Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:24:02 +0800
Brother Tom,
Tom: 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.
The straight forward (knee-jerk) understanding may not be the right understanding.
The knee-jerk understanding of the statement 'Whoever believes has everlasting life' is that this is a conditional statement of offer... whoever will believe will receive eternal life.
But a moment reflection tells us that it is declarative statement of truth... the person who believes does so because he possesses eternal life. [Possession of life must precede the believing, an act of life, and a manifestation of that life. Spiritual activities declare that spiritual life has been imparted.]
When a believer is said to be justified 'before God' - the question we must ask is: is this justification before God by God's free grace or by the believer's faith. If the former, then it is vital/actual/ personal justification; if the latter, then it is the declarative /experiential justification.
Actual justification (once for all) always precedes and makes possible the declarative justification (repeatable throughout life).
God justifies us 'declaratively' (experientially) by our faith throughout our life.
God justifies us ‘vitally’ (personally) by His grace once for all at effectual call to grace and salvation.
Faith, the effect of vital/personal justification, plays no role in our actual justification. It plays its biblical role ordained by God in our declarative justification.
May our Lord give you light.
Take time to consider the opinions of a chinese lad set before you.
I will shut up for now.
By grace, I remain
your brother in Christ,
sing
Message 32
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 16:45:31 +0800
Pastor Lau,
I think you are quite right. Most people would not have (the privilege or opportunity/interest) to look at Justification in so much detail. To set the record straight I have to thank you for stirring up the interest. Having said this, I don't blame any of the other brethren for not knowing either. Unless one has gone to Seminary (one where this is mentioned or taught) this distinction is not something that is looked at everyday.
Looking at your reasoning below (incidentally you are also using the "if ....then" mode of argument), you have difficulty with accepting faith being in the equation of Actual Justification. Although I will accept the danger of one believing that his faith being the "efficient cause" or "ground" of Actual Justification - that would be Arminian beliefs, or even maybe Baxterian.
Most Reformed Baptist will agree with Watson below (blue):
Q-xxxiii: WHAT IS JUSTIFICATION?***
A: It is an act of God’s free grace, whereby he pardons all our sins, and accepts us as righteous in his sight, only for the righteousness of Christ, imputed to us, and received by faith alone.
==What is meant by justification?
It is verbum forense, a word borrowed from law-courts, wherein a person arraigned is pronounced righteous, and is openly absolved. God, in justifying a person, pronounces him to be righteous, and looks upon him as if he had not sinned.
==What is the source of justification?
The causa, the inward impellant motive or ground of justification, is the free grace of God:
==What is the ground, or that by which a sinner is justified?
The ground of our justification is Christ’s satisfaction made to his Father.
==Wherein lies the method of our justification?
In the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to us.
==What is the means or instrument of our justification?
Faith. ‘Being justified by faith.’ Rom 5:5: The dignity is not in faith as a grace, but relatively, as it lays hold on Christ’s merits.
==What is the efficient cause of our justification?
The whole Trinity...... God the Father justifies, as he pronounces us righteous; God the Son justifies, as he imputes his righteousness to us; and God the Holy Ghost justifies, as he clears up our justification, and seals us up to the day of redemption.
I believe the above refers to Actual Justification, primarily (with possible overlap with Virtual Justification on the cross of Christ). The reason I say this is because a few paragraphs down he says this:
Are we justified from eternity?
No: for,
(1.) By nature we are under a sentence of condemnation. John 3:18. We could never have been condemned, if we were justified from eternity.
(2.) The Scripture confines justification to those who believe and repent. ‘Repent, that your sins may be blotted out.’ Acts 3:19. Therefore their sins were un-cancelled, and their persons unjustified, till they did repent. Though God does not justify us for our repentance, yet not without.
But does not the apostle James say that Abraham was justified by works? The answer is easy. Works declare us to be righteous before men, but they do not make us righteous before God. Works are evidences of our justification, not causes.
Watson was alluding to Actual Justification all the way. It would not make sense for him to argue for Declarative Justification in the reference to Justification from eternity.
a justified sinner,
Tom
Message 33
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 00:42:01 +0800
Brother Tom,
Thanks for the thoughts.
See my comments indicated ##.
Tom: I think you are quite right. Most people would not have (the privilege or opportunity / interest) to look at Justification in so much detail. To set the record straight I have to thank you for stirring up the interest. Having said this, I don't blame any of the other brethren for not knowing either. Unless one has gone to Seminary (one where this is mentioned or taught) this distinction is not something that is looked at everyday.
## I didn't learn it in the seminary. I learned a one-street Justification Town in LTS... to this day - I confirmed it [with the present Principal]. Strangely, I learned it from the plain reading of the Confession of Faith - WCF and the 1689 (though the 1689 differs quite considerably from the WCF in some places) when I brought the church through the Confession the second time... noting that John Murray's order of salvation differ considerably from that expressed in the WCF - chiefly because he mistake the declarative justification by faith as the actual justification at effectual calling (using your preferred terminology) - which has become the standard reformed position. John Murray's view differs from that of James Buchanan, new and old school respectively.
Tom: Looking at your reasoning below (incidentally you are also using the "if then" mode of argument), you have difficulty with accepting faith being the in the equation of Actual Justification. Although I will accept the danger of one believing that his faith being the "efficient cause" or "ground" of Actual Justification - that would be Arminian beliefs, or even maybe Baxterian.
## The problem is not with the 'if... then...' reasoning. The problem arises when the 'then... ' does not follow, or is obviously illogical.
Tom: Most Reformed Baptist will agree with Watson below (blue):
*Q-xxxiii: WHAT IS JUSTIFICATION?***
A: It is an act of God’s free grace, whereby he pardons all our sins, and accepts us as righteous in his sight, only for the righteousness of Christ, imputed to us, and received by faith alone.
## I am in perfect agreement with this statement too.
The simple and basic problem here is that the ALL RBs see God's act of imputing the righteousness of Christ to a condemned spiritually dead man, and the spiritual man's act of receiving it by faith as ONE intricate incidence... that God freely imputes Christ's righteousness WHEN there is faith in Christ. [Therefore, they always insist: no faith, no actual/personal justification.]
Watson is very plain... he is stating two separate and distinct but related acts: First, there is God's sovereign act of imputing Christ's righteousness by His free grace - i.e. conditioned on nothing man does - to a condemned man. This is Vital/Actual justification. This is monergistic.
Then, there is man's responsive act (the man that has been vitally/personally justified freely by God's grace) of receiving that righteousness by faith. This is declarative justification. This is synergistic. Faith that receives and rest in Christ DECLARES the justified state of the person.
Abraham was justified (vital/personal/actual) when an ungodly man in Ur when he was effectually called out of sin and death.
Abraham was declaratively (experientially) justified when he believe in the promised seed in Gen 15:1-6.
Abraham had lots of works of obedience in Gen 12-14. However, in God's dealing, his works was never imputed to him for righteousness. His faith in the promised seed in Gen 15:1-6 was imputed to him for righteousness - for his declarative justification.
I think it is so simple... once you have understood the doctrine of salvation by grace alone. God justified you (vital/actual/personal) when you were in a state of sin and dead (unjustified state, i.e. under the condemnation of death) when He effectually called you to grace and salvation. Your actual/personal justification took place when you were in an unjustified state - under the condemnation of death. I certainly hope you won't dispute this statement of truth.
As a result of you having been justified personally/actually - imputed with the righteousness of life, you were regenerated and adopted, and given the Spirit of Christ/adoption to dwell in you... who works in you all the graces that accompany the justification of life, including faith... Romans 5:18.
Upon hearing the gospel, that grace of faith worked in you by the Spirit of Christ is called forth. In believing, your faith [SIC, and not Christ's righteousness!!!] is imputed to you for righteousness. This is declarative justification - your faith declaring your justified state by God's free grace, your faith declares your righteousness before God by His free grace.
Can I conclude from your view that an elect still under condemnation of death, i.e. not justified, not vitally/personally imputed with the righteousness of life by God the Father, IS ALREADY regenerated by God the Spirit and enabled to believe IN ORDER to receive the righteousness of life, IN ORDER to be justified freely by God's grace? If I understand you wrongly, please correct.
Brother, as a minister of Christ, I have spoken "the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation" to you. I have spoken enough. I will say no more. I don't take offense at your disagreement. At least you know that you didn't have to go to seminary to learn these things. They don't teach you these things anyway... instead they teach you popular opinions.
Thanks for giving your time to search the Scriptures together.
May the Lord bless you richly.
sing
"And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not" Acts 28:24
Message 34
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 01:19:33 +0800
Tom: Most Reformed Baptist will agree with Watson below (blue):
Q-xxxiii: WHAT IS JUSTIFICATION?***
A: It is an act of God’s free grace, whereby he pardons all our sins, and accepts us as righteous in his sight, only for the righteousness of Christ, imputed to us, and received by faith alone.
Brother Tom,
Just a thought.
Is it not quite plain from Watson’s statement above that God's acts of pardoning, accepting and imputing by His free grace PRECEDE and are DISTINCT and SEPARATE from man's act of receiving by faith? Is it not plain and obvious that actual justification always PRECEDES and is DISTINCT and SEPARATE from declarative justification? Consider Abraham. Consider Cornelius. Consider just any one who is able to exercise faith in Christ...
Finally, I managed a short one.
Thanks for listening.
sing
"And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not" Acts 28:24
Message 35
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 09:03:27 +0800
Pastor Lau,
Actual Justification being an act of God's free grace is not in dispute.
We all agree on the first few sub-questions and answers that the efficient cause and ground of Justification lies with God alone. The dispute is whether 'faith being the instrument' of justification refers to Actual or Declarative.
1. All the chosen of God are decretively justified from Eternity (Agreed?)
2. All the chosen of God are virtually justified at the Death and Resurrection of Christ (Agreed?)
3. No elect person is really and Actually Justified before he believe (Agreed?).
The sins of the elect, while they remain in unbelief, are charged to them; and that the Righteousness of Christ is not actually imputed to them until they believe in Jesus Christ (Agreed?)
I think we have agreed on No.1 and 2. No.3 is the point of contention?
a servant undeservedly,
Tom
Message 35
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 11:14:56 +0800
Tom: Most Reformed Baptist will agree with Watson below (blue):
Q-xxxiii: WHAT IS JUSTIFICATION?***
A: It is an act of God’s free grace, whereby he pardons all our sins, and accepts us as righteous in his sight, only for the righteousness of Christ, imputed to us, and received by faith alone.
Brother Tom,
Lumping God's gracious and sovereign act and man's response together for ACTUAL justification - is where the new school theologians have gone seriously wrong, with all the obvious inconsistencies and contradictions. This view concludes: no faith, no actual justification. This view would leave us with some elect who would never be justified - whether with 'Actual' or 'Declarative' justification - i.e. they continue to remain in the state of condemnation personally, fit for and deserving of eternal hell. Why - they can't exercise faith. Read 1689.10.3. You have an exception clause for them?
All elect are ACTUALLY justified wholly by God's free grace at effectual calling to grace and salvation, without the instrumentality of faith.
However, Not all elect are DECLARATIVELY justified... there are those who are incapable of hearing the gospel and there are those who have no opportunity to hear the gospel.
If you condition ACTUAL justification on the instrumentality of faith, please be ready to deal with the necessary implications of your view. I have stated many of them along the way... Make sure your scheme of salvation guarantees that "the promise might be sure to all the seed."
Have a good day.
sing
"And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not" Acts 28:24
Message 36
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 11:15:09 +0800
Brother Tom,
Tom: 3. No elect person is really and Actually Justified before he believe (Agreed?).
The sins of the elect, while they remain in unbelief, are charged to them; and that the Righteousness of Christ is not actually imputed to them until they believe in Jesus Christ (Agreed?)
Thanks. You know my answers to your questions. If I say anything more, I would only be repeating and I fear nauseating an intelligent man like you.
By grace, I remain
your brother in Christ,
sing
Message 37
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 15:11:17 +0800
Pastor Lau,
Nausea? I can deal with that…. Intelligent? That's open to debate ;-]
Humour aside: At the risk of you calling me 'recalcitrant' - I'm still pretty convinced that your position is not reflective of the Particular Baptist and the 1689. It may be reflective of Samuel Richardson's position- or he wrote in his paper. Unfortunately William Kiffen rubber-stamped it for some reason. He probably changed his mind later in 1689.
Those words I quoted below came not from me (like I said, I can only stand on shoulders of giants. else i will lose my way completely) but help verbalize what i believe is faithful interpretation of Scripture on Justification.
1. All the chosen of God are decretively justified from Eternity
2. All the chosen of God are virtually justified at the Death and Resurrection of Christ
3. No elect person is really and Actually Justified before he believe. The sins of the elect, while they remain in unbelief, are charged to them; and that the Righteousness of Christ is not actually imputed to them until they believe in Jesus Christ.
These statements were written in and around the time of 1689, signed by William Kiffen, Hanserd Knollys, Benjamin Keach and about 20 other names. I haven't check whether the others are also part of the ministers that made up the signatories of the 1689. The article also added that "Dr Owen, Dr Goodwin, and many other Reverend and Orthodox divines, that say the same thing with us."
(I have a badly printed copy- like most photostat copies! It has taken me many months to slowly read through this 'Narrative' - saw this statement earlier this week and I think pretty much reflect the position of the 1689 people.)
standing on broad shoulders
Tom
Message 38
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 23:55:08 +0800
Brother Tom,
Glad to hear that you are pretty convinced.
Tom:
1. All the chosen of God are decretively justified from Eternity
2. All the chosen of God are virtually justified at the Death and Resurrection of Christ
3. No elect person is really and Actually Justified before he believe. The sins of the elect, while they remain in unbelief, are charged to them; and that the Righteousness of Christ is not actually imputed to them until they believe in Jesus Christ.
So, you are insisting that the Righteousness of Christ is not really and vitally imputed to them personally until they believe in Jesus Christ? So what happened in your statement 2? Also, what about those elect who are not outwardly called by the gospel to faith? Is there an exceptional way for the righteousness of Christ to be imputed to them? Would they be actually justified at all? And if they don't what would be their destiny? Does this inconsistency pose a problem for you? In your scheme, is the promise sure to ALL the seed, or you are excluding some of them from heaven by your scheme of salvation?
Your third statement above is fatally flawed - first, it confuses Actual Justification at effectual calling with Declarative Justification by faith, second, you have conveniently omitted Declarative Justification from your scheme of Justification!!!
There should be 4 statements, an extra statement to state the Declarative Justification. The first three are PLAINLY stated in 1689.11.4. The fourth is stated in 1689.11.2.
1. All the chosen of God are Decretively justified from Eternity
2. All the chosen of God are Virtually/Legally justified at the Death and Resurrection of Christ. All the sins of all the elect have been charged/acounted to Christ at the cross, and He suffered justly for all of them. Christ's righteousness is IMPUTED to them
3. Each elect person is really and Actually Justified by God's free grace at the Effectual Call out of sin and death to grace and salvation at God's own appointed and approved time. Christ righteousness is IMPARTED to each personally.
4. Each child of God [regenerated and adopted at effectual call] who is called by the ministry of the gospel to faith in Jesus Christ is experience Declarative Justification.
Rightly dividing the word of truth, and recognizing the distinction between actual justification by free grace at effectual call and declarative justification at conversion set forth the truth harmoniously.
You sound a bit (just a wee bit) patronising towards Kiffen... he rubber stamped something for some reason... May be William Kiffen wasn't as clear minded in his statement about faith being the evidence as you are clear minded in rejecting his view.
You might like to know that those great names whom you mentioned - Owen, Goodwin, and host of Reformed giants like Drs Twisse, Ames, Maccovius, 'very learned Witsius,' etc were also mentioned by John Gill, marshalled to vindicate his treatise on justification... decretal, legal, personal [Actual], experiential by faith [Declarative] and final on judgment day... John Gill was universally respected by the non-Baptist Calvinists folks of his days. But today, Gill is nothing but dung in the eyes of RBs.
(Read his Body of Divinity - book 2, chapter 5, and book 6 chapter 8. Just the chapter headings will teach us something...)
By grace, I remain
your brother in Christ,
sing
Message 39
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2006 09:48:03 +0800
Brother Tom,,
> 1. All the chosen of God are decretively justified from Eternity
> 2. All the chosen of God are virtually justified at the Death and Resurrection of Christ
> 3. No elect person is really and Actually Justified before he believe. The sins of the elect, while they remain in unbelief, are charged to them; and that the Righteousness of Christ is not actually imputed to them until they believe in Jesus Christ.
1689 has this:
1. God did from all eternity decree to justify all the elect, and
2. Christ did in the fullness of time die for their sins, and rise again for their justification; nevertheless,
3. They are not justified personally, until the Holy Spirit doth in time due actually apply Christ unto them.
You are claiming that the giants were saying the same as you do.
Until the Holy Spirit does actually apply Christ unto you personally in effectual calling out of sin and death to grace and salvation, were you able to believe? I understand you will answer in the affirmative.
Until the Holy Spirit does apply the righteousness of life unto you personally in effectual calling out of sin and death to grace and salvation, were you able to exercise faith? I understand you will answer in the affirmative.
You don't seem to want to deal with the plain inconsistencies and contradictions and deficiencies of your view. Puzzled and flabbergasted!
I think we have understood each other’s view...
I will call it a day. Thanks for your time.
Like Dr Luke has written, "And some believed the things which were spoken,
and some believed not" Acts 28:24.
By grace, I remain
your brother in Christ,
sing
Message 40
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2006 10:50:42 +0800
Pastor Lau,
Before you dismissed me so quickly (I hope it's not the famous gesture of a Reformed Baptist pastor whom we all know of 'washing my hands clean, I've nothing to do with you since you will not listen to me' that so characterized a number of people) as being un-teachable hear me out one last time -
I have the highest regard for Kiffin - Not many can run a business full time, be not distracted by his wealth and pastor a church. … I'm only saying that Kiffen signed on the preface to Richardson's work in 1646, but later signed the Narrative with Knolly and Keach. Obviously he changed his mind - that to me is a reasonable conclusion. Similarly, if I may (with great courage and much prayer of repentance) nudge at you for being a wee bit over-bearing on John Murray and other so-labelled 'New School' men.
I am merely interested to find out what the Particular Baptists of 1689 thought on this issue- i.e. what the confession meant. The words from Keach, Kiffen and Knolly seem to provide a clear exposition of what chapter 11 of the 1689 really says. You seem to want to view Scripture (on this issue) with an a priori assumption- i.e. if there is faith, then there is no more grace.
Allow me to quote the title of the document which I'm reading (which I have yet to finish):
'Actual Justification RIGHTLY STATED CONTAINING A True Narrative OF A SAD SCHISM Made in a Church of CHRIST, at KILBY in LEICESERSHIRE PROVING, None of the ELECT are Actually Justified before FAITH.' Proving, There is no Actual Justification, or Actual Union with Christ before FAITH
Inside this article, the men of the 1689 muster their support towards a fellow minister who was unjustly accused of having departed from Scripture. I hope you will not let history repeat itself; and I say this kindly, respectfully and with much grief. It seems to me that the Particular Baptists (who signed the 1689 and this Narrative) believes thus:
Moreover he and we with him, distinguish, or explain Union with Christ, and Justification thus;
1. That all the Chosen of God are decretively justified, &c. from Eternity
2. Virtually at the Death, or rather at the resurrection of our blessed Saviour.
3. Yet that no Adult Elect Person is really and Actually in Union with Christ, and Actually Justified before he doth Believe in him: And so is transplanted out of the first Adam as a common Head, and implanted into the second Adam: It being impossible any should stand in (or grow out of) two common roots at one and the same time; since all (as considered actually in the Second are made Alive and brought into Justification, and declared free for ever from Condemnation, Rom 8.1. If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, the same is none of his. That is actually his, tho' many of them may be in the Election of Grace.
Similarly from:
The NARRATIVE Of the Proceedings of the Elders and Messengers of the Baptized Congregations in their General Assembly, met in London on September. 3 to12, 1689.
The Questions Proposed from the several Churches, Debated, and Resolved:
Q. Whether Believers were not actually reconciled to God, actually justified and adopted when Christ died?
A. That the Reconciliation, Justification, and Adoption of Believers are infallibly secured by the gracious purpose of God, and merit of Jesus Christ. Yet none can be said to be actually reconciled, justified, or adopted, until they are really implanted into Jesus Christ by Faith; and so by virtue of this their Union with him, have these Fundamental Benefits actually conveyed unto them. And this we conceive is fully evidenced, because the Scripture attributes all these Benefits to Faith, as the instrumental cause of them. Rom 3.25, 5.11, 5.1,3.26. And gives such Representation of the state of the Elect before Faith as is altogether inconsistent with an actual Right in them, Eph 2.1,2,3-12.
Those are the words of the men who penned the Confession.
If faith being in the equation of justification such a major stumbling block for you perhaps what Keach said is spot on! In the parable of the Pearl of great price he asks the question that amounts to this (I do not have the actual words with me but please tolerate my paraphrase): Does faith buy our justification? Answer is obviously 'no' to the rhetorical question. Keach goes on to explain that faith is there as part of God's ordained order whereby justification (actual) is bestowed.
This agrees with what the reformed church says- that faith is not meritorious, faith is not the efficient cause, faith is not the ground of justification (which both you and I heartily agree)- but merely the instrument that receives it, the beggarly hands before the richness of God's grace. It is not work, and never seen as work in the redeemed who is given faith.
Perhaps I have said much more than usual.
I remain,
a student of the 1689ers
Tom
P/s
Honestly I'm not sure what to make of Gill. Neither do a number of people more 'intelligent' than I. I've read some chapters of his body of divinity and commentary- to great benefit. Yes I would agree that he would hint at faith making manifest of our justification in our conscience in several place but no statement to counteract the above. [see comments in message 47].
