Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 02:09:06 +0800
Brother Tom,
Read some words of John Gill, and you will see that he and Buchanan are saying exactly the same thing. I am only repeating old stuff. I hope you take note.
sing
------
"What scriptures may be thought to speak of faith, as a prerequisite to justification, cannot be understood as speaking of it as a prerequisite to the being of justification; for faith has no causal influence upon it, it adds nothing to its being, it is no ingredient in it, it is not the cause nor matter of it; at most, they can only be understood as speaking of faith as a prerequisite to the knowledge and comfort of it, and to a claim of interest in it; and this is readily allowed, that no man is evidentially and declaratively justified until he believes; that is, he cannot have the knowledge of it, nor any comfort from it; nor can he claim his interest in it, without faith; and this being observed, obviates another objection, that if justification is before faith, then faith is needless and useless. It is not so; it is not of use to justify men, which it is never said to do; but it is of use to receive the blessing of justification, and to enjoy the comfort of it." [Gill - Body of Divinity, bk 2, chapter 5)
----------
"…The Protestant doctrine affirms that a sinner is made or constituted righteous by having Christ’s righteousness imputed to him; and that, being thus justified actually, he is also justified declaratively, when his acceptance is proved or attested [by faith, sing], so as to be made manifest to his own conscience, or to his fellow-men. In both cases it is one and the same Justification that is spoken of:– his acceptance as righteous in the sight of God; but in the one it is considered simply as a fact, in the other as a fact that is attested and proved [by faith, sing]. Actual Justification comes first, and is necessarily presupposed in that which is declarative; and hence, if any one is declared to have been justified, we conclude that he was actually justified, or accepted as righteous in the sight of God…" [Buchanan - Justification, Lecture 8, Proposition 2]
Message 62
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 22:32:08 +0800
Pastor Lau,
Thanks for taking the trouble to compare the two.
1) Agree that John Gill most probably believes (actual) justification to precede faith,- although I have to admit not having read his writings much.
2) Your quote from Buchanan's Lecture 8 Proposition 2 is accurate. However dropping the words [by faith] in the sentence describing declarative justification is misleading and does no justice to the author's intention. [I almost get the impression you are trying to mislead me O:-) !). If you care to read the Proposition 2 a little further on you might be warmly surprised that he holds to what you consider the 'heretical view' of Actual Justification by faith. I quote here:
/The Protestant doctrine affirms that a sinner is made or constituted righteous by having Christ’s righteousness imputed to him; and that, being thus justified actually, he is also justified declaratively, when his acceptance is proved or attested, so as to be made manifest to his own conscience, or to his fellow-men./ (page 234, in this chapter Buchanan rightly pointed out the important theological distinction between Actual and Declarative Justification)
/The distinction between Actual and Declarative Justification, may be further illustrated by what is said of the Old Testament believers in the 11th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Apostle refers to them as _been actually justified by faith_; but his expressions show that he speaks also, and very specially, of their declarative justification…._.Their Actual Justification is presupposed, but their Declarative Justification is specially referred to...Justification, considered as the pardon of a sinner and his acceptance as righteous in the sight of God, is by faith./ (taken from pages 236-238).
Later in page 251,
/The act of justification introduces _believers _into a state of Justification…..is an act of God in time,- not His eternal purpose merely, as some Antinomians have held,- nor is it a mere revealing of what was always true, and is now only made known and believed…..It is an act of God with reference to the individuals, and it takes place at a definite period in the life of each,- for as long as any one remains without Christ, and in a state of unbelief, he is charged with guilt, and exposed to wrath; but as soon as he believes and is united to Christ, his state in this respect is entirely changed./
Merely standing on giant's shoulder,
Tom
Message 63
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 22:34:04 +0800
Pastor Lau,
I've replied to some of your statements below in a previous mail. Just a quick one here: You said below (correctly) that:
Actual justification by God's free grace comes first, and is necessarily presupposed in that which is declarative by your faith.
Actual justification by God's free grace is declared and attested by faith in Christ.
But both these statements are not in dispute, and introducing them confuse the issue and add unnecessary length to the post. I believe (as you do) that Actual justification precedes Declarative justification. Where we differ is whether Actual Justification is by faith or before faith. Actual Justification is by the instrumentality of (non-meritorious) faith - that, of which is a gift of Christ
Declarative Justification is by faith and works (although you seem to think Declarative justification is by faith only).
tom
Message 64
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 00:44:14 +0800
Brother Tom,
Now I am very puzzled.
You said my two statements are correct, and are not in dispute.
The first statement excludes the vain notion that your Actual Justification is by your faith! Your Actual Justification cannot be, at one and the same time, by God's free grace and by your faith too. It is either by God's free grace, or by your faith.
The second statement excludes the vain notion that BOTH your Actual Justification and your Declarative Justification are by your faith.
You state correctly that where we differ is whether Actual justification is by faith or before faith. That is a very good summation of the issue at hand.
Please tell, what is the spiritual state of an elect before Actual Justification?
What can an elect do spiritually before his Actual Justification?
I asked some questions on 1689.11.4? Did you consider them? (Message 59)
You said, “Declarative Justification is by faith and works (although you seem to think Declarative justification is by faith only).
I believe this: "Jas 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." "... It [faith] is not alone in the person justified, but ever accompanied with all other saving graces..." 1689.11.2.
Now you can be certain what I do believe on this point.
Faith and works justify DECLARATIVELY ONLY. BOTH are saving effects of Actual Justification.
You insist that faith justifies in BOTH the Actual and Declarative Justification.
That's where the heart of the difficulty and confusion lies.
By grace, I remain
your brother in Christ,
sing
Message 65
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 00:44:42 +0800
Brother Tom,
Thanks for the extra paragraphs from Buchanan.
I may be deceived, but to think that I wish to mislead you is laughable... easier to swallow an African elephant than to deceive a [clever and intelligent] man like you .
You complained about my putting '[by faith, sing].' The purpose is not to mislead you. I am not good at deception... I was stupid to bracket ‘by faith’ with my name there . The purpose is to assist reader to see the distinction more clearly. May I ask, how else is Actual Justification declared and attested but by faith - as the context of the paragraphs show?
See my comments. I have read the Proposition II several times... maybe with coloured glasses... in which case it is your honour to tell what colour the glasses is.
"The distinction between Actual and Declarative Justification, may be further illustrated by what is said of the Old Testament believers in the 11th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Apostle refers to them as been actually justified by faith; but his expressions show that he speaks also, and very specially, of their declarative justification… Their Actual Justification is presupposed, but their Declarative Justification is specially referred to...Justification, considered as the pardon of a sinner and his acceptance as righteous in the sight of God, is by faith." (taken from pages 236-238).>> [emphasis mine, sing]
Please note carefully BUCHANAN'S QUALIFYING words, "but his [the author of Hebrews, sing] expressions show that he speaks also, and VERY SPECIALLY, of their declarative justification..." Could Buchanan qualify more plainly that he understood the justification spoken of by the author of Hebrews is VERY SPECIALLY the declarative justification by faith, and not the actual justification by faith?
Again he said, "Their Actual Justification is presupposed, but their Declarative Justification is SPECIALLY referred to." Could Buchanan distinguish more plainly that the justification spoken of is SPECIALLY the declarative justification by faith, and NOT the Actual Justification by faith?
I conclude:
a. Actual justification by God's free grace is presupposed.
b. Actual justification is by God's free grace. What is presupposed is separate and distinct from, and precedes the Declarative Justification by faith.
c. Actual justification is NOT by faith.
d. Actual justification IS - IS - IS received by faith.
e. Actual justification by God's free grace IS - IS - IS attested and declared by faith.
f. Faith is the instrument to declare and attest the Actual justification by God's free grace.
Do these simple statements make sense?
Tom: The act of justification introduces _believers _into a state of Justification…..is an act of God in time,- not His eternal purpose merely, as some Antinomians have held,- nor is it a mere revealing of what was always true, and is now only made known and believed…..It is an act of God with reference to the individuals, and it takes place at a definite period in the life of each,- for as long as any one remains without Christ, and in a state of unbelief, he is charged with guilt, and exposed to wrath; but as soon as he believes and is united to Christ, his state in this respect is entirely changed./
This describes Actual Justification in time nicely, manifesting itself in Declarative Justification through faith. In Buchanan's own words, 'their Actual Justification [in time] is presupposed, but their Declarative Justification is specially referred to."
It is so plain that Buchanan is refuting the false accusation of 'Actual Justification' in eternity. He had to state categorically, that 'Actual Justification is an act of God in time - i.e. at effectual at God's appointed and approved time. Actual Justification brings an elect out of the STATE of sin and condemnation into a STATE of justification. Again, 'takes place at a definite period of time in the life of each.
I have nothing more to say. I better shut up lest I mislead you .
I will leave you to believe what you will. Thanks for the exchanges.
By grace, I remain
your brother in Christ,
sing
Message 66
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 09:59:06 +0800
Pastor Lau,
Both the RB and yourself believe the same regarding Justification by free grace. Indeed our salvation is all of grace.
Our difference lies in the whether faith is before or after Actual Justification. You say faith justify as a work - but that's the Arminian concept of faith. The RB (together with the Particular Baptist) says faith is the instrument or beggarly hands that receive the Righteousness of Christ. And that faith is a gift. And therefore Actual Justification is by free grace through faith.
by grace through faith
Tom
Message 67
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 10:38:21 +0800
Dear Pastor Lau,
Your reading of Buchanan is clearly biased. Please allow me the liberty to show why, and I re-quote:
/The distinction between Actual and Declarative Justification, may be further illustrated by what is said of the Old Testament believers in the 11th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Apostle refers to them as been _actually justified by faith_; but _his expressions show that he speaks *also*, and very specially, of their declarative justification_…../
/Their Actual Justification is _presupposed_, but their Declarative Justification is specially referred to./
/Justification, considered as the pardon of a sinner and his acceptance as righteous in the sight of God, is by faith./
From the first two statements it is clear that Buchanan is saying: Hebrews 11 presupposes that the OT believers have been Actually Justified by faith, and speaks of their declarative justification. Notice where he puts the 'by faith' - viz next to "actually justified". The third statement talks about active and passive justification (not declarative) and they are by faith.
Let me quote another 'heretical' (by your estimate) view of a reformed baptist:
/"O what encouragement is here for great sinners, old sinners, backsliding sinners Jer.3.12 to believe in Christ! ..What though you are the worst of men, the greatest of sinners, and under matchless guilt; let it be so, and you are under the blackest character, yet there is hope;….Isa 1.8 ie they (thy sins) shall be washed away in Christ’s blood that very moment that you believe in him."/
I have no problems giving the same invitation to sinners. If we hold to the foolish notion of justification before faith, the appeal to sinners above would be theologically impossible/.
/Believing in Jesus Christ is no work, but a resting on Jesus Christ; ...The poor wearied sinner can never believe on Jesus Christ till he finds he can do nothing for himself; and in his first believing doth always apply himself to Christ for salvation…..This doctrine of free justification by faith alone, hath this advantage, that it suits all men’s spirits and frame in their serous approaches to God in worship. (Robert Traill)/
soli Deo gloria,
Tom
Message 68
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 12:31:23 +0800
Your reading of Buchanan is clearly biased. Please allow me the liberty to show why, and I re-quote:
> /The distinction between Actual and Declarative Justification, may be further illustrated by what is said of the Old Testament believers in the 11^th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Apostle refers to them as been _actually justified by faith_; but _his expressions show that he speaks *also*, and very specially, of their declarative justification_…../
Brother Tom,
I knew this was coming.
The word 'actually' (an ADVERB) as in 'actually justified by faith' is now taken by you to mean Actual (an adjective) as in Actual Justification. Can you see just how a slight misreading can do to the meaning of a simple statement.
My advice: don't read by *sight* and *sound* of a word, read by the *sense* of the word in its context.
I am sure you have no problem distinguishing an adverb from an adjective.
If you want to read the word 'actually' as a adjective, try reading the sentence again and see Buchanan openly contradict himself in the very same sentence. I think he is more consistent than many who are reading him.
For a moment try reading 'actually' as 'really justified by faith.' Then the whole idea of Actual justification disappear from the paragraph altogether. But you will go on insisting that it is there because of the *sight* and *sound* of that word *actually*.
We went through this before, didn't we?
A believer (like Abraham in Gen 15:1-6) is really/actually justified by faith in Declarative justification.
He was really/actually justified by grace in Actual justification at effectual calling out of sin and death.
The latter precedes the former, both logically and chronologically.
[*also* only indicates that Actual Justification is necessarily presupposed.]
I think you need to distinguish Actual justification is by God's free grace, and that Actual justification is received by faith; the former precedes the latter, both logically and chronologically. Actual Justification by grace must have taken place before it can be received by faith in Declarative Justification.
Actual Justification is not by faith. Actual justification is received by faith - and that is Declarative Justification by faith. Faith is the instrument to declare and attest the Actual Justification by the free grace of God. That's the proper relationship [and order] between the two.
Please do believe whatever you do understand at this stage.
I don't think I am in a position to teach you anything. You appear to me to be quite an accomplished self-taught man.
By grace, I remain
your brother in Christ,
sing
---
Message 69
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 12:55:55 +0800
Pastor Lau,
The quote was from Benjamin Keach- his system of theology is unashamedly evangelical RB
"The moment you believe, your sins shall be washed away in Christ's blood"
"O what encouragement is here for great sinners, old sinners, backsliding sinners Jer.3.12 to believe in Christ! ..What though you are the worst of men, the greatest of sinners, and under matchless guilt; let it be so, and you are under the blackest character, yet there is hope;Isa 1.8 ie they (thy sins) shall be washed away in Christ's blood that very moment that you believe in him."
Tom
Message 70
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:36:05 +0800
Brother Tom,
Tom: Both the RB and yourself believe the same regarding Justification by free grace. Indeed our salvation is all of grace. Our difference lies in the whether faith is before or after Actual Justification. You say faith justify as a work - but that's the Arminian concept of faith The RB (together with the Particular Baptist) says faith is the instrument or beggarly hands that receive the Righteousness of Christ. And that faith is a gift. And therefore Actual Justification is by free grace through faith.
I believe Actual justification is by free grace, and Declarative justification is by faith. Yes, by grace alone, declared and attested through faith in Christ.
All along, RBs like you have insisted that Actual justification is by faith. Go back and read your own posts, and the way you have been reading Buchanan and many Particular Baptists through that glasses.
I say faith and works justify in the declarative sense, they are evidences that declare and attest to the prior Actual justification by God's free grace.
"The grace of faith... is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts and is ordinarily wrought by the ministry of the Word." 1689.14.1. In that sense it is a gift, like ALL other saving graces worked in their hearts, and they not of their own.
The grace of faith worked in the heart of God's children by the indwelling Spirit of God, and the believing acts of God's children as a result of that gracious work are quite different things. God's children themselves must do all the believing. It is their activities... they do the believing. [Their spiritual work of believing is the instrument for their declarative justification.]
Faith and works are ALL effects of Actual Justification. This is what Particular Baptists declared in the 1689:
"Faith thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification;(6) yet it is not alone in the person justified, but ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love."
Faith is NOT ALONE in the person justified [Actual]. Many other graces are worked in them by the Holy Spirit that dwells in them. Is it not obvious that faith is a product or effect of Actual Justification? How could a product of Actual justification be the instrument of Actual justification? I have asked that long ago... and no RB care to give an answer.
Faith is the instrument to declare and attest the Actual justification by God's free grace. Faith is NOT the instrument of Actual justification - you insisted all along that it is.
Actual justification is by free grace... declared and attested through faith. This is VERY different from saying that Actual justification is by your faith... something which you HAVE INSISTED all along in our LONG series of exchanges.
I think you are still quite confused about a simple thing: faith as the instrument to receive the righteousness of Christ is a whole world of difference from saying that your faith is the instrument of your Actual justification. The former is the Declarative and Experiential aspect of salvation. The latter is Actual or Objective aspect of salvation.
A man that has beggarly hands that move to receive something... is he still under the condemnation of death, i.e. is he still an unjustified man... is he still spiritually dead... is he still an un-adopted alien...? Then what explains for the life and spiritual activities...? Think about it Brother Tom!
Thanks for the exchanges.
By grace, I remain
your brother in Christ,
sing
