Pristine Grace
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst ... 2 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 169

Thread: God's Will to Justify His People IS the Justification of Them

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    South Korea
    Posts
    134
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Carol , regarding Col.1 :20-22 -- we ( the elect ) were enemies of God . It was not something we imagined in our minds . It was real . There was no peace between us and God .

    Bob , I never stated or implied that total depravity meant that all people are as wicked as it is possible to be . The sin nature is pervasive in our being . There is radical corruption within .

    Regarding Ephesians 2:3 -- ... like the rest we were by nature deserving of wrath.

    That is God's wrath -- not our wrath -- the wrath of man .

    " Like the rest " . Who are " the rest " ? The reprobate are the rest .

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    South Korea
    Posts
    134
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Bob , I agree somewhat with your purposed , constituted and declared justification scheme . But I would have it more like :

    decreed in eternity

    accomplished and secured at the cross

    realized and applied at conversion

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    103
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Quote Originally Posted by foundinHim
    Carol , regarding Col.1 :20-22 -- we ( the elect ) were enemies of God . It was not something we imagined in our minds . It was real . There was no peace between us and God .
    I wasn't meaning it was something we imagined. I know we truly considered God our enemy and wanted no part of him in our reprobate self. But did God feel the same way or was it only on our part? That was my point.

    Carol
    Run John Run! The Law commands,
    But gives me neither feet, nor hands,
    Far grander news the gospel brings,
    It bids me fly, and gives me wings.
    ----John Bunyan

    http://members.cox.net/ckizzz/index

  4. #24
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Those who believe the blasphemous thought that Christ actually hated His precious elect who were accepted in the beloved (Eph 1:6) (it's clear to me what that means) love to quote Eph. 2:3. Yet they NEVER EVER quote Eph. 2:4 or vs. 5 in conjunction with their babbling because it totally destroys their argument.


    Eph 2:3-5, (KJV), Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. (4) But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, (5) Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

    So foundinhim, since you love the idea of Christ hating His elect, do you believe He hated and loved them at the same time? Or did He hate them, and then love them because He saw them get converted?

    Carolk - wonderful verse! God's Word has a way of clarifying things even more for His people as they grow in the Grace and Knowledge of Him!
    This is my signature.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    South Korea
    Posts
    134
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    In Robert Traill's book : " Justification Vindicated " he says the following on pages 44 and 45 .

    # 7 Against those who say that a sinner is actually justified before he is united to Christ by faith ... That there is a decreed justification from eternity , particular and fixed as to all the elect , and a virtual , perfect justification of all the redeemed , in and by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ ( Isa. 53:11; Rom. 4:25 ; heb. 9:26, 28 and 10:14 ) is not yet called in question by any amongst us ; and more is not craved , but we affirm that a sinner , for his actual justification , must lay hold on and plead this redemption in Christ's blood by faith .

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    South Korea
    Posts
    134
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Darth I have never said that Christ hates his elect ones , much less do I love that foul notion . You made that up out of whole cloth . Please attribute to me what I actually say . Read my posts more throughly . I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here .

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    South Korea
    Posts
    134
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    In Thomas Goodwin's book : " The Object and Acts of Justifying Faith " , he says the following :

    It is vain to say I am justified only in respect to the court of mine own conscience . The faith that Paul and the other apostles were justified by , was their believing on Christ that they may be justified ( Gal. 2:15,16 ) , and not a believing they were justified already .

    In other words , faith does not merely reveal the fact that we are justified .

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    wingham,ontario
    Posts
    1,046
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Quote Originally Posted by foundinHim
    In Robert Traill's book : " Justification Vindicated " he says the following on pages 44 and 45 .

    # 7 Against those who say that a sinner is actually justified before he is united to Christ by faith ... That there is a decreed justification from eternity , particular and fixed as to all the elect , and a virtual , perfect justification of all the redeemed , in and by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ ( Isa. 53:11; Rom. 4:25 ; heb. 9:26, 28 and 10:14 ) is not yet called in question by any amongst us ; and more is not craved , but we affirm that a sinner , for his actual justification , must lay hold on and plead this redemption in Christ's blood by faith .
    FIH, I see you struggle with the concept of God's elect being loved by God before they are justified in time. Yet Scripture states clearly that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Further, I John chapters 1 and 2 state clearly the love therewith the elect have been given.

    Many a time I have stated for you to read Romans 9. I must say, you ought to read it again. That the purpose of election might stand. Jacob in this purpose was loved by God , before he was born. He was an elect child, whose life was a clear testimony that he was no better , nor more deserving than his brother, yet according to the Lord's eternal purpose, Jacob would be justified by his Saviour Jesus Christ. The Lamb slain before the foundations of the world.

    Also you have the audicity to babble forth a denial of some of us here to total depravity. Cast that breaking of wind else where friend.

    I see from your profile that you adhere to the Canons of Dort. If so I would strongly advise you to reread it as soon as time permits, that way you can free yourself from the same babble that was rejected by the reformers in the rejection of errors.
    Greetings and salutations, el rana

    21There are many devices in a man's heart; nevertheless the counsel of the LORD, that shall stand.

    Proverbs chapter 19

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    South Korea
    Posts
    134
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Ray , Romans 9 is one of my favorite Bible texts . We go way back .

    I love the Canons of Dort . I have Homer Hoeksema 's : " Voice of Our Fathers " which is a grand work commenting on that landmark council . I have index cards in which I have written out his preferred rewording of the official documents in English .

    Please Ray , disabuse yourself of those obnoxious pet sayings of yours . You need to reread John Newton again at the least . My private e-mails to you have not convinced you to be more temperate . Demonstrate some fruit of the Spirit . If you differ with me -- fine . Just pinpoint my errors , but do not do your Martin Luther routine --- his unsavory Table Talk manner is not suitable for a godly Christian . He said many things of value in those talks but like a child following the bad manners of someone older you copy his sinful utterings .

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    OR
    Posts
    1,064
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    foundinHim, I am going to make this very simple. I am aware of the scriptures you are using to make your case. However, I believe you are forgetting some foundational absolutes that can never be compromised when we are trying to reconcile all of these things in our minds.



    Is God immutable? I will assume you say yes. So then does God hate the ones he has predestined to salvation before they are regenerated?



    Please answer this question then we can move on. If you say that God does hate the elect then we cannot move on because you do not believe that God is immutable and we will simply be beating the wind if we continue.


    Mike


  11. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,849
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Justification invloves forgiveness of sins correct?


    I used to deny justification in eternity completely until I found Christ forgiving the sins of people prior to His death. Now either Christ was lying or He actually forgave these people He encountered prior to His cross. Now my views have changed and I agree that it is ONE aspect of justification

    I came across some writing of John Ryland, who was given the tremendous gift of High Doctrine and evangelism in Northampton, (somethign we have a very difficult time finding these days, you either end up on one end of the beam or another), was writing to either Toplady or Gill and said this:

    "The souls of the elect were saved upon trust for four thousand years. The Father gave credit to Christ, and glorified his saints, on the footing of a sacrifice not then offered up, and of a righteousness not then wrought. Christ also, in the days of his flesh, went on credit with his Father every time he said to a sinner, "Thy sins are forgiven thee," previous to his offering himself on the cross."


    Benjamin Keach, Gills predesessor, stated we must walk carefully in regards to this belief in the aspect of mans natural state. That we as nature, elect or non elect are under Gods Wrath. Our (adamic) nature (flesh) is constantly at emnity with God until glorification. What he also stressed was the key to viewing justification in eternity is that the Father views us "In Christ" THis is why there can be no wrath or hatred of the father to His elect. He also stressed that some have perverted this eternal union of the elect with Christ and concluded that the elect are not born sinfull.

    If I can find the full article that speaks of the elect as eternally in union in Christ vs their adamic state I will post it. I found it well written and balanced.


    Keach argues that our justification is virtual and our discharge actual in Christ's work in eternity, he believes that the actual declaration of discharge comes when the sinner is granted faith to believe in Christ's operation on His elect's behalf.

    "I deny not that fundamental, and representative justification of the Elect in Christ their head, or as a common Person, which is before Faith, which lies in Christ making full satisfaction for all their sins and meriting Faith for them. I also grant a federal Union of the Elect with Christ, as our Surety and blessed Sponsor, from Eternity, who also received a grant of a discharge for them from Condemnation, upon his holy Compact and Covenant with the Father, on the account of what he was to do and suffer, which made Justification and Salvation sure for them all, see 2 Tim.1:9, Tit. 1:2."

    The question that he attempts to answer, of which Scripture is not extremely clear on in does the Father still view man in his adamic, sinfull nature when they are elect. He states that his biggest fear is to equate justification in Eternity, with a denial of original sin. Which did happen by a few people. That is a thought I never considered. He couples the words of David, who says he was shapen in iniquity.......A sinner at birth, with the Pauline verses that explain our natural depravity, with the scriptures that speak of being given to Christ before the foundation of the world. With John 3, Christ with Nicodemus in regards to regeneration. His cliff note conclusion is that the Father views us as both. And in regards to the operation of the Holy Spirit and the effectual call happens in real time.


    He uses the example of David being anointed by Samuel, yet having to wait years to sit on the throne. The declaration was made, but the actual even did nto happen immediately.

    I may have presented this in a confusing way and I apologize, but the 2 works were very good.

    I am not yet settled on the issue because of its vast implications. So much firther study is needed by me.

    My hope is to find the needed balnce of eternal union with Christ and His elect, without erring on the side of extreme antinomianism were confession of sin is not for the believer anymore, and also where EVERYTHING becomes Eternal vs in time. SOme have errored and have put everythign in the eternity (election, justification, glorification, redemption etc.)

    One scripture that presents me a problem with viewing justification on in eternity is Galatians 3:8: “And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all the nations be blessed.” The Gentiles, then, were not yet justified; they were yet to be made righteous. That is to say, justification was yet to take place in time through faith



    Joe

  12. #32
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Thanks Joe - that was an excellent post.

    Foundinhim, I apologize for accusing you of stating that God hates His elect. That is what I perceive men to be stating with such terminology. Marc Carpenter for example believes God hates all unregenerate people - including the elect. Most professing Calvinists would assent to this as well. I find the teaching utterly repulsive - even worse than the doctrine of common grace!

    Ps 5:5, (KJV), The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

    God hates all workers of iniquity. The question we must ask ourselves is what about the elect? Were they ever hated by God? Were they not workers of iniquity? Of course they were - how dare we even suggest that the elect are not completely and utterly depraved to the uttermost at birth (being conceived in iniquity). They are completely unable to do anything that is good in the sight of the Lord. They are deserving of His wrath and even live like they are reprobate. In their mind - in their conscience - the wrath of God abides on them - that is they do not experience His love. They are at enmity with Him and they hate Him. They are workers of iniquity - no doubt about that!

    But does God view them as workers of iniquity? If He did, then we should rightly say that He hates them before their justification at conversion. But we also know that God has loved His people with an everlasting love - a love from eternity. He has always viewed His people IN CHRIST. He has never viewed them as workers of iniquity - so we must logically conclude that He has always viewed them as righteous. There is nothing in between the workers of iniquity and the righteous. You must be one or the other.

    So, where does that leave us? I believe the Bible, when it refers to justification by faith alone, it is referring to the justification in the court of the elect's conscience. The elect receive knowledge and are justified in their mind. God declares to them that they are now justified and are not under His wrath. The enmity that was between them (on the part of the elect) is now gone, and they are given knowledge that God has always loved them and viewed them as being righteous in Christ. It is completely experiential. The thing that has changed is not God's disposition toward the elect but the elect's disposition toward their Creator. It truly is a wonderful thing.

    P.S. - I am merging this thread with thread on justification from eternity.
    This is my signature.

  13. #33
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: God's Will to Justify His People IS the Justification of Them

    Justification and Election
    by Ron Hanko


    While we do not believe that God's people are actually justified in eternity, we do believe that there is a very close relationship between election and justification. They are justified by faith, not by election. Nevertheless, their justification cannot be separated from their election.

    First, having chosen them to be His own, God also decreed to justify them and them only. He not only decreed that they should be holy, but that they should be without blame (Eph. 1:4), which is nothing more nor less than the decree of their justification.

    Second, insofar as they are chosen in Christ according to God's eternal love, He also saw in eternity them as justified and without guilt. [Comment by Brandan - if that's the case, isn't that all that matters? If God saw His people as chosen in Christ and saw them as justified and without guilt, isn't that justification from eternity?] Only having foreseen them without sin, could God set His love upon them. And in giving them to Christ in eternity, God gave them to Him as those whom He eternally saw without sin.

    Numbers 23:21 is especially important here. The same past-tense language is used, "He hath not seen iniquity in Jacob," that is used in Romans 9:13, "Jacob have I loved." This language has always been understood by those who believe in sovereign grace to refer to God's eternal decrees.

    Numbers 23:21 is the answer to Balak and Balaam's attempts to curse God's people. Though Christ had not yet come, nor the blood of atonement been shed, God's people could not be cursed because of what God had foreseen in eternity.

    It is in this sense that we are willing to speak of eternal justification, or better, of justification from eternity. Indeed, we believe it is of the utmost importance to emphasize this eternal background to justification.

    To separate justification from God's eternal decree of election, is to end up with a justification that is available to all, if only they will believe, i.e., a conditional justification that in some way depends on the sinner's response to the gospel. That is not the free, gracious justification of which Scripture speaks.

    Third, it is according to the decree of election, therefore, that justification is made available in the death of Jesus for the elect, and for them only. And, according to that same decree of election, they and they only are given the gift of faith by which that justification becomes their own.

    There is no justification or righteousness possible for the non-elect. No forgiveness is available for them. What does not exist, either according to God's decree or the cross be Christ, cannot be offered to them without doing violence to Scripture's teaching concerning the truthfulness and unchangeableness of God.

    Such a close connection there is between election and justification, that we know our election by way of our justification. Experiencing through faith the forgiveness of sins, we also know that we have this forgiveness from Him who "hath not seen iniquity in Jacob" nor "perverseness in Israel."

    Praise be to His Name who sovereignly justifies His people.
    This is my signature.

  14. #34
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: God's Will to Justify His People IS the Justification of Them

    Thoughts on Eternal Justification.
    by Samuel Trott.
    SIGNS of the TIMES: Vol.5 Nov.22nd, 1837.


    Brother Beebe: - In heading this communication as "My Thoughts," I have only reference to the fact known to many of the Old School brethren that I differ in my views from them on this important article of gospel doctrine, or at least in my manner of treating the subject. Whether these views are thoughts of my own hatching, or whether I have received them from Him whose office it is to guide the disciples into all truth I leave for my brethren to judge for themselves. I have for some time intended, as soon as opportunity would serve, to communicate my views on this subject. My wish for doing so has arisen from the circumstance that in occasionally touching this subject in preaching, my brethren have discovered a difference, without perhaps being able to discover, wherefore and wherein, I thus chose to make myself singular in departing from the beaten trail of our Old School brethren on this point. And I freely admit that my brethren have on their side all the true advocates for the doctrine of Sovereign grace, who have published anything on this subject, perhaps for the last hundred years; that is, so far as I have been acquainted with their writings. On the other hand, I have met with no human author who has advanced my views on this doctrine. But though I thus stand alone on this point, if it should be that my views, weak as I am, are sustained by the Scriptures of truth, they will stand the test. I am further induced to publish my views from the circumstance that the fact of a difference on this subject having existed has been brought to the notice of the readers of the Signs through your Baltimore correspondent, (Signs, Vol.5, #13, pg.103). I would here just reply to our esteemed Baltimore friend that the correspondence between brother Hezekiah West and myself was not designed for publication, but merely for a free interchange between ourselves of the reasons of our different views on this point.

    Lengthy as my apologies have already been touching this communication, I have still another one to offer, before I can enter upon the subject before me; that is, for coming out with this communication so soon after the publication of the recent Circular of the Licking Association lest any should suppose that I had the vanity to design this as an attack upon that ably written Letter. As I have already remarked, I have for some time had this communication in view; and I had intended writing it as soon as I had done with Mr. Giddings. Another inducement has pressed upon my mind for not delaying it, which I will not mention. Perhaps, however, it is quite as well on a general scale, though not so pleasant to me, that the two pieces should appear near together, as our brethren at large can thus conveniently compare the two, and see more clearly wherein the difference of our views consist and thus be able more clearly to judge of the correctness or incorrectness of my grounds for differing from my brethren on this point. I will now drop apologies and come to my subject. My first objection to the term "Eternal Justification" as used by my brethren, or to the sentiment that the justification of the elect was an act of God passed in eternity, grows out of that prominent sentiment embraced in our Old School stand, namely: that a "Thus saith the Lord" is requisite to justify us in what we believe as well as in what we practice. I do not mean by this that the doctrine must always be expressed in the Scriptures in so many identical words. The doctrine of the "eternal union" of Christ and His people is not, that I know of, declared in just so many words in the Scriptures, yet I think this doctrine is therein clearly revealed. For instance compare Heb.2:11, "For both He that sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified are all of one for which cause He is not ashamed to call them brethren," with Rom.8:29, "For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son that He might be the first-born among many brethren," and they show that the oneness or the union is of as old a date as the predestinating decree of God; and that we know that from Eph.1:4 & 5, to have been from before the foundation of the world. Inference is thus plain, because according to Heb.2:11, Christ recognized His people as brethren on the ground of their oneness with Him; and according to Romans 8:29, the predestinating decree of God recognized them as the many brethren among whom Christ was first-born. This doctrine is also taught by the several figures by which the union is illustrated in the Scriptures. For instance, in the figure of the creation of Adam and Eve. As Eve was of Adam's body, of his flesh, and of his bones, so the church is of Christ. (See Eph.5:25-32) Eve was created in Adam in his original creation. Gen.5:1 & 2. That the figure as used by the Apostle may hold good, we must therefore admit that the church was brought forth and set up in Christ, her head, when He was brought forth from everlasting, when there were no depths, &c. Prov.8:23,24. The same is further confirmed by the general doctrine of the gospel such as that they were chosen in Him, &c. Eph.1:4. I would here remark that the doctrine contained in this text is not that they were chosen into Christ; but chosen in Him. Neither does it sustain Doctor Watts in the following couplet:

    "Christ be my first-elect he said, Then choose our souls in Christ our head."

    These lines found in that otherwise excellent hymn of Dr. Watts, 54th, 1st book, are in my estimation an entire departure from the Scripture doctrine; both in reference to the idea that our being chosen was an after act, and as to the notion of our souls being chosen in Christ. But to return to the subject, if there are any passages of Scripture having reference to justification, which thus represent it or bring it to view as an act passed in eternity, I have never discovered them, neither have the advocates of that sentiment, as far as I have seen, brought them forward. Besides there are texts which, so far as I understand them, plainly contradict that idea. As Rom.4:25, "Who was delivered for our offenses and was raised again for our justification." If the sentence of justification in behalf of the church of Christ was actually passed in eternity I cannot conceive how Christ only eighteen hundred years ago was raised for our justification. We needed not to be twice justified before God. "For by one offering He (Christ) hath perfected forever them that are sanctified." (Heb.10:14) Remember, it was by one offering He perfected. They could not be justified from all things without being perfected, and the one offering which perfected them was that making His soul an offering for sin; that offering of His body once for all, which He has accomplished on Calvary, as a time act. (Isa.53:10 & Heb.10:10).

    Again, according to Rom.3:24, we are "justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." This justification must be the act of God, being "freely by His grace," and it is through the "redemption that is in Christ Jesus." If so, the act of justification cannot be considered as actually passed until the redemption was actually made. Redemption is "through His blood." (Eph.1:7 & Col.1:14). Again, "In the fullness of time, God sent forth His Son made of a woman and made under the law to redeem them that were under the law." (Gal.4:4,5). Hence, as redemption is so manifestly a time act for those who before "were under the law," I cannot believe that the act of justification was passed until Christ was raised again. It is true Christ is said in Heb.9:12, "To have obtained eternal redemption for us;" but a moment's reflection on the passage and its connection will, I think, convince any one that the redemption is here called eternal, not because it existed from eternity, but because it shall be, in its effects, of eternal or everlasting duration. The fact of Christ's obtaining it denies its having eternally been, as well as the connection.

    I will not multiply testimonies upon this point seeing that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established. I will just ask how it is, if justification was designed to be received as an eternal act of God that it is never thus declared in the Scriptures? The choice and predestination of God are revealed as being before the foundation of the world; also that the "purpose and grace of God" were given in Christ before the world began.

    I pass to a second objection, namely: That the sentiment of eternal justification as contended for perverts the plain Scriptural use and design of the term "justification." To justify and justification are terms which have special reference to legal proceedings as admitted by all writers on the subject, and signify the act of pronouncing a person clear from charges which may have been exhibited against him. In this sense these terms are evidently used in the Scriptures. We find them connected with law, Acts 13:39, with offences, Rom.4:25, with redemption, which, of course, refers to law, Rom.3:24. It is true that as taught in the gospel, justification has a more extensive bearing as used in other cases. The decisions of human judges whether in relation to the Sinai or other laws cannot embrace futurity; but the justification which the gospel reveals embraces all futurity, as well as past transgressions; it is a clearance from all the demands of the law past, present and to come; it is a judicial pronouncing of those whom Christ hath redeemed from under the law, as legally perfect, and that forever, as Christ "by His own offering hath forever perfected them." Hence justification is in this sense, as is the redemption obtained by Christ, eternal; that is, eternal in its duration. If then the meaning of the term "justification" refers exclusively to legal proceedings, and if it is uniformly so used in the scriptures, what can it have to do with any period before the foundation of the world? Before creatures had an actual existence and before therefore the obligations of law had any place? "Where no law is, there is no transgression" so of course no charge? How then can a legal sentence of justification be passed in the absence of all charge, of all law? It will be asked, had not the children of God an existence before the foundation of the world? I answer "yes" as is evinced by that I have said of the union of Christ and His people? They existed in Christ, as His seed, His bride, His body; as Adam's bride and posterity existed in him in his original creation. But this existence was as distinct from their existence in Adam and his posterity as Christ is distinct from Adam. And the Covenant under which they were set up and existed in Christ was equally distinct from the law under which Adam was created. This Covenant was "ordered in all things and sure;" had no requisitions to make excepting of Christ as its surety. (Heb.7:22). This existence therefore opened no room for the requisition of a legal justification. A legal righteousness could just as soon be required of the Son in order to His enjoying the love of the Father, as it could be required of His seed and bride as they thus stood in Him, heirs with Him, to the same inheritance. Herein, I cannot help imagining that my brethren have confounded, or at least, have not kept clearly in view the distinction between the headship of Christ and Adam, and between the law and the everlasting covenant. Herein also I object to the system of my brethren upon this point as transposing the act of justification from its relation to the law, to a provision to meet a demand of the everlasting covenant. Should any say that they do not view the sentence of justification as actually passed in eternity, but only existing in purpose to meet the predetermined event of the elect's being created in a fallible head, and being left to fall into sin, &c., I would remark that I believe in the pre-existence of such a purpose, as strongly as any of my brethren do; and not only that such purpose existed in the Divine mind, but also that God made sure and full provision in Christ as the surety of the better testament to meet all the demands of law and justice, that, should stand against the elect, as they were to be related in time to the earthly head, Adam. But why confound language by representing that which existed only in the predeterminate purpose of God as being actually past in eternity? The creation of man was as much predetermined and stood as present to the view of God as did the justification of the elect. But I have heard of none who pretended to say that man was created in eternity. Why then say that the elect were justified in eternity? By this confusion of language will you not lead men to think that when you say that the people of God were elected in eternity you mean only that God proposed to elect them in time?

    I will now notice some of the arguments used to support the sentiment of eternal justification. 1st. The argument drawn from the everlasting love of God to His people. This argument is that God could not have loved them as sinners, and therefore that He must have previously justified them that He might love them. But really if these premises were correct I do not see how this provision of justification would help the difficulty any. For according to this argument God must have extended His electing love to a people who were not then fit objects of His love, and provided for them a redemption in His Son, the strongest possible expression of His love, in order to justify them, and this done, that He might love them.

    The premises, however, on which this, to me, absurd conclusion rests is wrong. Christ and not Adam is the channel through which the love of God flows to His people. Viewed in Christ their Head, and in that life which they had in Him, I may confidently ask what sin was then in Him as their Head to bar the love of the Father from them? And what love was there to charge a failure upon Him? Christ speaks of the Father having "loved them (His people) as He had loved Him." John 17:23. The Father loved Him as His only begotten Son, and not as having a legal righteousness to justify Him. And if He loved them as He loved Him, He loved them in Christ as His children and joint heirs with Christ; and above what a legal righteousness could entitle them to. The truth is, Christ as the only begotten Son of God and Head of the church, had a glory with the Father before the world was, which no law servitude, no legal obedience could add to; and when about finishing His servitude under the law as the Redeemer of His people, He prays the Father to restore Him to that same glory. And what is more, He says to the Father, "the glory which thou gavest me, I have given them." (John 17:5 & 22). And surely, if Christ had given them, through their union with Him, that glory which He had with the Father, nothing which the law could impart could be necessary to make them lovely in the sight of God. Again, although it pleased the Father that the members of Christ's body should have an earthly existence, as such be under the law and fall under its curse; yet that law with all its divine rigor could no more destroy the love which God in eternity had placed upon them in His Son, than the Sinai law thundering its curses from Mount Ebal (Deut.27:13-26) against the posterity of Abraham, could disannul the promise which had been confirmed only four hundred and thirty years before, of God in Christ, that is, to Abraham. (Gal.3:16,17).

    As another plea for the doctrine of eternal justification, it is asked, if we admit that the sentence of justification was passed eighteen hundred years ago in behalf of the whole church of Christ, why not admit that it was passed before the foundation of the world? I answer, for two of the best possible reasons. First, because eighteen hundred years ago, Christ completed the redemption of His church, by which they were cleared from all the demands of the law in Him, it was therefore fitting that the sentence of justification should then be declared in their favor, in and through Him their Head. But previous to Christ's being made of a woman and made under the law, the redemption of His church from under the law was not actually paid, and the sentence of justification could not therefore previously be passed in their favor, without clearing Him, as He stood as their Head through whom the sentence must pass, and as one with them, from His obligation to suffer the penalty of the law, and without making void the law. Second, the Scriptures declare that Christ, eighteen hundred years ago, was raised for our (the church's) justification, but they no where declare that she was justified antecedent to His redemption. Again it is argued from the doctrine of imputation that the church was justified in eternity. To carry this out it has been said that it was in consequence of the sins of the elect having been imputed to Christ, and His righteousness, which if it had remained His own, would have sustained Him under the load of their guilt, having been imputed to them, that He was subjected to fall under the curse of the law. But this is not the way I have read the Scriptures. If I have read them right, this position must fall. First, it calls for a double righteousness; for if Christ originally had such a righteousness as the sins of His people called for, to shelter them, He needed it not, only as He was one with them; and if therefore it sheltered them it must equally have sheltered Him as one with them, so that the curse could not have troubled either, the Head or the body. In the second place, the Scriptures teach me that Christ had not originally such a righteousness as was called for by the sins of His people to cover them. What righteousness was this? Remember that their sins were altogether sins under the law, the righteousness therefore which could counterbalance them could be nothing other than a perfect actual obedience to the law, a complete honoring it as a transgressed law. This righteousness, holy and pure as He was before, Christ had not actually, until He was made under the law, took upon Him the form of a servant, became obedient unto death, &c. Let us see how the Scriptures read upon this point. "For it became Him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through suffering." (Heb.5:9). Hence, there was a perfection, a completing, wanting in Christ as He stood connected with His people in their apostasy, and as their deliverer from sin, until He was "made perfect through suffering." Again, "He made Him to be sin for us," not because we had been made the righteousness of God out of Him - but, "that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him." II Cor.5:21. More I need not repeat, but read for yourselves.

    Another argument in support of eternal justification is drawn from the fact of the Old Testament Saints having been accounted righteous, or justified. The conclusion drawn is that if the sentence of justification was not passed until the resurrection of Christ, all that lived before His coming must have remained under the condemnation of the law. If there was nothing brought to light touching this point in the Scriptures, the above would appear a very plausible conclusion. Justification as presented to view in the Scriptures is in a two-fold relation.

    The first is the public declaration from the throne of God of the justification of the whole body of Christ collectively, though having reference to every individual member thereof. This transaction was wholly with and through Christ as the Husband, and surety of His church. Her sins were laid on Him, law and justice looked to Him for satisfaction; He met the demand in that nature from which the law required it, and having in His death fully satisfied the demand, was raised again for the justification of His people. In the resurrection of Jesus by the power of God, in the same body in which He was delivered for the offenses of His people, not only was justice declared to be satisfied, and therefore their justification made manifest in Him; but also the righteousness of God was made manifest in justifying whosoever believeth in Jesus and also in the remission of sins that were past, or previous to the coming of Christ. Rom.3:35,26 & Heb.9:15. Here, therefore in this public declaration of justification, there was a reference to the individual justification of the saints under the former dispensation, as though that had been done in anticipation of the great sacrifice to be offered by Christ.

    The second relation is the experimental justification of individuals. This is at the bar of the believer's conscience, faith is the medium by which this act of justification is communicated. "Therefore being justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." (Rom.5:1). This justification is necessary to our enjoying peace with God, and secures it. As it is by that faith which "is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen;" and as Christ was set forth from the beginning as the object of faith; hence said to the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world," (Rev.13:8) I see not why the Old Testament Saints might not realize something of this justification and peace which we experience. But that they did not experience it in the same perfection I shall have occasion shortly to show. By Christ's being the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world," I presume no one will contend that He was then actually sacrificed, and by the expression, "from the foundation of the world," I do not understand the act of appointing Christ, by the Father to be the sacrifice of His people, intended for that was from before the foundation of the world, I consider the expression as having special reference to the fact of His being set forth from the first introduction of sin; in promises, types, &c., as the Lamb which God had provided for sacrifice, and as the object of faith. Thus Abel offered his lamb in faith, (Heb.11:4) not faith in His sacrifice, but in the bloody sacrifice of the Lamb of God as showed forth by his. "For without the shedding of blood there is no remission," (Heb.9:22) consequently no justification. How does this stand with eternal justification?

    My brethren, I think, ought to admit that if the act of justification in behalf of the saints was passed before the foundation of the world, the faith of all must look back to that act to find their justification in experience, seeing this is no other than a receiving and applying by faith the justification as found in Christ. According to the notion of eternal justification, Abel's faith must have had the same back and perfect view of justification as have ours. And we to find peace with God must not stop in our view by faith at Calvary. If then the Scriptures show that the faith of the Old Testament saints looked forward instead of backward for this justification, it is proof positive against the notion of their justification having been in eternity. Not to multiply proofs where one case in point is sufficient, I will just cite to Abraham's faith, the object of which "was accounted to him for righteousness;" and ask was that in a revelation which God made to him for something past? Or was it in the promise of something future? The apostle says, and that settles the point, "that God gave it to Abraham by promise." (Gal.3:18). See also Romans 4:20, 24, and notice the difference brought to view in this passage, in the manner in which the object of faith is presented to Abraham from what it is to us. Abraham believed that God "was able to perform that which He had promised." We believe He has performed it in that He "has raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead." I will also notice one instance of prophetic faith, namely: Isa.45:25, "In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified and shall glory." This surely presents justification of something then future. Other passages will be found to correspond with the above, as this is the name whereby "He shall be called the Lord our Righteousness." (Not was called.)(Jer.23:6). Hence the Apostle's account of those worthies who went before (Heb.11:39,40), "And these all having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect." They received a good report - the report of good to come, but the manifestation of this promised good they received not. This text not only manifests that the faith of the ancients was in anticipation of good to come, but it also shows that there was an imperfection connected with their faith which nothing but the coming of the gospel day could do away. "That they without us should not be made perfect." Hence it is no wonder that the prophets enquired - "searching what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory which should follow." (I Peter 1:10,11). There is a glory connected with the full manifestation of justification, which they had not. For though as the redeeming Lamb, Christ was "foreordained before the foundation of the world," yet He was not manifested until these last times, for those that believe. (I Pet.1:19-21). If these texts consist with the idea that the justification of the elect was completed in eternity, I must confess my utter inability so to understand them.

    From the remarks which I have interspersed with my objections to the doctrine of eternal justification, it will be discovered that my thoughts concerning justification are that as it is presented in the Scriptures, it is altogether a legal transaction; though a gospel or gracious provision that has to do with the people of God, only as they stood connected with Adam, and under the law; and with Christ, as He was involved by His union with them in the demand of the law. That its use is to manifest their clearance by the redemption of Christ from under the law, and the righteousness of God in bestowing upon them, encompassed as they are with humanity and sin, the adoption of children. It is, I think, altogether a mistaken notion that justification is what entitles the saints to heaven. Equally erroneous is the notion that Christ by His death purchased heaven for His people. This union to Christ as His bride, His body, and being the children of God, is what entitles them to the heavenly glory. Justification could no more entitle them to heaven than the law could give life. (Gal.3:27). Hence, my view of justification is that it was a provision made for the people of God in Christ, and which they needed, wholly as they are creatures of time, and from the nature of it, that it is altogether a time act, though appointed and provided for in the counsel of eternity, as were all other time things.

    In reference to the eternal standing of the elect before God, as they were set up in Christ, they forever possessed in Him a spiritual beauty, excellency, and glory which nothing arising from their connection with Adam and the law could ever add to, or diminish from, excepting on the one hand this connection was till they were delivered from it, an insuperable barrier to their inheriting the kingdom prepared for them, and indeed to their being manifested as the sons of God; and on the other hand the experimental knowledge which they thereby have of the evil and misery of sin, and of the grace, love and mercy of God, manifested in delivering them from their thralldom and sin, will enhance to them the excellency and enjoyment of their heavenly inheritance.

    I have thus given a summary of my thoughts upon this subject. If they are wrong, it is because I have a wrong understanding of the Scriptures upon this point. If they are right, it is because God has graciously given me to understand the Scriptures concerning this doctrine, for I certainly never learned it from men. Were it not that the Scriptural account of this doctrine appears to me so clearly to support my views concerning justification being a law, and time transaction, the circumstance that so many more excellent, and more gifted brethren differ from me in their judgment concerning it, together with the reflection, what am I that I should be made thus to differ; would lead me much to doubt the correctness of my views. As it is, I must retain them, till I am led to see some direct Scriptural authority for the doctrine of eternal justification.

    With love to the brethren, and a hope that I may be found to share with them in the perfection there is in Christ Jesus our Lord. I subscribe myself yours, S. Trott.

    P.S. I wish not my apologies, with which I commenced this communication, construed as a plea with my brethren not to answer my objections if they see fit. As I wish on this and all other religious subjects to see eye to eye with them, if any of them can give a more correct view of this subject founded upon direct Scriptural authority I shall be glad to see it. I would further remark that perhaps some may think the view I have given of justification, and especially from my remarks being especially designed to illustrate those views in distinction from the sentiment of eternal justification are calculated to diminish the importance of this gospel doctrine; but I do not view it as presented in the Scriptures in a light any less important by its standing so immediately and intimately connected with the actual obedience of the Son of God unto death; an obedience yielded especially to bring about the accomplishment of this act, than though it was revealed as, like predestination, an absolute act of the Divine Mind, or as being passed in anticipation of the obedience of Christ. The fact is, the grace, love and mercy of God is far more displayed in the act of justification by viewing it as thus involving as essential to it, the actual obedience unto death of the Son of God, than they could be, by separating the act in any measure from the obedience and sufferings of Christ. And it can be no less precious to the believer by viewing it as coming to him, a poor, guilty, law-condemned sinner of Adam's race, alone through the righteousness of Christ brought in by His actual substitution of his law place. And as they are made to view it, in their experience, whatever may be said of their having been eternally justified.
    This is my signature.

  15. #35
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: God's Will to Justify His People IS the Justification of Them

    Download John Brine's defense of Eternal Justification - this is a great booklet!

    http://www.predestinarian.net/showpo...35&postcount=8
    This is my signature.

  16. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    wingham,ontario
    Posts
    1,046
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Justification

    Quote Originally Posted by foundinHim
    Ray , Romans 9 is one of my favorite Bible texts . We go way back .

    I love the Canons of Dort . I have Homer Hoeksema 's : " Voice of Our Fathers " which is a grand work commenting on that landmark council . I have index cards in which I have written out his preferred rewording of the official documents in English .

    Please Ray , disabuse yourself of those obnoxious pet sayings of yours . You need to reread John Newton again at the least . My private e-mails to you have not convinced you to be more temperate . Demonstrate some fruit of the Spirit . If you differ with me -- fine . Just pinpoint my errors , but do not do your Martin Luther routine --- his unsavory Table Talk manner is not suitable for a godly Christian . He said many things of value in those talks but like a child following the bad manners of someone older you copy his sinful utterings .
    FIH, you mention temperance. Maybe our Saviour Christ should be reprimanded as well for His "unsavory" comments in Matthew 23. That being said, as long as you continue to babble forth words implicating that we deny total depravity when speaking of justification, then to heed the words of John Newton......... demonstrate some fruit of the Spirit.

    So if you do not like me using the terms "babble, babbler" or "breaking wind, or dung hill" that may be directed at you, then like Luther with Erasmus, do not give opportunity to it.

    What you classify as temperance is in effect to advocate tolerance.
    Greetings and salutations, el rana

    21There are many devices in a man's heart; nevertheless the counsel of the LORD, that shall stand.

    Proverbs chapter 19

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,849
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: God's Will to Justify His People IS the Justification of Them

    Did I miss FIH's comment about some denying TD? I cannot find it.

    But this is in essence one of the perversions that some did espouse. This again is the balnce we must have when speaking of doctrines as such. SOme have had it, some have not had it.



    Joe

  18. #38
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Hawaiian Islands
    Posts
    3,672
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    73
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    119
    Thanked in
    65 Posts

    Re: God's Will to Justify His People IS the Justification of Them

    FIH had stated that the doctrines of some of us logically amount to a denial of TD, without actually stating that we deny it confessionally. In my view, this reasoning can only be supported if one views TD as the same level of depravity for all men as exists in the devil himself. Many of us view the depravity of the elect before regeneration as a different 'substance' of evil than exists in reprobate souls; because of that belief he was stating that we logically deny total depravity.

    On justification, scripture clearly teaches different aspects. Rom 5:18 refers to a completed (consituted) justification while other scriptures say justification is in time through faith (declarative). It is not declared to the conscience of the believer and to the community of saints until faith occurs.
    I got four things to live by: don't say nothin' that will hurt anybody; don't give advice--no one will take it anyway; don't complain; don't explain. Walter Scott

  19. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,849
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: God's Will to Justify His People IS the Justification of Them

    Quote Originally Posted by BillTwisse
    FIH had stated that the doctrines of some of us logically amount to a denial of TD, without actually stating that we deny it confessionally. In my view, this reasoning can only be supported if one views TD as the same level of depravity for all men as exists in the devil himself. Many of us view the depravity of the elect before regeneration as a different 'substance' of evil than exists in reprobate souls; because of that belief he was stating that we logically deny total depravity.

    On justification, scripture clearly teaches different aspects. Rom 5:18 refers to a completed (consituted) justification while other scriptures say justification is in time through faith (declarative). It is not declared to the conscience of the believer and to the community of saints until faith occurs.

    tHIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE 2 AUTHORS i MENTIONED EARLIER WROTE ABOUT. sorry about the caps!!!!!!!!

    They stressed to only adhere to 1 aspect, denying the rest is false. And bob, like I mentioned earlier, some have denied it without saying it directly. Not here, but in history. Some have erroneously concluded that EVERYTHING ONLY happens in eternity. Therefore denying the actual historical event of the cross and ressurection and the power that flows from them.

    WHile others have made faith conditional.


    Joe

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,849
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: God's Will to Justify His People IS the Justification of Them

    http://www.ccel.org/k/kuyper/holy_spirit/htm/TOC.htm



    The above link is very good on this topic

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst ... 2 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. My problem
    By Bigbil in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-20-05, 02:47 PM
  2. Jacumba Conference - May 20-22, 2005
    By Brandan in forum News & Announcements Archive
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-26-05, 01:06 PM
  3. Limited Goodness
    By Skeuos Eleos in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-27-04, 10:24 PM
  4. Church Membership Courses
    By Alan Stevens in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-05-02, 06:30 AM
  5. British Conservative Catholics
    By Alan Stevens in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-11-02, 09:56 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •