Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 21:44:58 -0600
I think these two statements would be the same:
"and by His almighty power determining them to that which is good,"
OR
"and by His almighty power causing them to that which is good,"
In other words, determining and causing have essentially the same meaning.
However, these next two statements say something completely different than the first two statements.
"and by His almighty power, causes them to desire and pursue that which is good"
OR
"and by His almighty power, determines them to desire and pursue that which is good"
The first set of statements is true - in other words effectual. The second is like you said, fiction!
DS
Message 22
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 22:16:49 +0800
Brother Tom,
Tom: Both Watson and Owen were alluding to Actual Justification by faith- where it is the non-meritorious instrument whereby the sinner receives and apply Christ and His righteousness.
Thanks for the quotes from Watson and Owen.
Please tell, what do these venerable men say about actual justification?
I believe their words you have quoted refer to 'declarative justification.'
Actual justification is by God's free grace (a once-for-all unrepeatable application at effectual call from sin and death to grace and salvation.)
Faith that receives and rests (present tense!) in Christ and his righteousness is declarative justification by faith – an effect of justification by God’s free grace. I think that is simple enough for an unprejudiced mind. Faith that receives and rest DECLARES (‘faith declares’ is wholly different from ‘God declared’) the justified state of the person exercising faith in receiving and resting in Christ and his righteousness
As for Owen and Watson, I have no problem with them.
Please remember the simple fact:
- God applying righteousness by His free grace at effectual calling when you WERE in the state of sin and death, and
- You, by faith, receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness when you ARE in the state of grace and salvation are worlds apart.
The former is Actual Justification, the latter is Declarative Justification (to use your preferred terminology). [The former is the divine cause, and the latter is human response].
God justified (simple past tense) (Vital/Actual) Abraham personally when he was an ungodly man in the Ur of the Chaldeans.
Abraham's faith justifies (simple present tense) (Declarative/Experiential) Abraham evidentially when he believes in the promised seed, Gen 15:1-6.
Please indicate whether you agree with these two statements.
ACTUAL (personal, applied, vital) justification is by God's free grace when your WERE in the state of sin and death.
DECLARATIVE (experiential/evidential) justification is by your faith in Christ when you ARE in the state of grace and salvation. Only someone in the state of grace and salvation is capable of exercising faith.
Don't confuse the two. And if you don't wish to see a significant difference between the two... I can understand too. Let me leave you with a reminder: distinction is the essence of sound theology.
I have nothing more to say for now. I have said enough. Tell me which part you don't agree and why. You don't seem to interact with what I actually say. You just state what you want to believe - which is perfectly alright with me.
If you have further questions, please feel free to ask. I would be glad to answer if I have one.
sing
"And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not" Acts 28:24
Message 23
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 18:40:55 +0800
Pastor Lau,
Yes, I've not been able to respond to all your statements. However I do see two issues that possibly form the basis of all the discussions below (I may be wrong but two is a good number to work on.)
1. That the Particular Baptist of the 1689 confession taught Actual Justification before faith / by the instrumentality of faith -- hence my reading of Owen and Watson. I think that would be a fair approach. I saw what Kiffin wrote on Samuel Richardson's article. (I'll have a read of Richardson's article closely and get back to you.) It is certainly an interesting article. (you are saying that Actual justification is before faith, and I'm contending for the belief that Actual Justification is by the instrumentality of faith).
2. That the Reformed Baptist understanding of Justification by faith has departed from the Particular Baptist of the 17th - early 18th Century.
Although I will admit that Watson 'could possibly' have referred to Declarative Justification, Owen's statement definitely was referring to Actual Justification. Faith justifies a sinner - in the sight of God" - Declarative Justification justifies in the sight of men. Hence his statement that follows- only as it is an instrument by which he receiveth and applieth Christ and his righteousness.
a labourer for grace,
tom
Message 24
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 00:21:15 +0800
Brother Tom,
Just a quick one. My comment indicated by ##
Tom: 1. That the Particular Baptist of the 1689 confession taught Actual Justification before faith / by the instrumentality of faith -- hence my reading of Owen and Watson. I think that would be a fair approach. I saw what Kiffin wrote on Samuel Richardson's article. (I'll have a read of Richardson's article closely and get back to you.) It is certainly an interesting article. (you are saying that Actual justification is before faith, and I'm contending for the belief that Actual Justification is by the instrumentality of faith).
## I am saying that Actual Justification takes place by God's free grace when we were in a state of sin and death, and Declarative Justification takes place by the instrumentality of our faith in Jesus Christ; i.e. our faith declares our justified state by free grace when we were in a state of sin and death.
Tom: 2. That the Reformed Baptist understanding of Justification by faith has departed from the Particular Baptist of the 17th - early 18th Century.
## 1689.11.4 put it as plain as could be:
- Decretive justification before time
- Virtual [Legal] justification at the cross (using your terminologies)
- Actual [Personal/Vital] justification at effectual call
- Declarative [Experiential] justification at conversion
Tom: Although I will admit that Watson 'could possibly' have referred to Declarative Justification, Owen's statement definitely was referring to Actual Justification "Faith justifies a sinner _in the sight of God" - Declarative Justification justifies in the sight of men.Hence his statement that follows- only as it is an instrument by which he receiveth and applieth Christ and his righteousness.
## Perhaps you don't see any significance difference between:
God justifying the ungodly (condemned dead) sinner in His sight, and
Faith justifying a believing sinner in the sight of God [before men, and his own conscience.]
There is a sense that declarative justification is in the sight of God... because God imputes faith to the believe for righteousness, i.e. God blesses the faith of the believer so that the believer experiences the blessedness of his righteous state by God's free grace.
Is there a significant difference between God justifying (Vial/Actual) Abram in His sight when he was an ungodly man in Ur, and God justifying (declaratively) Abraham in Gen 15:1-6, i.e. imputing Abraham's faith to Abraham for his righteousness??? What is your answer to this simple question?
Whenever our faith is involved, it is inevitably declarative justification. Faith in Christ declares the justified state of the believer by God's free grace.
Is justification in Gen 15:1-6 vital/actual/personal or declarative/experiential? It is a very easy choice - one out of two. Choose one. A typical RB ALWAYS choose VITAL/ACTUAL justification – that Abraham in Gen 12-14 was an UN-justified man, still under condemnation. What about you?
May the Lord bless you and all the saints with a blessed time of worship and fellowship. Pray for us too.
Thanks.
an heir of grace,
sing
Message 25
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 08:58:45 +0800
Brother Tom,
I wrote:
-------
1689.11.4 put it as plain as could be:
- Decretive justification before time
- Virtual justification at the cross (using your terminologies)
- Actual justification at effectual call
- Declarative justification at conversion
---------
The declarative aspect is not stated in 1689.11.4. Declarative is stated elsewhere.
Justification can only be experienced and is evidenced by faith in Christ AFTER it has been applied personally by God's free grace at effectual calling to grace and salvation, out of the state of sin, condemnation, and death
Virtual/Legal is accomplished for all [by Christ’s blood and resurrection]
Vital/Actual/Personal is applied personally [by God’s free grace]
Declarative is experienced [through believer’s faith in Jesus Christ]
Thanks.
sing
Message 26
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:34:06 +0800
Pastor Lau,
Please see below, my comments marked **
== I am saying that Actual Justification takes place by God's free grace when we were in a state of sin and death, and Declarative Justification takes place by the instrumentality of our faith in Jesus Christ; i.e. our faith declares our justified state by free grace when we were in a state of sin and death==
**I think everyone on both sides of the controversy agrees that Justification takes place by God's free grace. The early Particular
Baptists do mostly believe in Actual Justification by faith. Declarative Justification is by faith and works - otherwise James argument is redundant. Again I can only rest on what others have said:
Perkins : "So soon as a man believes, he is presently justified: Faith therefore justifieth, because it is an instrument to apprehend and apply that which Justifieth, viz.Christ's obedience." That is Actual Justification, by faith.
Bishop Usher said there is no union with Christ without faith. And again faith, "Each justifieth only relatively in respect of the object it fasteneth on, viz, the righteousness of Christ; which by faith we are justified; faith being the instrument or begger's hand to receive the alms."
Pardon me for repeating but I don't see Actual Justification and Actual Union with Christ happening before faith. Where the Confession speaks of faith being the instrument of receiving Christ and His righteousness, it is alluding to Actual Justification.
== Perhaps you don't see any significance difference between: God justifying the ungodly (condemned dead) sinner in His sight, and Faith justifying a believing sinner in the sight of God. There is a sense that declarative justification is in the sight of God... because God imputes faith to the believe for righteousness, i.e. God blesses the faith of the believer so that the believer experiences the blessedness of his righteous state by God's free grace. ==
** When a believer is said to be justified - before God - the straighforward understanding is that the sinner now stands before God having the righteousness of Christ upon his person and being considered righteous in the sight of God. - Actual Justification.
== Is there a significant difference between God justifying (Vital/Actual) Abram in His sight when he was an ungodly man in Ur, and God justifying (declaratively) Abraham in Gen 15:1-6, i.e. imputing Abraham's faith to Abraham for his righteousness.
> Whenever our faith is involved, it is inevitably declarative justification. Faith declares the justified state of the believer by God's free grace.
> Is justification in Gen 15:1-6 actual or declarative? It is a very easy choice - one out of two. Choose one. A typical RB ALWAYS choose ACTUAL justification!!! What about you?==
**You have got me here! I've not attempted a hard look at Gen 15.6. A knee-jerk response would be "Declarative" but after having a second look I would have to say (not without possibility of error!) that is Actual Justification. Abraham was (Effectually) called earlier, and Justified at Gen 15.6. Would that make be a bone fide Reformed Baptist?? ;-]
I think it jive well with what Paul is arguing in Romans 3,4- and James says about faith and works.
many blessing
Tom
Message 27
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:08:53 +0800
Brother Tom,
Thanks for your thoughts.
So you think Abraham was effectually called in Ur but only justified (actually/vital/personal) in Gen 15? I conclude from your view that Abraham was a condemned man (i.e. unjustified) in Gen 12-14, and his effectual calling precedes his actual/vital/personal justification by decades. You have just repudiated the opening statement of 1689.11.1. God justifies the UNGODLY (Rom 4:5!!!!!!!) ... to be consistent you would designate Abraham prior to Gen 15: 1-6, i.e. in Gen 12-14, an ungodly man then, etc, etc. I sometimes seriously wonder whether you do take seriously the insurmontable difficulties inherent in your views?
Justification by God is actual justification - God declaring a legally justified (at the cross) elect as personally and vitally righteous. Righteousness legally imputed at the cross is now applied personally at effectual calling.
Justification by faith is declarative justification - Faith declaring the believing person is justified by God.
I hope you do see a very significant difference between God justifying you and your faith justifying you.
Faith is always the present instrument to declare the justified state of the believing person.... 'The just shall live by faith' - and Abraham in Gen 15:1-6 is a classic proof of the glorious statement. Abraham, who was actually justified by God's free grace in Ur, was declaratively justified by his faith in Gen 15:1-6. Paul's whole argument in Rom 4 is based on that pivotal incidence. A man who misses the meaning in Gen 15:1-6 cannot possibly understand the doctrine of justification rightly.
Apply this simple truth to all the quotes of great men you have mentioned and it will make perfect sense.
Now you are believing that faith justifies actually as well as declaratively.
I think it is pretty plain that faith and works justify IN THE SAME MANNER, i.e. declaratively. You probably haven't study that post on James 2:24.
Doesn't 1689.11.1 plainly excludes faith to play any part in vital/personal/actual justification, but indicates faith as the instrument in declarative justification in the last clause, and further expanded in 11.2? Do you read that in any other way?
Permit me to agree to disagree with your interpretation of those quotes of great men. I agree with them... they speak of declarative justification by faith.
Let me just deal with one:
Tom: Pardon me for repeating but I don't see Actual Justification and Actual Union with Christ happening before faith. Where the Confession speaks of faith being the instrument of receiving Christ and His righteousness, it is alluding to Actual Justification.
Decretal union and decretal justification were before time.
Virtual union and virtual justification were at the cross.
Personal/Vital/Actual union and Personal/Vital/Actual justification are at effectual calling.
Declarative union and declarative justification are at conversion through the ministry of the word.
It is at conversion, and not before, that a person experiences his union with Christ and the blessedness of his justified state.
I would say, I don't see Declarative Justification and Declarative Union with Christ happening before faith. I do insist with Scriptures that Declarative Justification and Declarative Union with Christ happens AT/BY/THROUGH faith. Do you see the difference?
May the Lord bless each of us to see the truth.
Have a good week.
Sing
Message 28
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 21:24:12 +0800
Brother Tom
Tom: You have got me here! I've not attempted a hard look at Gen 15.6…. Would that make be a bone fide Reformed Baptist?? ;-] I think it jive well with what Paul is arguing in Romans 3,4- and James says about faith and works.
James 2:24 says:
"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."
I am in perfect agreement with this biblical statement. Let's consider the implications of this grand statement.
This statement, in its context, is declaring at least two truths:
ONE: The works as well as the faith of a person justifies him. Scriptures say, 'NOT BY FAITH ONLY'!
TWO: The way works justify a man is the same way his faith justifies him. The same verb 'is justified' applies equally in exactly the same manner to both 'works' as well as 'faith' of the same person.
If you disagree with these two statements, please state and give reasons.
Now the questions we want ask are these:
How do a man's works justify him?
How does a man's faith justify him?
In what sense do works and faith justify a man in exactly the same manner?
Please tell, what is the justification spoken of here - actual or declarative?
Again not difficult - just one of two choices!
sing
"And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not" Acts 28:24
Message 29
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 21:24:14 +0800
Brother Tom,
Tom: You have got me here! I've not attempted a hard look at Gen 15.6…. Would that make be a bone fide Reformed Baptist?? ;-] I think it jive well with what Paul is arguing in Romans 3,4- and James says about faith and works.
Please tell, what is imputed at actual/personal justification?
Was there imputation of Christ's righteousness to an ungodly man in Gen 15:1-6? What is imputed to Abraham in Gen 15:1-6?
Read Romans 3-4 carefully, and you will realize that apostle deals with BOTH the actual justification by God's free grace, and declarative justification by believer's faith... Read the chapters again please.
James deals with declarative justification by BOTH works and faith, for he was dealing with those who claim to have faith but no works. [Faith and works are both effects of Actual Justification, faith and works are Siamese twins cannot be separated.]
Romans 3: 22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. [actual justification.] 25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God.
Romans 4:6 “Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, [actual justification] 7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
Romans 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. [declarative justification] 4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. [declarative justification]
ACTUAL justification is by the imputation of Christ's righteousness to an ungodly man by God's free grace.
DECLARATIVE justification is by the imputation of the believer's faith to him by God's free grace.
Is there any significance difference between the two?
sing
"And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not" Acts 28:24
Message 30
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:23:36 +0800
Brother Tom,
Tom: **I think everyone on both sides of the controversy agrees that Justification takes place by God's free grace. The early Particular Baptists do mostly believe in Actual Justification by faith. Declarative is by faith and works - otherwise James argument is redundant. Again I can only rest on what others have said:
I don't know that everyone on both sides of the controversy agrees that Actual Justification takes place by God's free grace. Very many insist that Actual Justification takes place by their faith too. They don't even believe there are Vital/Actual Justification at effectual calling and Declarative Justification at conversion, let alone distinguishing the two! I was there too. They have only one street in their Justification Town. You are now aware of the different aspects of justification. That's progress. You are now grappling to distinguish the differences... may the Lord give you light unto 'rightly dividing the word of truth.' I went through the struggle for several years and the Lord gave me light. I am still learning.
‘Justification by God's free grace’ is just a religious shibboleth until one spells out its exact meaning.
Is Justification by God's free grace Actual/Vital justification? If it is, then how is Actual/Vital Justification also by one's faith?
How is Actual Justification by God's free grace as well as by your own faith? How is it possible that Actual Justification is by its cause (God's free grace) as well as its effect (your faith)?
How is faith the instrument in Actual Justification as well as in Declarative Justification?
If the 1689 was any indication of what the early Particular Baptists did believe, I would say that they believe in Actual Justification by God's free grace while in the state of sin and death, and Declarative Justification by faith while in the state of grace and salvation. Only a person in the state of grace and salvation possesses the saving grace of faith and work and all other saving graces (1689.11.2).
Do you appreciate the confusion and inconsistencies when the word of truth is wrongly divided?
By grace, I remain
your brother in Christ,
sing
