s hand (John 10:28-30), that all those who are given to the Father by the Son will be raised on the Last Day (John 6:40), that the one who called us will establish us until the end so that we will be blameless in the day of Christ (1 Cor 1:8), and will sanctify us completely on the day of redemption (1 Thess 5:24). All these promises give us believers great assurance because we know that just as we did not initiate our salvation, neither can we sustain it apart from God’s grace. These promises assure us that God will complete what he started. They protect us from a paralyzing fear that looks within and sees no resources to persevere to the end. The gospel promises that God will grant the grace necessary to finish what he began. None of these promises, however, rules out the threats and warnings or exhortations and admonitions in the scriptures. Indeed, the gospel’s threats and warnings and the gospel’s admonitions and exhortations are means that God uses to see to it that the promise of perseverance will be realized in us.

40. Christian assurance of salvation is not retrospective; it is prospective. It is not introspective; it is Christ-focused. The assurance that the gospel holds out to us does not focus our attention upon the beginning of salvation but upon its consummation. Furthermore, the assurance that the gospel calls us to embrace does not look within ourselves but away to Christ who is the prize to be won (Phil 3:8). Though the gospel does frequently appeal to past perseverance as reason for continued faithfulness to the end (e.g., “We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure” [Heb 6:11]), assurance concerning the past is now passed. The kind of assurance the gospel gives is never content either with the past or with what we already are. Rather, the assurance that the gospel provides for us is of the essence of faith, for this assurance is “being sure of what we hope for” (Heb 11:1), namely confidence that we shall be what we are not yet –fully like Jesus Christ (1 John 3:2-3). This assurance is born out of faith that acknowledges that God “rewards those who earnestly seek him” (Heb 11:6).

This is the perspective that I believe the apostle Paul has in mind when he appeals to the Philippian believers with these words:

“Not that I have already arrived or have already been perfected, but I pursue it, if I also may lay hold of that for which I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus. Brothers, I do not yet regard myself as having laid hold of it. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I pursue the goal to attain the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. As many as are perfect, let us think like this. And if someone thinks differently, God will reveal this understanding to you also. Only let us live up to what we have already attained” (Philippians 3:12-16).

Nick's Question about Justification Now and Not Yet--Part 6

Technically, this is not a direct response to Nick's question. It is, however, in connection with his question.

You may find the following comment exchange here.

My comments in this blog entry addressed comments from the comments segment of Whiling Away the Hours here. I offer the following exchange because the distinctions made in this discussion are crucial to the discussion I am engaging in my responses to Nick's question.

Stephen posted the following response concerning my comments in "An Exercise for My Readers."

Barb - I guess I'm flattered that a college professor would take the time to parse my words. However, what is our education system coming to when college professors assign comments made by bloggers to their students? :-)

One of the most important tasks in understanding meaning is to look at context. It doesn't appear that your friend, Mr. Caneday, has actually read the entire discussion. If he had, he would have understood what I meant. To clarify, I meant that works are never, never -- to use the well chosen words from the OPC Report On Justification -- "a part of what faith itself is." If your friend looks up the word "meld" in the dictionary, my point will become more clear to him, though I gather from the content of his web site that he still won't agree with it.

By Stephen, at 8/15/2006 11:28 PM

Following is my response to Stephen.

Stephen,

I understand what meld means. I offered no quibble with your use of meld. That was not and is not the point that I addressed.

Instead, I addressed your first two sentences, where your error is. I said, The three-fold fallacy occurs in the first two statements. The two statements contradict one another.

Here is your statement: Faith is inseparable, but distinct, from its fruits. Works are never, never part of faith. We must avoid language that in any way melds them together.

If faith and faith's fruits are inseparable but distinguishable, then the two cannot at the same time be separable, which is what you are saying when you state, Works are never, never part of faith.

If Works are never part of faith but at the same time works are the fruit of faith, then you have contradicted your earlier statement. Have you not? You cannot have it both ways at the same time. Can you?

What is my point? It is simply this. You overstate your case when you say, Works are never, never part of faith.

It seems to me that we need to be very careful how we express the relationship between faith and works, lest we contradict Scripture. This is my point.

Indeed, faith is not faith's fruits. James distinguishes faith from works, but he does not allow us to say that they are separable. Is this not James's burden in 2:14-26? It seems to me that any reasonable understanding of your statement, "works never, never are part of faith" poses a rather large problem in view of James's argument. James's expressions surely indicate that faith and works are organically inseparable in such a manner that to use any language that separates the two does injury to both. To say that the two are organically inseparable is not to say that works is simply another designation for faith, or vice versa. They are distinguishable, and in this sense, then, the two are not merged into one indistinguishable unit. Keep in mind James's imagery of the body and the spirit and his use of words such as, "the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead."

Grammar matters, especially in doing theology.

By A. B. Caneday, at 8/19/2006 12:36 PM

Nick's Question about Justification Now and Not Yet--Part 5

I return to Nick's question, after a brief interlude. As I return, I want to begin by focusing upon point 8 from Part 4, in response to Nick's question. Here is point 8.

Since the establishment of our justification before God is in Christ Jesus alone and because we can do absolutely nothing to establish or add to our justification before God, Jesus, Paul, James and other preachers of the gospel are not timid to correlate our justification before God with our belief in Jesus Christ (Galatians 2:16), with our words (Matthew 12:36-37), with our being "doers" (Romans 2:13), with our deeds (James 2:24).

Consider the following, which is from Matthew Henry's "A Scripture Catechism in the Method of the Assembly's." The Westminster Shorter Catechism inquires and responds:

Q. 33. What is justification?

A. Justification is an act of God's free grace, wherein he pardons all our sins and accepts us as righteous in his sight, only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by faith alone.

To the question and answer, Matthew Henry offers eight expansions. Here is his eighth.

Is justifying faith a working faith Yes: for by works is faith made perfect, Jam. 2:22. And will that faith justify us which does not produce good works? No: for by works a man is justified, and not by faith only, Jam. 2:24. Is faith then dead without good works? Yes: for as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also, Jam. 2:26. And are good works dead without faith? Yes: for without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb. 11:6. Must they both act together then? Yes: for that which avails is faith, which works by love, Gal. 5:6. Do we then make void the law through faith? No: God forbid, yea, we establish the law, Rom. 3:31. Is our faith our own? No: it is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God, Eph. 2:8. Are our good works our own? No: for thou also hast wrought all our works in us, Isa. 26:12. Is any room left for boasting then? No: it is excluded by the law of faith, Rom. 3:27. Must God therefore have all the glory? Yes: for by the grace of God I am what I am, 1 Cor. 15:10.

I offer this as a first step toward developing, understanding, and explaining my own eighth point. We need to be accurate in how we speak of the relationship between faith and works. By works, I do not mean "dead works," of course, nor "works of the Law."

On Matthew Henry's "A Scripture Catechism," a hat tip to Barb.

Nick's Question about Justification Now and Not Yet--Part 4

This entry is the most crucial one that I have posted in response to Nick's question. It is, therefore, incumbant upon all who read to do so carefully, thoughtfully, and prayerfully. I am eager to be corrected biblically, if I have wandered afield in any regard. But, please understand, I expect any correction offered to be done in a manner commensurate with the gospel's call for Christian grace and to be done with demonstrable biblical evidence.

From my reading and conversations concerning justification, it seems to me that the principal root of most squabbles over justification, among those who care enough about the subject even to show passion, is the relationship between the two aspects of justification that many of us represent as already but not yet.

It is this relationship between the now and the not yet, though he does not express the matter this way, that John Piper endeavors to understand and to explain in the document, "What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism." In that document he says,

Nevertheless, we must also own up to the fact that our final salvation is made contingent upon the subsequent obedience which comes from faith. The way these two truths fit together is that we are justified on the basis of our first act of faith because God sees in it (like he can see the tree in an acorn) the embryo of a life of faith. This is why those who do not lead a life of faith with its inevitable obedience simply bear witness to the fact that their first act of faith was not genuine. . . .

The way we put together these crucial threads of Biblical truth is by saying that we are indeed justified on the basis of our first act of faith but not without reference to all the subsequent acts of faith which give rise to the obedience that God demands.

It is the relationship between the now and the not yet of justification that N. T. Wright also attempts to explain in his brief glossary entry that I cited in a previous posting:

Justification: God's declaration, from his position as judge of all the world, that someone is in the right, despite universal sin. This declaration will be made on the last day on the basis of an entire life (Romans 2:1-16), but is brought forward into the present on the basis of Jesus' achievement, because sin has been dealt with through the cross (Romans 3:21-4:25); the means of this present justification is simply faith. This means particularly, that Jews and Gentiles alike are full members of the family promised by God to Abraham (Galatians 3; Romans 4) (Mark for Everyone, pg. 233).

After devoting many years of consideration to the issue, long before I read anything that Tom Wright had written other than whatever portion he wrote of The Grace of God in the Gospel (1972), including my having written numerous pages on the subject that have never been read by anyone else, it seems to me that the way forward is along the lines similar to those that N. T. Wright has followed. As I have carefully and prayerfully examined the Scriptures, and particularly those portions that the apostle Paul wrote, the following seem to be evident propositions to which the biblical evidence compels me. There is a logical order to the propositions in my own way of thinking. Some may quibble about the order. Others may quibble with the way I express these propositions. Still others may quarrel with everything I say about the matter.

1. Justification is bound up with justice. Hence, justification, God's declaring sinners righteous, is integral to but not equated with Paul's expression--"the righteousness of God" (dikaiosunē theou; Romans 1:17; etc.). The expression "the righteousness of God" should be understood as "God's righteousness." As such, God's righteousness is at stake, and the gospel vindicates God, for in the gospel God is shown to be righteous in that he has kept his promises to the patriarchs (Romans 15:7ff) and that he remains righteous when he declares sinners righteous because his wrath has been satisfied in Jesus (Romans 3:23-26). Thus, the gospel's principal proclamation is about God's character not about setting humans right with God. This is why Paul says, "In the gospel God's righteousness is revealed" (Romans 1:17). God's character is vindicated in the gospel, and thus, the gospel is also good news for us because Christ Jesus does not only reveal that God is just but also that God is just to justify sinners.
   

2. Justification is one biblical imagery that is inextricably united with other biblical imageries, all of which represent their distinctive facets of the salvation God accomplishes in his Son, Jesus Christ.
   

3. Justification is fundamentally forensic or legal in nature, which is to say that justification is a biblical imagery that represents God's saving accomplishment in Christ Jesus in terms of the sentencing phase of the courtroom.
   

4. Justification derives its forensic or legal quality from the Last Day, the Day of Judgment.
   

5. Justification is fundamentally eschatological, which is to say that justification is God's Last Day verdict over everyone who is in Christ Jesus.
   

6. Justification, though fundamentally having to do with the Last Day, the Day of Judgment, is God's Last Day verdict brought forward in time by virtue of his Son's first advent and his own bearing of God's Last Day wrath upon the cross on behalf of all for whom he died.
   

7. Justification is God's Last Day gift to us now in Christ (Romans 5:12-19). By faith we lay hold of God's Last Day verdict in Christ now, for we trust God's revelation in Christ concerning his actions for us with reference to his own justness.
   

8. Since the establishment of our justification before God is in Christ Jesus alone and because we can do absolutely nothing to establish or add to our justification before God, Jesus, Paul, James and other preachers of the gospel are not timid to correlate our justification before God with our belief in Jesus Christ (Galatians 2:16), with our words (Matthew 12:36-37), with our being "doers" (Romans 2:13), with our deeds (James 2:24).

These are crucial propositions, I believe, that we need to grapple with in order to formulate a biblically acceptable doctrine of justification. These, I do not think, exhaust all that we need to ponder as we endeavor to put together into a thoughtful and integrated whole the elements of the biblical doctrine of justification. Nevertheless, I believe we have to begin, at least with these propositions.

I realize that in posting this, some will leap to preposterous conclusions. I learned long ago that false accusations are unavoidable, for there are always individuals who, because they are incapable of understanding complex ideas for any number of reasons, will not hold back but will immediately retaliate with wild accusations. May God give patience to us all as we struggle to articulate Scripturally sound expressions that apprehend the fullness and breadth and vastness of the precious teachings of the apostles and of Jesus concerning our justification before almighty God in Christ Jesus and on no other basis than what Christ has done on our behalf but first on behalf of God's own character.

I post this entry, then, with fear and trepidation, not on account of humans but on account of God.

Nick's Question about Justification Now and Not Yet--Part 3

The following is lifted from The Race Set Before Us, 161-162, where Tom and I provide an overview of the apostle Paul's theology of salvation.

Always orienting his view of salvation eschatologically, that is toward the last day, Paul announces in his gospel that God has revealed his righteous judgment in the “present time” (Rom 3:21-26). God has already begun his good work in us (Phil 1:6), by calling us to believe “in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead” (Rom 4:24). God has brought the verdict of the Day of judgment forward, into the midst of redemptive history, for God has graciously revealed his righteousness through the gospel (Rom 1:17), which announces that God’s obedient son, Jesus Christ (Rom 5:19), has already appeared in the flesh (Rom 1:3f) and has already borne God’s wrath for us by becoming a sin offering on our behalf (Rom 8:3). Because God condemned his own Son in our place, he has already rendered his judgment, vindicating his own righteousness, so that he now justifies all who embrace Jesus Christ (Rom 3:26). Thus, God already gives the eschatological gift of righteousness in advance of the Day of judgment (Rom 5:17). Therefore, as far as the believer is concerned, the verdict of God’s judgment is already in, though the Day of judgment has not yet arrived. The verdict is acquittal (Rom 5:1; 8:1). This verdict is irrevocable for all whom God has called to believe (Rom 8:30), for because Christ Jesus died and was raised and now intercedes for us, God’s verdict is final; God will not hear any further charges against his chosen ones, for his verdict stands (Rom 8:34).

True as it is that Paul’s gospel announces that God’s judgment is already rendered in Christ at the cross, the apostle never relinquishes the Old Testament eschatological orientation toward the coming Day of judgment, for God’s Son has come and he will appear again to call everyone to judgment (Acts 17:31). For Paul, justification remains fundamentally the eschatological verdict of acquittal. For while God has already revealed his righteousness by subjecting his own Son to his wrath (Rom 3:25), God discloses his final justice at the present time only in the gospel which explains what God did in Jesus Christ on that dark and dreadful day of his death to save sinners. For while God presently reveals his wrath against human unrighteousness “from heaven” (Rom 1:18), that is from a distance and not as he will in the last day, he restrains his wrath in the present time as he patiently abides those who spurn his kindness. Those who snub God’s kindness accumulate wrath against them in preparation for the day of God’s wrath when he will reveal his righteous judgment (Rom 2:5; cf. 12:14-21) and will execute judgment in keeping with the secrets now concealed in human hearts (Rom 2:16).

We who believe in Jesus Christ receive God’s righteous verdict of forgiveness before the Day of judgment arrives, but not publicly as we will in the Day of judgment when his justice and wrath will come upon all who disobey the gospel and will also give us relief from our present afflictions (2 Thess 1:5-10). Though it is true that God has summoned us all to give account of ourselves (Rom 14:12), the Day of judgment has not yet arrived in which the eternal Judge will announce his verdict in keeping with our deeds, until that day, we now stand justified in God’s courtroom by faith only. By his Spirit whom he gives to all who believe, already God secretly speaks acquittal, life, peace, reconciliation, and adoption (Rom 5:1-11; 8:1-17). Therefore, Paul admonishes us who believe to fasten our gaze upon the Day of judgment in hope that we shall receive the promised salvation (Rom 2:6-10; 8:23-25; 13:11-14). For the Day of judgment is the day of salvation for all who believe. It is the day of redemption (Rom 8:23; Eph 1:14; 4:30). It is when our adoption as God’s children will be complete (Rom 8:23). It is the point of entrance into eternal life (Rom 2:7; 6:22; Gal 6:8). It is the day of salvation that has drawn closer than when we initially believed (Rom 13:11), the day when salvation will be ours (Phil 2:12; 1 Thess 5:8, 9) and when God will reveal our justification which we now have secretly by faith as he crowns us with justification, openly and publicly (2 Tim 4:8). For, while we already have received God’s justifying verdict by faith, by faith we yet await through the Spirit the hope of receiving this same verdict in that day (Gal 5:5).

The above, I believe, is an accurate summarization of an integrated biblical theology of Paul's teachings concerning salvation, featuring justification. I believe that it represents what we ought to be preaching. I also beleive that it is the kind of theology that needs to embraced by systematic theologians. It also seems to me that it represents something close to the kind of theological expression or formulation that is necessary to correct the warring factions that rally around forceful speaking personalities, such as, N. T. Wright and John Piper.

Nick's Question about Justification Now and Not Yet--Part 2

As I progress in my response to Nick's question, I believe that it will be helpful to visit a portion of The Race Set Before Us where Tom and I discuss Romans 2, not exhaustively but nonetheless pertinently. Find the following segment on pages 165-167. I trust that it will edge us toward an integrated and systematic theology of justification that is in accord with Scripture.

Paul solemnly avows that when God judges, he will reward everyone according to their deeds.

To those who by persevering in a good work seek glory and honor and incorruptibility, he will give eternal life. But upon those who act out of selfish ambition and who disobey the truth and instead submit to unrighteousness, he will inflict wrath and anger. There will be tribulation and distress for every person who does what is evil, both the Jew first and also the Greek, but there will be glory and honor and peace to everyone who accomplishes what is good, both to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God (Rom 2:7-11).

Using two sets of designations–“eternal life” and “glory and honor and peace”–Paul affirms twice in this passage that God will reward perseverance in good deeds with “salvation.” This causes no small dilemma for interpreters who want to avoid the notion that the apostle contradicts his own clear statement that “no flesh will be justified by the works of the law” (Rom 3:20). However, the dilemma is in the eye of the reader, for Paul plainly affirms that the principle of God’s impartial judgment is integral to his gospel, for he speaks of “the day when, according to my gospel, God shall judge the secrets of humans, through Christ Jesus” (Rom 2:16). So, “judgment according to one’s deeds” is not alien to his gospel but an essential element of it. Paul echoes the principle of Ezekiel 18, for both the apostle and the prophet insist that God is an impartial judge who will render his judgment in keeping with one’s deeds. Paul confronts the same problem Ezekiel faced: Israelites who possess the Law but fail to obey the Law. This is what Paul denounces in Romans 2. But in the midst of his prosecution of disobedient possessors of the Law, he reaffirms God’s thoroughly impartial principle of justice that holds out hope for all who do the things the Law requires, because “not the hearers of the Law are righteous before God, but the doers of the Law shall be declared righteous” (Rom 2:13). This is not a fictional offer that no one attains, nor is this salvation based upon one’s own works. Though it is true that he speaks of judgment and justification, here Paul is not speaking of the legal basis or ground of justification, for the basis is the obedience of Christ alone (Rom 5:12-19). Rather, he speaks of the kind of person whom God will justify in the Day of Judgment. It is the obedient, not the disobedient person. It is the doers of the Law, not the possessors of the Law. Who are these “doers of the Law”? At the close of chapter two Paul explains their identity. They are people who, though they may not even have the Law, do the things the Law requires. They are ones who, though perhaps not circumcised in the flesh, have hearts circumcised by the Spirit of God. Therefore, Paul succinctly summarizes his argument of Romans 2 by reiterating the principle of his gospel that the true Jew is not one who possesses the Law and who is circumcised in the flesh; but the true Jew is one who keeps the requirements of the Law from a heart circumcised by the Spirit. This person “will receive praise from God,” which is another way of saying “will be justified” (Rom 2:13) or “will be reckoned as circumcision” (Rom 2:26).

Therefore, since he indicts unfaithful Israelites for failing to keep the Law which they possess by privilege from God, and since Paul orients his discussion to the eschatological Day of Judgment, his primary concern is to answer one question: “Who will be justified?” Like the prophet in Ezekiel 18:21-23, the apostle Paul answers that one who will be justified in the heavenly courtroom of God is the person who does what God requires. The promise of eternal life is conditional, but the condition must not be confused with the basis of one’s right standing before God. This is because Paul does not confuse the two. He makes it clear that God’s righteous judgment laid his wrath upon Christ Jesus in order that God might be just when he justifies all who belong to Jesus Christ (Rom 3:21-26). So, Paul does not answer the question “On what basis will one be justified?” until Romans 3:21ff. In Romans 2 Paul makes one thing clear: God’s promise of salvation is conditional. On the Day of Judgment God will award eternal life to those who persevere in good works (Rom 2:7, 10), because God does not justify hearers of the Law but doers of the Law (Rom 2:13). Praise from God belongs to all who keep the requirements of the Law, to all who obey from hearts circumcised by the Spirit (Rom 2:26, 29).

Nick's Question about Justification Now and Not Yet--Part 1

Shortly after I began this blog, Nick posed a question. He inquired:

The relationship between justification by faith alone (especially how the death and resurrection of Christ is the sole objective ground of our standing with God) and a future final judgment according to works. I know the already-not yet is huge here, but how it actually works is obviously a major issue today, and most scholars seem to shy away from explaining how the two fit together for the biblical writers.

Now that I am beginning to emerge from under a pile of many tasks, I believe that it is timely for me to take up Nick's question. I begin by posting the following note duplicated on another of my blogs. I trust that it is self-explanatory.

In John Piper's interesting and full report on his five month writing sabbatical at Tyndale House in Cambridge, England, he mentions two books that he wrote during the sabbatical. The second has stirred some discussion here and here.

The other book is a response to N. T. Wright on the doctrine of justification. I have no immediate plan to publish it until I get the feedback from critical readers. My motivation in writing it is that I think his understanding of Paul is wrong and his view of justification is harmful to the church and to the human soul. Few things are more precious than the truth of justification by faith alone because of Christ alone. As a shepherd of a flock of God’s blood-bought church, I feel responsible to lead the sheep to life-giving pastures. That is not what the sheep find in Wright’s view of Paul on justification. He is an eloquent and influential writer and is, I believe, misleading many people on the doctrine of justification. I will keep you posted on what becomes of this manuscript.

N. T. Wright has written much on the subject. Look for essays and sermons here. Regrettably, misunderstanding exists on both side of the conflict. I make no pretense that what I have to say, here, will settle the matter. In my estimation both sides need to correct and to qualify crucial aspects of how they formulate their comments on justification.

Here is N. T. Wright's glossary entry for "justification" in a popular commentary.

Justification: God's declaration, from his position as judge of all the world, that someone is in the right, despite universal sin. This declaration will be made on the last day on the basis of an entire life (Romans 2:1-16), but is brought forward into the present on the basis of Jesus' achievement, because sin has been dealt with through the cross (Romans 3:21-4:25); the means of this present justification is simply faith. This means particularly, that Jews and Gentiles alike are full members of the family promised by God to Abraham (Galatians 3; Romans 4) (Mark for Everyone pg. 233).

It seems to me that N. T. Wright opens himself up to legitimate criticism when he says of justification that "This declaration will be made on the last day on the basis of an entire life. . . ." This is problematic in one crucial regard. Wright uses an expression that will only offend the ears and eyes of anyone already suspicious of him. Furthermore, his expression confounds biblical language. His offending expression is on the basis of an entire life. To say that God's declaration of justificaiton will be made on the last day on the basis of an entire life is quite problematic. Here is the reason that Wright's critics charge that he teaches justification on the basis of deeds, a kind of legalism.

Wright's critics have a point. His expression is confusing. Judgment will not be on the basis of deeds. Judgment will be in keeping with our deeds. The preposition Paul uses in Romans 2:6 is κατά, "according to" or "in keeping with." Paul's discussion in Romans 2:6-13 does not address the basis of judgment or of justification. His expression in 2:6 has the sense in accordance with. Perhaps Wright means nothing more than this. Yet, his phrasing seems to confound issues. Furthermore, Paul's expression in Romans 2:13, his use of the adjectival noun--οἱ ποιηταί--does not warrant Wright's translation, on the basis of. Paul's word selection is to characterize whom God will justify in the last day. See my commentary on the passage here.

Problematic as is Wright's statement that justification in the last day will be on the basis of an entire life, similar problems can be found in the formulations of Wright's critics. For example, in Where Is Boasting? Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response in Romans 1-5, Simon Gathercole makes the following statement,

In [Romans] 3:28, justification is simply expressed as taking place on the basis of faith, and in 3:30, under exactly the same conditions for Jew and gentile. In Romans 4, Paul locates justification at the beginning of Abraham's life with God: when Abraham is justified, it is on the basis of trust alone, while he is in a state of "ungodliness" (250; emphasis added).

How is it more palatable to say that our present justification is on the basis of faith or on the basis of trust alone than it is to say that justification in the last day will be on the basis of an entire life? It seems to me that Simon Gathercole's formulation (justification "on the basis of faith") is no less problematic than N. T. Wright's formulation (justification in the last day will be "on the basis of an entire life"). My point is simple: less than cautious formulations on both sides have been made. I am willing to be as generous to N. T. Wright as I am to Simon Gathercole, for in my estimation, both have formulated statements that do not comport with the evidence of Paul's Letter to the Romans.

Despite their less than acceptable doctrinal formulations, I would not regard either Wright or Gathercole heretical. I do, however, believe that both are in need of some correction. Justification before God is by faith but only on the basis of Christ's sacrificial and atoning death.

Update (8/8/06): JT has posted links to John Piper's first sermon upon his return from a five-month sabbatical. Piper is taking on N. T. Wright in his sermon. Is John Piper beginning to let out in dribs and drabs the substance of the manuscript of which he speaks here, which I cite above?

Update (8/8/06): You may read the manuscript or listen to the audio of John Piper's sermon on August 6, "This Man Went Down to His House Justified," his first sermon upon returning from his five-month writing sabbatical at Tyndale House, Cambridge, England.

His sermon is based upon Luke 18:9-14. His message is a clear harbinger of what to expect in the pages of the book manuscript that takes on N. T. Wright. Is it not fairly obvious that John Piper regards the Pharisee in Jesus' parable to be the ancient equivalent of N. T. Wright today?

He may say, "Not I but the grace of God in me has worked this righteousness. I thank you God that I have a righteousness that is from you. Oh, how I thank you that I have a righteousness in me. His mistake was not in taking credit for his righteousness. His mistake was that once God had given it to him, he trusted in it as what would be the basis of his justification. He is not a legalist.

The excerpt above is from the heart of his sermon, taken from the audio version.

It is doubtful that Luke 18:9 bears the meaning that John Piper attempts to extract from it in the above quote. Luke 18:9 says that Jesus "told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt." The expression, "trusted in themselves that they were righteous," does not readily yield the meaning given it in the above quote. The text does not say that "they trusted in the righteousness that God had given them as the basis of their justification." The passage does not even use the familiar word πιστεύω to depict their "trust." Rather, the text reads πρός τινας τοὺς πεποιθότας ἐφʼ ἑαυτοῖς translated: "to some who were confident in themselves that they were righteous." Accordingly, Luke does not tell us that the fault of the Pharisees to whom Jesus addresses the parable is that they put their faith in a righteousness that God had worked in them. Rather, Luke tells us that their fault is two-fold: (1) their confidence is misplaced; their confidence is in themselves; and (2) they hold others in contempt. Confident of themselves, they judge themselves righteous while behaving unrighteously by condemning others. They submit to their own judgment of themselves and not to God's judgment, as the tax collector does.

What is rather odd in the quote above is that it argues that the Pharisees to whom Jesus spoke the parable were not legalists. It paints a rather positive portrait of them. It insists that Luke's statement in 18:9 is not descriptive of a person who looks to one's own deeds as meritorious. In other words, the quote's descriptions of the Pharisees approaches N. T. Wright's own descriptions of the Pharisees and of first-century Jewish views of what is entailed in righteousness. Yet, as one listens to the sermon, does one not get the sense from this almost agreement that N. T. Wright's view of justification may agree with the Pharisee's view? Jesus speaks the parable of 18:9-14 to the Pharisees. Would one be wrong to infer the implication that present-day use of the parable would be properly directed to N. T. Wright or at least to anyone who takes his view?

Would it be fair to deduce that the sermon was shaped by the writing of a manuscript in response to N. T. Wright? Would I be wrong to infer that this is made evident from this excerpt near the close of the sermon?

Do you see why I would spend weeks of my sabbatical laboring to understand why so many teachers in the church today are replacing the righteousness that Christ has in himself with the righteousness that Christ creates in us as the basis for our justification? People who trust in the righteousness that God has worked in them for the basis of their acceptance and acquittal and justification do not go down to their house justified. People who really believe that the righteousness that God helps them do in this life is a sufficient basis for their justification, Jesus says, will not be justified. Bethlehem, this is serious. We are not justified by the righteousness that Christ works in us, but by the righteousness that Christ is for us.

I certainly agree with the theology of the sermon. I find it difficult, however, to see that the theology of the sermon derives from Luke 18:9-14. I would express it this way: it is the case of correct theology from a wrong text. For whatever it is worth, it seems to me that the sermon works hard at straining out the gnat (expressions of justification that do not seem to measure up) and swallowing the camel (a creative interpretation of the text to make the point desired). We have all been guilty of using Scripture this way at some point. Is not use of Scripture, that derives from shortsightedness or partially blinded vision when responding to others, a fault that we all need to avoid? Unless we do, we will use both Scripture and the pulpit or the lectern poorly.