This has to do with justification
by God before divine justice. The time of justification. Before we begin our study tonight,
which will take tonight and at least next Sunday evening, we
may be able to complete looking at the arguments that have been
given to oppose the view of eternal justification, and then the answers
to those points that have been made by those who oppose eternal
justification. We often sing the song Higher
Ground. I don't usually take time to
read a portion of a song. But having begun a very important
series of messages from the latter part of Romans chapter 8, which
is, without a doubt, one of the great doctrinal sections of Scripture,
I'd like to read the beginning of the song entitled, Higher
Ground. I'm pressing on the upward way. new heights I'm gaining every
day. Let's stop there. I believe that the Apostle Paul, at the close of Romans 8, stood
at the summit of the mountain from the standpoint of doctrinal
truth. He kept pressing onward to higher
ground. But I think you will agree with
me before we will have finished our study of Romans 8, 31 through
39, that the apostle had reached the height of biblical doctrine in that
great section of scripture. The time of justification, I'll
just introduce the subject and we will begin immediately by
considering the arguments in opposition to eternal justification
and the answers to those opposing views. We have stated that most
religionists today believe only in justification in time. Thus they deny eternal justification. On the other hand, most persons
who embrace eternal justification, that view when it comes to justification
by God before divine justice, do not deny justification by
faith in time. Those who believe in justification
by faith in time deny eternal justification, but those who
believe in eternal justification do not deny justification by
faith in time. I have a number of arguments.
I have outlined them in my Bible. the views that have been given
in opposition to eternal justification, and then we'll look at the answers
to them. I have no problem with this subject at all. I hope you
do not. I am convinced, however, that this is a subject that unless
a person is willing to make a study, a detailed study, he can become
very confused on the subject of justification, especially
concerning the time of justification. I'm going to try to reduce the
arguments to about 20. We may have more, we may have
a few less, but I have come across number
of opposing views through the years and then as a result of
Having made a study again of the subject during the last three
months. I have found a few new arguments in opposition to eternal
justification and therefore We will add to our list It may be a little difficult
for you to take notes on this I hope not when it comes to presenting
the argument against We'll not have too much to say because
usually the argument is concisely stated. When it comes to the
answering of those arguments, it'll not take too long an answer
for some, and yet in the answering of others, it will take a great
deal of explanation in order to do justice to the subject,
or to that particular view. What do you believe about eternal
justification? Do you believe there is eternal
justification? Or do you believe that the Bible
teaches justification by faith in time? What I have done in my Bible,
you may want to do something similar, you may not. I have
taken some paper, I have India paper. In fact, I bought 2,000
sheets a few years ago. for a loose-leaf Bible that I
was using at that time, and now I just trim it down and glue
it, fasten it into my Bible. And I put a line right down through
the middle of the page. I entitled the subject Eternal
Justification. On the left, I have Opposition
2, and on the right-hand side, Answer or arguments for eternal
justification. I've tried to keep it like a
number one taking the first opposing view to eternal justification
then when I give the argument for I like to consider what is
given in that view that opposes and Keep the number like that
number one opposition opposing view and then number one across
in the other column in answer to that particular opposing view
that is under consideration. Some of them we can go rather
fast, others it'll take some time to develop. Number one,
in opposition to eternal justification, It is said justification is God's
act in time. Just a blanket statement. And
this is embraced not only by Armenians, but I must hasten
to say even most of the Puritans embrace this view. Now that may
surprise you. Now before we go any further,
let me state something else. At the beginning of our study
of this subject, we sought to show that there are three major
systems of interpretation of the subject of justification.
Number one, the Roman Catholic view. Number two, the remonstrant
view. That's the Arminian view. And
number three, the reformed view. Now, what we're developing at
the present time, of course, after having given those three
major systems of interpretation of justification, is justification
by God before divine justice. However, since we have sought
to divide the study into three major systems of interpretation,
and using the reform view as the last, I do not agree with
most of the reformers in their view of justification. I realize I've made a statement
that would be criticized by many Calvinists today, many grace
people. Most of the reformers did not
embrace the view of eternal justification. And I've already given the major
reason for it. The major reason for it, according to church history,
is that the antinomians who embraced eternal justification were so
disliked and rightfully so, their view of lawlessness, that the
reformers, to a great extent, wanted to classify every person
who believed in eternal justification with being an antinomian. And
so antinomianism actually became a nickname even for many who
embraced the subject of eternal justification. John Gill believed
in eternal justification. He has a tremendous work on the
subject. He was not alone. There were
a few others. But there were not too many. So even though
we're talking about the reformed view of justification, Beloved,
I do not agree with most of the reformers and their view on this
particular point of justification and note I said this particular
point. So the first opposing view to
eternal justification is that justification is God's act in
time. This was the position that a
man by the name of Bragg held He gave four lengthy messages
on the subject of justification, and those four messages are recorded
in a book entitled Lime Street Lectures, a classic work, one
that is out of print. It has not been reprinted, but
I have a copy of that old work. Following that, a man who studied
under John Gill, for a number of years. His name is Brian. We have a
copy or we may have more than one copy of his little book on
eternal justification in our library. He sought to answer
Bragg and I think he did a tremendous job of answering all the arguments
that Bragg made in opposition to eternal justification. But
I have both of the works and having both of them, I've considered
them in detail. All I want to know is the truth
of the subject. I've already given enough to
prove that justification from the standpoint of God is eternal,
but we will add to that as we progress in the study of the
time of justification. Now, what is the argument for
eternal justification in answer to the first argument that opposes
eternal justification which states that Justification is God's act
in time The answer I believe can be simply stated Justification
by God is an imminent act Therefore eternal That is what we've been observing
in Romans 8 verses 29 and 30 and especially the 30th verse
and I don't believe that anyone can be consistent with his belief
about the other subjects mentioned in that verse of Scripture without
believing in eternal justification. God is of one mind who can turn
him. Job 23 and verse 13. God can
never have a new thought. He is wisdom personified. He can never be taught anything,
he can never learn anything, no new thought can ever come
to his mind. And since God chose us in Christ
before the foundation of the world, and we were given grace
in Christ even before the world began, surely, beloved, justification
had to be in the mind of God, because justification is related
to both election and grace. Now it's just that simple. The second argument in opposition
to eternal justification states, the Bible does not speak of eternal
justification. In other words, the word eternal
is not associated with the word justification. That's what they
mean. But below there are other great truths. where the word eternal is not
associated with the word of the truth under consideration. But
it is eternal. Now what's the answer? They go
on to say, adding to that statement, the Bible does not speak of eternal
justification. That's a complete sentence. Then
to add to that, the opposers say, one might as well speak
of eternal creation. I want you to see how subtle
the argument really is. One might as well speak of eternal
incarnation. One might as well speak of eternal
sacrifice, calling, regeneration, etc.,
etc. Now that sounds like a good argument.
Many accept it as being good argument one that cannot be refuted
I believe it can be refuted by the very fact that grace was
given you and me since we're the elect of God
in Christ before the world began therefore beloved justification eternal. How can there be grace without
justification? In the mind of God I'm talking
about. Can there be grace without justification? And then I repeat what I said
last Sunday morning. Things future to you and me are
not future to God. That seems to be the most difficult
thing even for the average believer to accept or embrace. And as Barnhouse so well said,
too many men try to drag God down into time and make Him a creature
of time. By dragging Him down out of eternity,
and making Him a creature of time. God is eternal. He is the
ever-present I Am. With God there is no past. With
God there is no future. There He is with you and me,
but not with God. He's the eternal I Am. He's the
ever-present One. Then I like to think of that
verse of Scripture in Romans 4, 17. Using the King James translation
of the Greek text, God calleth those things that be not as though
they were. Or to use another translation, God
calls the things that are not in existence as being in existence.
Now what is Paul actually saying in that statement? There is no
time with God. So even though the Bible does
not speak of eternal, using the word eternal in connection with
justification, that does not deny that justification is eternal
with respect to God. And Romans 8 30 proves it. Argument number three in opposition
to eternal justification states, There is nothing said about justification
before faith, emphasizing the word before. Nothing stated about justification
before faith. Justification is presented in
connection with faith, they say. And then they quote, Two or three
verses, one in particular, therefore being justified by faith, we
have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. I do not deny
that, I believe that. But Romans 5, 1 is talking about
justification by faith before the consciousness of the justified. And that, beloved, takes place
in time, not in eternity. Now what is the answer to it? First of all, justification is
presented in connection with God the Father. Romans 8, 30
and 33. We've already studied verse 30,
we are now studying verse 33. And then you could put right
beside it eternal, especially in connection with verse 30.
Now listen. God the Son, Romans 5-9. Now, what does Romans 5-9 say? Open your Bibles to Romans 5-9
and we will see. Talking about being justified
by blood. Much more than being now justified by His blood. We shall be saved from wrath
through Him. So I'm presenting justification
now in connection with the Godhead. Justification is presented first
of all in connection with God the Father. Romans 8, 30 and
33, but I'm zeroing in on verse 30 in particular. Therefore eternal,
being the imminent act of God. That's eternal. In Romans 5,
9, justified by the blood of Jesus Christ, that is objective,
or we'll use another word, that's external. That refers to justification
outside the recipient of grace. That's objective, that's the
work of Christ on Calvary. It's external, that is not in
the justified person himself. Thirdly, and in the Holy Spirit, we've
already studied this, 1 Corinthians chapter 6 verse 11, and that
is subjective, being justified in the sphere of the Holy Spirit. Now there is a difference, beloved,
between an imminent act God and a transient act in time I Said there's a difference between
the imminent act of God and the distinction must be made and
a transient act in time Justification is an act of God
need not be considered as something future or because there is no future with
God. The Father's act, therefore,
is eternal, the Son's act is external, and the Holy Spirit's
act is internal. Now those are three very important
statements. Eternal, external, internal. As far as I'm concerned, That
answers the third argument that states there is no justification
before faith. There could never be justification
by faith in time apart from justification by God before time. Justification by faith in time
is the fruit of justification by God even before time. Argument number four in opposition
to eternal justification states, justification comes between calling
and glorification, and they're using Romans 8 and verse 30.
And they try to make a big to-do over this. Justification coming
between calling and glorification. I've already answered that but
I'll give just a short answer tonight. Justification from eternity assures
redemption. That is the work of Jesus Christ
at Calvary, which is external. Justification from eternity assures
not only Redemption provided for you and me at Calvary, but
regeneration. And lastly, justification in
time, which is the fruit of regeneration. And regeneration is the fruit
of redemption provided for us on the cross. Justification by faith in time,
therefore, is the effect of eternal justification. The fifth argument in opposition
to justification being eternal or an imminent act of God goes
like this. Justification by faith is not
a mere manifestation of what was done in eternity.
There is neither standing nor access without faith. Neither
standing nor access without faith. You see what they're doing? They're
using Romans 5.1. Therefore being justified by
faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
and it is by faith that we have access into this grace wherein
we stand and rejoice in the hope of the glory of God. They're
using standing and access. Now listen to the argument again.
I'll give you all of it. Justification by faith is not a mere manifestation. Of what was done in eternity,
there is neither standing nor access without faith. They, that
is, both standing and access, are more than manifestations. Now to the untutored person,
this argument would sound plausible. What's the answer? Justification
by faith is God's revelation. Revelation to us of His imminent
act. I say that without any hesitancy.
If the act of receiving Christ is our justification, then, beloved,
we justify ourselves. Will you think that one through
for a moment? I am not justified before God by my imperfect faith. If there is anyone here tonight
who feels that his faith is perfect, stand up, I'd like to look at
you. No one possesses perfect faith. That's why we go from
faith to faith. You remember our Lord said in
speaking to his disciples on one occasion, Oh, yield a little
faith. The Bible speaks of weak faith.
Being weak in the faith, that is in the system of truth. And
of course, a person who is weak in the faith, in the system of
truth, certainly has a weak faith. Now the person is justified before
his own consciousness by his faith, even though it be weak. But no one can be justified before
God, before divine justice, by an imperfect faith. He's justified before God by
the perfect work of Jesus Christ on Calvary. And all of us will agree with
that who understand the meaning of faith. You see, this is the
kind of faith that one doesn't catch. This faith is not contagious. This faith about which I'm speaking
is the gift of God. But when God gives the ability
for one to believe, faith, beloved, is not something blind. Faith has to feed upon that which
God has given to you and me in the Word. And the more we feast
upon the Word of God, the stronger our faith is. And if we want to be unwavering
Christians, we must be strong. And in order to be strong, we
must be anchored in the knowledge of God's Word. We must know what
the Bible teaches. We must not pick a verse out
of its context. We must always study every text
in the light of its context. There isn't anything that disturbs
me more than to hear someone, whether it be a preacher or a
Christian, who just reaches into the Bible and picks out a verse
of scripture without any consideration whatsoever for the context from
which it is taken. but because it sounds good and
it gives them a little good feeling for the time being, he uses it. And beloved, how many of us have
been guilty in the early days of our Christian lives as a result
of false teaching, inadequate instruction, to just take our
Bibles on many occasions and open them and start reading,
and we say, oh, that's good, isn't that great? without giving
any consideration to the text, the context from which it is
taken. What a tragedy. Every heretic
under the sun has his proof text. Every religion refers to the
Bible, and here's the thing that disturbs you, it does me. A man
can get up and he can take a verse of scripture out of its context,
And he can quote it to try to justify what he believes and
what he stands for, and then he'll ask the people, that's
Bible, isn't it? And of course, everyone will
have to admit it's Bible that he's quoted. Well, what's it going to do with it?
That's Bible. Beloved, the Word of God must
be handled correctly. And it takes study to handle
the Scriptures correctly. Let's look at the sixth argument
against eternal justification. The sixth one goes like this.
Representation and union are not the same. I'm assuming that you know what
the person is getting at when he talks about representation
and union. Representation and union are
not the same. For example, The opposer says, a pardon in
the hand of the governor will not set the criminal free in
the eye of the law. It must be produced and pleaded
in court. Now that looks like a strong
argument. What's the answer to it? Union with Jesus Christ, beloved,
is an impenetrable mystery. I said an impenetrable mystery. But the different aspects of
our union, beloved, are not mysterious. I was united to Jesus Christ
when God chose me and gave me to the Son in the
covenant of redemption. There was union in that covenant. called by the writer of Hebrews,
the eternal covenant of grace. Hebrews 13, 20 and 21. Actually,
there may be five different aspects of our union. Some use four,
some use five. Some say election is the first
aspect of our union. Calvary is the second. Regeneration is the third. Justification
by faith is the fourth. And some go so far as to say
that glorification is the final one. Jesus Christ represented you
and me in the covenant of grace as our surety. This brings up
the subject of suretyship. Which is another tremendous biblical
doctrine that ought to be studied really in connection with justification
in fact I've been thinking for the last several days the subject
that we are now studying Actually includes all that we gave for
a period of months in our study of regeneration and conversion The high points of that subject
could very well be incorporated in our study of justification.
It's included. I want you to see what all justification
includes. But Jesus Christ at Calvary was
our representative. He was our surety. He stood in our place. The law
belittled was satisfied at Calvary. not when the sinner is either
regenerated or justified by faith before his own consciousness. Therefore, the representative
union by Christ is the cause of justification. I said the representative union.
I died with Christ. According to Romans 6, I was
buried with Him. I was raised with Him. I ascended
with Him. I am seated with Him at the right
hand of the Father. So when they say representation
and union are not the same, but don't forget the suretorship
of Jesus Christ, please. Argument number seven in opposition
to eternal justification states, the guilt of the sinner was not
terminated when Christ rendered satisfaction to the Father. Even after the removal of the
penalty of sin by ransom, the removal of guilt is conditioned
on faith. Therefore no one is justified
until he accepts Jesus Christ as Savior. What is the answer
to this? I admit that that one is the
most lengthy one that I have given. The answer is imminent and transit
acts of God must be distinguished. We've already stated that justification
is an imminent act. Christ's death was a transient
act. It took place in time. Justification
in time is a manifestation of an imminent act, whether in Christ's
death, being justified by His blood in Romans 5-9, Or in the
believer's faith, Romans 5, 1, therefore being justified by
faith we have peace with God. Listen closer to this. That which is called actual justification. Now there are those who use the
term actual justification. I think we need to be careful
about how we use the word actual. I've used it too loosely in the
past. And I have seen how loosely I
have used it. I'll be more careful about it
in the future. That which is called actual justification is
nothing more than the revelation of God's imminent act in Christ's
death and the discovery of it by faith. You see, I'm actually
putting I'm actually putting actual justification where it
belongs. You see, most persons say that
actual justification is when one believes. And he's the person who rejects
the concept of eternal justification. Let me give the last statement
again, but I've had to think through it very carefully. That
which is called actual justification is nothing more than the revelation
of God's imminent act in Christ's death and the discovery of it
by faith, both of which are transit acts. That is the death of Christ at
Calvary in our faith, both having taken place in time. One external,
to the elect person, the elected person, and the other which is
in the elected person. Now we're going to get to some
real study. If you think that this has been
deep so far, wait a minute. We're getting down to some real
questions now. I started out with the most simple
ones, and the further we go, the more complex they get. Here is argument number eight. Righteousness cannot be imputed
to a non-entity. Righteousness cannot be imputed
to a non-entity. There is therefore no justification
of the elect until the existence of the elect. I want that one to soak in because
here we're going to spend a little time, some tremendous theology
involved in answering this one. And you'll see what I mean in
just a moment. Let's get the question firmly established in
our minds, first of all. Righteousness cannot be imputed
to a non-entity, to one who does not exist. Now that sounds like an argument
that just can't be answered on the surface, doesn't it? It would to a young Christian,
I'll have to admit. If I had been asked that question a few
weeks or a few months after I had come to know the Lord as my Savior,
I would have been staggered, I'll have to admit that, and
so will you. Righteousness cannot be imputed
to an odd entity. And then to add to that, the
opposer says, there is therefore no justification of the elect
until their existence. What's the answer? Beloved, justification is not
the impartation of grace. That's how I begin it. Justification is not the impartation
of grace. When I was justified, grace was
not imparted to me. It was not subjective. I was
justified on the basis of imputed righteousness, not imparted righteousness. Now we have to establish that
before we go any further. So it is the imputation of Christ's
righteousness to us. Thus it is an act of God the
Father. It is not the act of the Holy
Spirit, who imparts righteousness. It is not the act of Jesus Christ,
the second person of the Godhead, who provided this righteousness. The impartation of righteousness
is the work of the Holy Spirit. Now, we have already seen this.
The Father sent the Son. The Son was in subordination
to the Father. He was willing to be sent. And
the Lord Jesus, having finished the work the Father sent Him
to perform, then said, I send the Holy Spirit from the Father. So the Holy Spirit is sent from
the Father by the Son for the purpose of imparting righteousness. And that's internal. We have
to divide these things. Now let's go a little further. It is not necessary for the subject
of faith, our justification, to be in existence for God's
imminent act. I'm gonna repeat that and then
I'm gonna prove it. I hope your minds are whirling. Because I'm just fixing to give
something that'll make you rejoice. Let me repeat that statement.
It is not necessary for the subject of justification to be in existence
for God's imminent act. Now, how can I prove that? It's not difficult to prove.
You see, we haven't gotten to the study of imputation yet.
We're going to have to get into the study of that subject. And
as soon as we will have finished The time of justification and
those messages that we have prepared from Romans 8, 31 through 39,
then we'll get into the subject of imputation. We've got to. But we'll have to get into it
a little bit right now. Just a little bit. Just give
you a taste of it. Were not our non-existent sins imputed to
Jesus Christ 2,000 years ago? Let's just think a little bit. 2,000 years ago, the Lord Jesus
Christ died on the cross of Calvary. I didn't exist. You didn't either. My sins, your sins, were put
on his account, they were imputed to him, and he died for your
sins and mine, even before we existed. Is that true or false? That kind
of annihilates the idea that the opposer gave, doesn't it?
Let's go a little further. Sins imputation Was both real
and immediate Now we'll get into some deep water there I'm talking
about our sins. They were both real and immediate And this would be explained more
in the study of imputation Jesus Christ paid for my sins
and And since I wasn't even alive
and had not committed them, they had to be imputed to Him, so
the Father had to know them, and they were imputed to Him,
and Jesus Christ paid for them. Well, what about the argument?
Righteousness cannot be imputed to a non-entity. For a person to make that statement
indicates that he doesn't even understand the subject of imputation. My sins were imputed to Jesus
Christ before I even existed. And the righteousness of Jesus
Christ was imputed to me before I existed. I realize that a subject like
this, being priest in the pulpit, in the average church today before
the average congregation, boy, you're talking about yawning, Nodding and and wishing they
were somewhere else a Lot of folk will say now things
like that are all right for the classroom But they're not to
be preached how in the world of people going to learn But
I believe whatever should be given in the classroom should
be given from the pulpit for the people of God and as a whole
I The corruption of our nature
follows the imputation of sin. You see, Adam's sin was imputed
to me, but the corruption of my nature took place after I
came into existence. But it cannot be denied that
Adam's sin was imputed to me. But this gets back to the subject
of real and immediate imputation, and that will be discussed later.
Both real. Real because of my complicity
with Adam when he sinned. And immediate. Not immediate. Not mine just by inheritance,
but immediate. As soon as I came into this world
as a human being, I came into this world as a sinner. So Adam's sin, which was imputed
to me, is both real and immediate. Real because of my solidarity
with Adam, Romans 5.12. And immediate, not inherited. How many people have you heard
say, and I've been guilty of saying it in years gone by, Quite
a few years, but I said it for a long time. We inherited our
sinful nature from our parents. It's true that we were conceived
in sin, but don't forget, please, that imputation involves real,
that's solidarity with Adam, and immediate. As soon as we
began to exist, we came into existence as sinners. So the elect have a representative
being in Jesus Christ. And when we speak about having
a representative being in Jesus Christ, my sins were imputed
to Him. He stood in my place. He suffered
for me. And His righteousness was imputed
to me. I wasn't in existence when my
sins were imputed to Him. Neither was I in existence when
his righteousness was imputed to me. Number nine. We're going to go
through ten tonight. The ninth opposing view to eternal
justification states, God's imminent acts can never be understood
by finite mind. But of it I want you to know,
I know the unknowable. How do you like that language?
That's biblical, and I'll prove it in a few minutes. What's the
answer to this one? We're told to be all the more
diligent. Here's the answer. to the opposition
which states that imminent acts can never be understood by finite
minds. You and I are told in 2 Peter
1, verse 10, we are to give the more diligence, so we are told
to be all the more diligent to make our calling and election
sure. No excuse. for anyone to say this is beyond
my ability to comprehend. Yes, it is beyond our comprehension,
but not apprehension. I know experientially even what cannot be explained experientially, if I may use
that term. So in 2 Peter 1 10, we are admonished
to give the more diligence to make our calling in our election.
Sure. You know what it literally means?
Be in every effort to make for yourselves your divine
calling and selection, things that have been confirmed. I like
that translation. I'll read it again. Be in every effort. You know, I have real serious
doubts about grace people today who say, well, if we have it,
we have it, and if we don't, we don't. I want you to know I've had people
Beloved, I've even had people that I've pastored who've made
statements like that. How do you think I feel when
members of the church where I preach make statements like that? Either they have not listened
to what has been proclaimed from the pulpit, or they may not have grace at all,
and there's a strong indication they may not. I believe that every person whose
heart has been touched by the grace of the sovereign God will
bend every effort. And that's what Peter said. Bend
every effort. Listen to this again. Bend every
effort to make for yourselves your divine calling and selection. Things that have been confirmed. Beloved, I want to know. There's a difference between
conception and comprehension. We're able to conceive ideas
of God's love. I said we're capable of conceiving
ideas of God's love, but we're not able to comprehend it. Turn with me to Ephesians chapter
3. Let's read two verses of scripture
in Ephesians chapter 3. That will reflect a little light
on this. I think. Let's begin with verse 17. That Christ may dwell in your
hearts by faith. that ye being rooted and grounded
in love may be able to comprehend with all science what is the breadth and length
and depth and height. Verse 19, and to know the love
of Christ which passeth knowledge, knowing that which is unknowable." Oh yes, I can conceive ideas
of God's love, but I'm unable to comprehend God's love. What about the argument God's
imminent acts can never be understood by finite minds? We must bend every effort to
make our calling in election sure. And those in whose heart there has been
a work of grace will make every effort. And I don't believe they'll
go around saying, well, if I made it, I made it, and if I didn't,
I didn't. If I'm in, I'm in, or I'm out, I'm out. Why worry
about it? Number 10 will be the last one
we will discuss tonight. Try to go through half of them. The 10th argument in opposition
to eternal justification It goes like this, if the elect
are justified by God in eternity, then they were justified before
they were condemned, before they became ungodly, before
they became disobedient, yes, even before they became sinners. Let me ask this question at the
very outset in the answer of that argument. The elect of God
were viewed as sinners when God chose you
and chose me out from among mankind. That's not difficult to understand.
He was from among sinners, He elected us. He was from among
sinners, He selected us. Justification from eternity does
not prevent the elect from being sinners, children of disobedience, etc.,
etc. We know that God's eternal act
is not based on the transient act of justification by faith.
Listen to this. I'll give you a verse of scripture
to think about in connection with this. When God was in Christ reconciling
the world unto himself, 2 Corinthians 5.19, He did not impute their trespasses
unto them. There's imputation. God was in Christ, reconciling
the world. And that does not mean every
person without exception. So don't take that out of its
context, please. Look at it in the light of its
context and go back to verse 14 through 21 and you'll see
what the Apostle Paul is talking about. But God was in Christ
reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses
unto them. Or not counting their trespasses
against them. Let me raise this question. Was
David justified before the death of Jesus Christ? I'd like you to go back to Romans
chapter 4 for a moment. Romans chapter 4, let us read
verses 6 through 8. Paul has used Abraham and his
life of faith. Let's look now at verses 6 through
8 when he reaches back into the Old Testament and uses David
as an illustration. even as David also describeth
the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness
without work, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are
forgiven and whose sins are covered. Verse 8, listen to it, great
text. Blessed is the man to whom the
Lord will not impute sin. This was before the death of
Christ. This is a quotation from the Psalms. Remember what I said this morning?
We all admit that David sinned. He committed a heinous sin. The
sin of adultery. Instrumental even in murder.
Terrible sins. Those sins were not imputed to
David. Blessed is the man to whom the
Lord will not impute sin. You say, wait a minute, preacher.
Do you know why those sins were not imputed to him? Because he stood justified before
divine justice on the basis of the finished work of Jesus Christ.
because the Lord Jesus was on His way to Calvary and He's the
Lamb that was slain from the foundation of the world. That's why I said this morning,
and here it comes in again, in the flesh, you and I are not
perfect. We are not perfect. But beloved, in the covenant of God's grace, You and I already stand, as it
were, in the mind of God, perfected. My sins were imputed to Christ. He paid for them. He paid for
every sin that David would ever commit after he became a Christian. We are not what we would like
to be de facto. But oh, how thankful we are for our justification on the
basis of the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ. And there wouldn't
be any hope for you tonight or me either if we were responsible for our
sins and the sins which we commit even now as Christians if they
were not already paid for. by the finished work of Jesus
Christ. Now you can understand why the
average religionist rebels at that. The religionist who thinks
that he has a part in his salvation, he also, and most of them, think
that they have a part in keeping their salvation. But beloved, we are what we are
by the grace of God, and that's the unmerited favor of God. When
we understand justification with imputation and the other
related subjects, beloved, it doesn't give us boldness by assuming
something that we shouldn't assume. But it gives us boldness because
we know what the Word of God teaches. So my sins were imputed to Christ Even before I existed, He paid
for them in Calvary. His righteousness, which He provided
for me, was imputed to me even before I came into existence.
And the blood which He shed 2,000 years ago is the blood that cleanses me
from all sin. And beloved, I want you to know
1 John 1, 7 is talking about the sins of sanctification. If any man says he has no sin,
he's a liar, and the truth's not in him. But the person who confesses
his sin, the Lord Jesus Christ is just and able to forgive him
his sins and cleanse him from all unrighteousness. Do we understand what justification
includes? We're declared righteous, beloved,
on the basis, before divine justice, on the basis, I said, of the
imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ. Not imparted righteousness,
but imputed righteousness. We're talking about eternal justification. The person who denies eternal
justification in order to be consistent is going to have to
deny, listen to this, he is going to have to deny imputation. We must learn to think relatively. Are you rejoicing in this? ask the brethren to come for
the observance of the Lord's Supper.