30 April – 7 May
(A)
As we study the Gospel of Luke, and we proceed from the beginning of the public ministry of Jesus onwards, we would become clearer of the mission and task of the Lord Jesus as well as why he persisted in going towards Jerusalem; also he shared on several occasions with his disciples about his impending death at the hands of the Jewish leaders.
The coming of Jesus heralds the end of the old era and the inauguration of the new era when God would deal with humanity in a new way and also, He would confront sin, evil, and the evil one in a definite and unprecedented manner.
There is no doubt that Jesus is bringing about SALVATION which centers on the gospel of God’s saving power in Jesus Christ. ‘Salvation’ is a comprehensive term concerning every aspect of God’s glorious action toward sinful humanity, culminating in the wholesomeness of life in the new heavens and new earth. One crucially important element is that salvation concerns the justification of sinners. The arrival of Jesus the Messiah, his life and ministry on earth and his death, resurrection and ascension have very much to do with the biblical doctrine of justification and we ought to be very clear what justification means, involves, and its centrality in salvation; so as we continue to study the Gospel of Luke, we must keep in mind the place and importance of this doctrine as we go along. As we look at the subject of justification, we would also look at how this doctrine has been misunderstood and the errors which have infiltrated this subject throughout church history and even presently – and the serious implications that come about because of these errors and misunderstanding.
The Bible defines justification as God’s declaration that sinners who believe in Christ are fully pardoned, acquitted of all guilt and are in a right legal standing before him, on the basis of what God has done in Jesus Christ. Note how the mission and work of the Son of God make it possible for such a declaration by God. Justification is a truth revealed to us by God himself in the Bible; it is part of God’s saving plan which has been disclosed in the gospel and which is to be proclaimed – God’s action in justifying sinners leads us back into the mystery of God and his unfathomable ways. We are left amazed, stunned and humbled, and to all eternity we shall be ‘lost in wonder, love and praise’ (Roms. 11:33-36).
While the wrath of God has been very evident in giving people over to their sinful passions, there is this wonderful disclosure for all the world to know, that God has decisively intervened to bring people of all nationalities into a right position with himself through Jesus Christ.
Apostle Paul’s teaching on justification is presented clearly in Romans 3:21-26 – all the key theological terms relating to justification are clustered together here. God’s gift of a right legal status (i.e. justification) before God is through Jesus Christ and it is this which lies at the heart of teaching on justification.
Imputation or ‘interchange’, which Luther called ‘the wonderful exchange’, is at the haart of God’s justifying grace. Sin is not reckoned to believers but to Christ and he bears it; the obedience or righteousness of Christ is reckoned to believers so that they are constituted righteous (2 Cor. 5:21). Here we see the reality that we are not just saved by the death of Christ but we are also saved by the righteous and obedient life of Christ as the perfect human. If Christ were not sinless as human, and if he were not obedient and righteous in his walk on earth with his Father and in his life, then it cannot follow that we are saved by his life, and that means his obedience and righteousness cannot be reckoned to those who believe. In 1 Corinthians 1:30 Christ is described as our righteousness from God.
Righteousness is a gift from God and this righteousness is associated with faith in Christ (Phil. 3:9) – the ‘righteousness of God’ is received ‘through faith in Jesus Christ’. “Faith” characterises the justified person, not ‘works of the law’. This ‘faith’ does not mean ‘faithfulness’ nor does it encourage the view that “faith of Jesus Christ’ should be taken to mean Christ’s faith or faithfulness (note that many books were written to affirm these inaccurate definitions). From these inaccurate ‘definitions’, some insist that our justification depends on Christ’s faithfulness per se or that our faithfulness is indispensable in order to be justified or remain justified.
Jesus Christ is the object of faith; there is no value in faith as such, it is simply the means whereby sinners embrace the one who saves them. Faith is stressed in Eph. 2:8-9 (the familiar verses) – ‘we are saved through faith …not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship…’ In Galatians 2:15-5:6y so strongly does Paul insist on justification by faith alone that he states, ‘The only thing that counts is faith’ (Gal.5:6); and that with the coming of Christ the gospel era can be described as the era of faith: ‘Now that faith has come’
‘(3:25). It is not works, or Christian graces like love that just justify, but Christ who is received by faith. Nevertheless, the apostle is quick to add that the faith which justifies is living, ‘expressing itself in love’ (5:6). On the one hand, the ‘righteousness of God’ (justification) is only available to those who have faith in Jesus Christ; on the other hand, it is available to anyone who has faith in Christ. All are in need to be justified for all are in the same sinful position (Rom. 3:23). The Lord willing, we would carry on looking at ‘Justification’ in subsequent sharings.
(B)
Continuity and Discontinuity
We have looked at the relationship between the OT and the NT, the continuity and discontinuity between the two. What about Justification by faith alone?
The period before the ‘now’ was the era of the Mosiac covenant, characterised by law. It was a temporary administration made with one nation. Israel, and having laws which kept them apart from others, which highlighted sin but had no power to change the human predicament (cf. Rom. 4:13-15). When considering the working of God’s plan of salvation in history, the two great epochs are characterised in terms of law and faith.
The period prior to the coming of Christ is described as a state of confinement under the law and under the supervision of the law (Gal. 3:15-4:7). The decisive moment in the history of salvation occurred when ‘faith came’ which means when Christ came who is the object of faith – the people of God are no longer characterised by law but by faith in Christ. In 2 Cor. 3:4-11, Paul describes the old era as an administration of condemnation and death. It can now be described as the ‘old’ covenant (3:14) because of the one who has established the ‘new covenant’ through the blood of his cross (1Cor. 11:25).
The whole Old Testament anticipates and points to the new era. In fact, justification through Jesus Christ has been in God’s mind from the beginning (Eph.1:4-5). Indeed, such men as Abraham and David were justified in this way. When Paul refers to the ‘coming of faith’, he does not mean that no one had exercised saving faith prior to the coming of Christ. The gospel of God’s justifying grace is the fulfilment of what is hinted at in the Mosaic religious system, the history of Israel and the prophetic messages. Now it has come to light and made plain through God’s intervention in Christ.
In Gal. 3:25 reference is made to God’s forbearance or tolerance: ‘in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished’. It means more than God’s patience which holds back the day of judgement and wrath so that the final punishment does not fall immediately on sinners. It also refers to God’s attitude toward believers of the olde era, whose sins were not held against them. They were forgiven and accounted righteous in God’s sight even though their sins were not actually dealt with at that time. The sacrificial system of the old covenant could not in reality atone for sin (the ‘blood’ of sheep for instance could not really atone for sin). God left the sins of his people unpunished until the present time (cf. Hebrews 9:15,26). What the Old Testament sacrifices symbolised, Christ has finally and completely fulfilled in his death.
God is seen to be righteous in passing over the sins of the righteous in Old Testament times as well as in justifying the ungodly who now believe in Jesus. At the same time, God is seen to be true to his promises made with the people of old. Divine justice is satisfied by the death of Christ. Christ has paid the punishment by receiving the wrath of God which sin deserves, in order that guilty sinners, past, present and future, whether Jew or Gentile, who look to God’s promised Messiah, Jesus Christ, might be forgiven, acquitted and pronounced righteous. This is what we mean when we say that the believers of old looked forward toward the ‘cross’ whilst the believers in the new look back at the ‘cross’ – both are saved by faith in Christ. The only way anyone was justified in Old Testament times was by faith in God’s promise (i.e. faith in the coming Messiah, Jesus Christ). It is only by faith in Jesus Christ that Jew and Gentile are acquitted and stand in a right legal position before God (i.e. justified).
The standards God used in judging will either be the revealed law of God or the consciousness of right and wrong felt by humanity generally. By these standards all are condemned. No one has ever lived up to their own standards, let alone the perfect standard of God himself revealed in his law and in the life of Jesus.
Even to belong to the nation specially chosen by God, to be a member of God’s covenant people, carrying out all the duties and requirements of the law, does not mean one is necessarily righteous in God’s sight.
(C)
God’s righteousness is first and foremost his nature as a moral being. He is the standard by which to assess what is right. God’s righteousness also means God acting in accordance with his own righteous character to fulfil the promises and threats he has made. His promises include deliverance from sin and its consequences, while his threats mean punishment for those who remain opposed to God. There is an end-time dimension to this righteousness in Malachi 4:2. The prophets have the expectation of God acting in righteousness to bring about everlasting righteousness (Isaiah 51:5-8). It is associated with the day of the Lord, the coming of the Messiah and the work of the Servant of the Lord (Isaiah 32:1, 61:1-3; Jer. 33:15-16, Daniel 9:24)’
Righteousness, in the sense of Christian behaviour, is always set against the background of a right legal position before God, and after apostle Paul has presented legal righteousness as justification in Romans 3 to 5, he speaks of righteousness in Romans 6 as acts of obedience on the part of believers. John regards ‘doing righteousness’ as an indication of the new birth (1 John 2:29). Like the OT, the NT distinguishes between the godly who do the right and work righteousness and the totally unacceptable righteousness so widely witnessed within the old covenant community and expressed in the religion of the Pharisees (Phil. 3:6-9; cf Isaiah 64:6).
What is clear is that those justified would demonstrate their righteous status by their good actions. Our works arising out of our faith should indicate that our lives have been changed and that we are living the righteous life. We do not do good works to earn salvation but we are saved to do good works. Those who are righteous by God’s grace hunger and thirst for righteousness; they desire daily to be more like the Lord Jesus Christ.
In the case of Abraham in the OT, it was not Abraham’s act of believing that was credited to him for righteousness. There is no thought of God treating faith as though it were righteousness. The act of believing is not a substitute for good works. Righteousness is a gift given by God to those who rely on the promised offspring. Abraham believed the promise concerning the offspring and this led God to account to him a righteousness which he did not merit or inherently possess. Thus Abraham was justified by faith alone in that he was judged by God to be in a right legal position before him and acquitted through faith in God’s promised offspring.This is the doctrine of justification by faith alone. Abraham was later severely tested in his submission to God’s call to sacrifice his own unique son – his act of obedience to God showed the genuineness of his faith. So being justified and being in a right legal position, whether in the OT or NT context, invariably leads to good works and obedience – absence of these seriously raises the question whether there is true conversion and justification.
While justification effects for the believer a new and permanent status, justification itself is a once-for-all act by which God acquits the sinner. Jesus lived the righteous life, kept all the covenant demands and endured the covenant curse as the federal head of a new righteous humanity. The righteous are those sinners who realise their own poverty and need, and who rely entirely on Christ as their Saviourvand are united to him. Jesus has satisfied the divine wrath on account of their sins and his guiltless, righteous is reckoned or imputed to them. They are no longer under condemnation and are assured that on the day of judgement they will be vindicated and blessed forever. It is through faith alone that they are justified. Their faith in Christ is not regarded as a meritorious work, but as the means whereby they embrace his person and work. In the matter of justification, faith is the empty hand which receives Christ and his righteousness. That faith through which alone they are justified nevertheless produces the good works which God has prepared in advance for them to do. Such works contribute nothing to their justification but show the genuineness of their professed faith.
(D)
The importance of justification for the church and the individual is intimately linked to a right view of the subject. Allow justification to take on a broader meaning than the biblical one or reinterpreting the biblical evidence to produce a revised definition will inevitably result in trouble for the church as well as the individual.
This actually happened early in the history of the church; it led to all the terrible abuses and false teachings that arose during that period. And this can happen again.
It may be appropriate to summarise the biblical support for ‘justification by faith alone” at this juncture:
In Romans, Paul expounds the gospel and this doctrine as its backbone. The gospel reveals the righteousness of God in justifying the ungodly (Rom.1:16-3:26).
Paul’s own personal experience and missionary outlook (remember he was a fervent Pharisee) are expressed in terms of justification (Gal. 2:15-21, 2 Cor. 5:16-21; Phil. 3:4-14).
It is ‘God’s fundamental act of blessing, for it both saves from the past and secures for the future’. We are given a full pardon and accepted as righteous. The judgement of the last day is brought forward and we are pronounced righteous in Christ, a verdict that is final and irreversible.
Justification is the basic reference-point in Paul’s doctrine of salvation as Romans and Galatians most clearly reveal.
All the hints, prophecies and examples of salvation in the Old Testament are explained in terms of justification (Cf. Habakkuk 2:4;Gen. 15:6; Ps. 32:1; Hosea 2:23; etc).
Justification is the key to unlock Paul’s understanding of history. The central over-all purpose in God’s dealings with humanity since the fall is to bring sinners to justifying faith.
Without denying the significance of other doctrines, justification does lie at the heart of Paul’s gospel.
The subject is not confined to Paul – the theme runs through the Bible. It is about how sinful human beings are brought into a right legal status before God. The whole history of the working out of God’s plan of salvation recorded in the BIble has this at its core.
Justification by grace alone has been undermined in church history. In many cases, well-meaning ministers and theologians have been the cause of distorting the doctrine in the interests of upholding other aspects of truth which they felt were under attack. The fear of sinful presumption and living without regard to God and the law (Antinomianism) have been at the forefront of this.
The first was Arminianism which owes its origins to the Dutch theologian Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609). The Arminians objected to Christ’s imputed righteousness, denied present assurance of future salvation, unconditional election, particular redemption and the penal substitution of Christ’s death. by which means he was punished for the sins of his people. Faith was seen as essentially a commitment to do something rather than self-despairing trust in Christ and what he has done. Faith, as obedience to the gospel and allegiance to Christ, was seen as God’s new law which is counted for righteousness.
The meaning of faith as trust in Christ’s person and work was forgotten; the experiences of conversion and assurance were dismissed as ‘enthusiasm’, dangerous to the soul; and present justification ceased to be an issue of importance or interest (but all these are important to the Reformers and Reformed theology, upheld by men like Calvin, Owen, and other like-minded theologians who relate them to the original Biblical teachings of the apostles).
Today, there may be many who hold this doctrine of Arminianism but refuse to be identified with it when confronted; this view is also held in different ways, and in varying degrees, by the Methodists, and some other denominations.
The other movement was called Neonomianism or Baxterianism after the famous Puritan minister Richard Baxter (1615-1691), and did much harm amongst the English Nonconformists (Independents and Presbyterians) and the
Scottish Presbyterians. Baxter’s views were greatly influenced by Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), the Dutch rationalistic theologian and politician and the mediating theology of Amyraldism, named after the celebrated theologian and professor of the French Protestant academy of Saumour, Moise Amyraut (1596-1664).
The position that Baxter took on justification differed substantially from that of the Reformers and the teaching of his fellow Puritans. He was in fact advocating like the Arminians the belief that it was faith in the sense of allegiance and commitment which justifies because it makes us ‘just performers of the conditions of the covenant of grace’. While believing in Christ’s death as penal and vicarious, it was not strictly substitutionary because Baxter did not believe in particular redemption, that is, he believed that Christ paid the penalty for the sins of everyone, not just for the sins of the elect.
Pause and ponder: notice that the distorted teachings arise from generally well respected ministers and theologians – it means that those in this category are not always right in their teachings and theology – it also means it behoves us to study and know the Scripture comprehensively – ignorance or wrong understanding and applications do not excuse us ultimately in the eyes of God – for the Lord Jesus said that those who are given much would receive much in terms of ‘whipping’ and punishment, particularly when what they teach and advocate ‘destroy’ or ‘damage’ the spiritual lives of many sincere believers.
One respected theologian said: “Baxter sowed the seeds of moralism with regard to sin, Arianism with regard to Christ, legalism with regard to faith and salvation,and liberalism with regard to God”. It is a sober reminder to us today of where the influential and dedicated minister’s ideas can lead.
There are some similarities between Baxter’s views and the revisions to the doctrine of justification that have been recently presented. Sin tends to be externalised with the results that the indwelling power of personal sin is underestimated. Faith as allegiance to Christ and the ground of justification is not dissimilar to the modern notion of faith as belief and commitment, a badge on the basis of which a person is declared to be justified. The cross becomes of peripheral importance; the wrath of God is no longer viewed as his settled opposition to human rebellion and an expression of his eternal and unchangeable holy nature. Like Baxter’s scheme the modern revision rejects the imputation of Christ’s righteous life.
Baxter was concerned that if people believe in a once-for-all justification on the grounds of a divine righteousness imputed to thm, the necessity for continued moral effort was surely ‘lessened’.
However, it was not the doctrine of justification which needed adjustment and revision to meet the threat of “easy-believism”. Dr. Martyn Lloyd- Jones recognised the danger that Baxter noted; and he said, “If my preaching and presentation of the gospel of salvation does not expose this danger, then it is not the gospel”. Genuine Justification must result in good works and must invariably lead to sanctification.
The good works of believers are to be associated with sanctification and not with justification. Justification must never be thought of as some sort of process fused with sanctification.
Justification itself does not involve or include regeneration or sanctification. God does not justify the godly but the ungodly, not the righteous but the unrighteous. In justification God does not justify sinners on the basis of an inner change which has led them to believe. It is not Christ plus an inner change, but Christ alone. We must get it right and not be tempted to alter the doctrine even under the pressure of antinomianism or some other error.
(E)
The other teaching that challenged “Justification” is “The New Perspective on Paul” termed or coined ‘NPP’. This is a more recent challenge in church history and its challenge actually claims that Luther and the evangelical church have read Paul wrongly. The implications include: the Reformers got it wrong when they used Paul in battling against the perceived errors of Roman Catholicism and thus caused great damage to the cause of Christ by bringing division to the church, whereas Paul strove for unity.
The result is that the NPP has radically redefined several words and theological concepts that evangelical Christians have long thought they understood. These include ‘gospel’, ‘justification’, ‘faith’, ‘works of the law’, and even the nature of ‘grace’ – the NPP actually redefines biblical religion. Justification, and the status of an individual sinner with a holy God, has been moved out of the centre of both Pauline and biblical teaching. Grace, while remaining central to the NPP, has lost much of the nuance and specificity that it has garnered in the Reformed tradition.
For instance, one of the examples that the NPP gives to show that Judaism was a religion of grace is that God gave sacrifices to deal with sin. But, according to the New Testament, the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin. Sacrifices cleanse the flesh, but ultimately serve as a reminder of ever-present sin, while pointing to the only sufficient sacrifice for sin in the death of Jesus Christ. Although the NPP’s emphasis that God’s covenants with Israel, including the Mosaic covenant were gracious is agreeable, failure to show precisely what this grace looks like and the place it plays in the life of faith leads to serious errors. ‘Grace’, in their writings, often looks very much like a synergistic (‘working together’) movement, in which God helps sinful human beings to cooperate in salvation, rather than a monergistic (God working alone) rescue operation in which God pulls helpless sinners out of the fire of hell.
There are however significant differences between the leading proponents of the NPP. Some are not confessing Christians. Others belong to the liberal wing of Christianity that denies doctrines like the deity of Christ, the inspiration of Scripture, penal, substitutionary atonement and the necessity of faith in Christ for salvation. There are others who are a lot closer to evangelical and Reformed Christianity. N.T. Wright, for instance, has more in common with evangelicalism than, say, E.P. Sanders, even placing himself within the Reformed tradition. Wright upholds many vital evangelical doctrines relating to salvation in Christ.
But even in Wright, with the rest of the NPP, the weight of reading Pau falls strongly on communal concerns. According to Wright, for instance, justification is not about how one establishes a relationship with God. Nor is it about how one becomes a member of the covenant people. Rather, it is about how you could tell who was in. In standard Christian theological language, it was not so much about soteriology as about ecclesiology: not so much about salvation as about the church. Wright calles justification ‘the great ecumenical doctrine’. Similarly, for Wright the gospel is not the good news that sinners can be made right with God by trusting in Jesus Christ and his finished work. As he puts it, ‘the gospel is not a message about ‘how one gets saved’, in an individual and ahistorical sense’. It is, at its heart, the proclamation that Jesus is Lord.
The NPP is a movement among modern scholars and it has brought much confusion to the church of Jesus Christ. Confused Christians lack assurance, prove to be unfruitful and are in a place of spiritual danger. Likewise, the gospel of Jesus Christ is the power of God unto salvation, but when the gospel is watered down or distorted it becomes ineffective. It loses its power to save. Thus, when anyone comes along proclaiming a different gospel (including a different definition of what ‘the gospel is’), it must be carefully examined and confronted. The truth of basic biblical and Reformed theology needs to be affirmed.
The NPP is a serious departure both from good exegesis and from orthodox biblical teaching – God’s people should have clarity on matters of essential Christian doctrine.
The traditional Reformed doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone must be affirmed and upheld. The most important question that a person can ask is, ‘How can a sinner be in a right relationship with a holy and just God?’ – this is the central theme of the Bible. This is not to downplay the corporate and cosmic nature of God’s redemptive work. When God calls his elect ones to himself, he always puts them in community. The return of Jesus Christ with power and glory will mean the liberation of this world and the coming of a new heaven and a new earth. But these communal and cosmic aspects cannot take precedence over the question of how an individual sinner, whose life has been an affront to a holy God, can be reconciled to God and become a part of the redeemed and renewed people of God. Christ builds his church as individuals repent, turning from their sin, and trust in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. The coming of the new creation begins with the transformation of the human heart.
In NPP, the ‘pattern of religion’ (as Sanders calls it) of first century Judaism was that of ‘covenantal nomism’. Jews were saved, Sanders argued, because they were part of the covenant people. They kept the law (nomism) for two reasons. Firstly, it was a response to God’s gracious act of choosing them to be his people. Secondly, the keeping of the law maintained their status in the covenant. So, as Sanders put it, obedience to the law does not get you in, but it does keep you in.
The doctrine of justification by faith is not merely that we are justified by our faith as opposed to our works. It is not that our faith saves us rather than our works, or that our faith is the basis of our salvation, rather that our works. Rather, the doctrine of justification by faith says that we are justified by God’s grace, not because of our works, but because of Christ’s work – the saving benefits of which we receive by faith.
In other words, the reason for which God accepts us and pardons us is not found in us! It is not because we were good. It is not because we were better than others. It is not because God foresaw good works in us. It is not because God foresaw faith in us. Justification is based upon what God saw in Christ and credited to our account, which is called ‘imputation’.
Through the years, many have attempted to modify the doctrine of justification; one main reason is that people cannot imagine that God would declare sinners to be righteous – it is counter-intuitive. But this is what God does precisely through Jesus Christ. Paul insists that God pardons those who do not deserve to be pardoned, declares righteous those who are unrighteous and accepts those who should not be accepted – the doctrine of justification is that radical!
Far from being an ahistorical, individualistic, human-centred doctrine, justification by faith is God-centred and God-glorifying. It exalts God, not man. Furthermore, God’s way of justifying sinners upholds his righteousness and justice, which demand that sin be punished. But God satisfied hisl justice by pouring out his wrath on his Son. as a substitutionary atonement.
The church is under threat from two directions. On the one side, we face the pressure, especially endemic to our age, of antinomianism (literally, being ‘against law’). The law of God is being trampled in the streets, Many churches are wilting under the pressure to set aside biblical commands.
On the other side, the church faces the danger of legalism – making law-observance instrumental in justification. The danger of legalism is the loss of the gospel,which is the power of God unto salvation. The NPP calls into question the traditional evangelical understanding of the law and its relationship to the gospel.
The buzzword of the NPP, ‘covenantal nomism’, is an attempt to describe the relationship of the law to the biblical covenants. Furthermore, the problem of legalism in first-century Judaism, which evangelical Christians see but the NPP denies, is a misuse of the law and so raises the question of the law’s proper use. Ultimately, the problems of the NPP stem not simply from an inaccurate historical understanding of first-century Judaism. They stem from an inadequate understanding of the biblical covenants.
(For a more comprehensive treatment on “Challenging the New Perspective on Paul”, the book “Gospel Clarity” by William B. Barcley with Ligon Duncan is very helpful and it not only understands the arguments but also the immediate significance of these issues for the individual Christian. It provides a clear understandable and accessible explanation and critique of the NPP)