Doctrine of Salvation

Doctrine of Salvation ST505 LESSON 10 of 24 Roger R. Nicole, Ph.D. Professor, Reformed Theological Seminary Corresponding Editor, Christianity Today Let us pray. Before the immense blessing of justification, O Lord, our God, we are moved with gratitude because we know that we do not deserve this immense blessing secured for us by Jesus Christ, our Lord. We pray that being justified by faith, we may also by your grace walk in faith and, therefore, serve you in a way that is acceptable in your sight. Through Jesus Christ, our Lord, we pray, Amen. There is a difficulty in the doctrine of justification that we sense also in the doctrine of original sin and in the doctrine of the atonement, and that is that judicial conditions are not available for substitution in the greatest number of cases that come to our attention as human beings. Definitely when a court has to take a decision concerning someone who has been accused, it has to determine whether that person is guilty or deserves to be acquitted. It will not do for anyone to intervene and say, I would like to take the place of a person who stands condemned because I would desire to deliver that person from the consequences of his or her deeds. If a person should come forward in this way, the judge would inevitably say, We do have the person who has committed the deeds that are reprehensible. We do not accept any substitute. You will go home and continue your life in integrity, but the punishment must be meted out the person who also has committed the crime. This is the principle of individual responsibility, which we observe very strictly in the judicial process, and when there is someone who is not guilty and who is condemned, then we say, There is a miscarriage of justice. The reason why this causes great difficulty for us is that there are some relationships that are found in original sin in the atonement and in the doctrine of justification which do not have a complete parallel elsewhere, and as a result, we are in the presence of a situation that is fundamentally different. 1 of 10

Now the principle of solidaric responsibility is manifested in a number of circumstances in human life, but these are not to be viewed as judicial, and the problems that arise for various people who are encompassed in one group are not to be considered as a judicial visitation unless these are specifically guilty of a certain crime that has been committed. In this way, we read in the Ten Commandments that God is a just judge and He will not leave unpunished those who take His name in vain, but He will punish the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation and be merciful to thousands who actually honor His name. Here we do have a principle that the family constitutes a unit and, therefore, a visitation which affects one person involves the others as well. A similar situation is found in the case of Achan, who had taken for himself some of the booty that had to be dedicated to God in the capture of Jericho, and when his crime was found out, then he and his family were condemned and stoned to death. Similarly, whenever someone behaves in a way that is particularly reprehensible, we recognize that the court can punish only that person, but there is a kind of reputation that extends upon the members of the family. The name itself is in some way cast into discredit, and the same is true when a nation is involved in a war or in an action which arouses the indignation of other nations. All those who belong to that particular group are inevitably under the stigma, whether or not they have participated in the action which in itself was reprehensible. But all of these matters are clearly providential rather than judicial, and at the judicial level, our courts do not accept the principle of substitution. In the case of original sin in which our relation to Adam is involved and in the case of the atonement and of justification in which our relationship with Christ is involved, we need to recognize that the connection between Adam and his descendants by natural generation on one side, and Jesus Christ and those who are His elect and to be redeemed on the other side is more intimate and binding than any other relationship that we know on this earth. There is no true and complete parallel to this covenantal condition in which the head stands for the whole group in such a way that what the head does relates to the standing of the group, and what the group does is also in some very real way applied to the head. 2 of 10

In the doctrine of original sin, we see, therefore, that the sin of Adam is not a private sin which has its effect only upon Adam himself and his wife, Eve, but it is a sin that affects the whole of humanity, so much so that all the members of the human race by natural generation encompassed within the person of Adam are rightly declared guilty of that first sin and are, therefore, under the bane and the rebellion which this particular attitude entails. Similarly, in the atonement, our Lord Jesus Christ, who Himself had the life of perfect obedience, accepted to stand as a substitute for all those whom He represents, that is, all those who are to be encompassed in His work of salvation. Therefore, He could receive in His own person the punishment due unto the sins of the redeemed, and this is precisely what He did, enduring on the cross of Calvary not only the judicial condemnation before a human criminal, but also the condemnation that issues from the righteousness of God and which involves separation from God, at least for a moment. When we consider justification, it is the same relationship that is in view, and that relationship involves the principle that those who believe in Jesus Christ, being attached to Him by faith through the work of the Holy Spirit that engrafts us into Christ in an indissoluble union, are by virtue of the work of Christ delivered from the condemnation which would normally fall upon them by virtue of their sin and are clothed with the righteousness of Jesus Christ, which can be placed to their account by virtue of that very same union. Because in judicial matters a substitution of this kind cannot be seen as a full parallel in human courts, the Scripture has used an additional form of language of great importance which recurs frequently in Scripture and which gives us an insight of the way in which substitution takes place. That is, the imagery of the marketplace, where the settlement of a situation of crisis is made by virtue of a payment. Sin in this light is viewed as a debt, as the Lord Jesus expressed it in what is known as the Lord s Prayer, Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And indeed by virtue of our sin, we are indebted to God, and God inevitably will visit upon us the sanctions of the law that we have violated, but if viewed as a debt, then a substitution can fairly easily take place. If I have a debt toward a person, it is not necessary that I should be the one who actually produces the payment as long as it is done in my name. If I am in arrears in my fee for rent, it is not necessary that it should be my funds, drawn perhaps from the bank, that would settle the indebtedness if there is a benefactor who comes and says, I will pay the money that you owe, then the situation 3 of 10

that I have toward the owner of the property is one that is entirely in order. He has no right to claim from me anything more than what has already been paid, and in this respect, at the level of the marketplace, the person who makes the payment is a matter that is not relevant to the question of whether or not the indebtedness was resolved. For this reason, very frequently in Scripture, the work of salvation is viewed in that light, and the imagery of the marketplace is used both to cause us to understand the atonement and to make it understandable for us how justification takes place by virtue of a settlement in full by the Lord Jesus Christ in our place for the debt that has been incurred by the commission of sin. The greatness of the debt is made particularly apparent in the great parable of Matthew 18, where you have the story of the master who had a claim against one of his servants, a claim as it is stated of 10,000 talents, and he cancelled out that debt, but when the servant came out, having been the object of this great benefaction, he encountered another person who owed him 100 denarii, that is, the equivalent of a hundred days of labor, and he pressed him to pay, unwilling to show the least condensation or pity on him. The natural understanding of this parable is to view that the master represents the attitude of God toward sinners, and that the relationship between the two servants is a relationship between human beings who may have incurred a fault against another person. We tend to minimize the importance of our indebtedness to God as if sin was only a peccadillo that God could easily disregard. On the other hand, where we are the offended party, we are often very demanding of reparation and restitution and amends made by the people who have trespassed against us. The parable shows us that this attitude on our part is not realistic, that the indebtedness that people have one toward the other, while real, is of relatively low significance, and that the indebtedness that we have incurred by our sinfulness in relationship to God is one of immense size. This perhaps becomes clouded for us because of the fact that we are not as well acquainted with the monetary system of the ancient [world] as we are with our own monetary system. On that account, it may be wise to attempt to translate the figures 10,000 talents and 100 denarii into dollars of the nineteenth or twentieth century in the United States. 4 of 10

The talent was a measure of weight whose exact value is open to some question. There have been people who talk about 60 pounds and others would talk about 100 pounds, and figures in between are also mentioned from time to time. If we take an average of something like 75 pounds, we will, I think, be safe enough not to exaggerate the amount involved. If somebody owes 75 pounds of silver or of gold, 10,000 times 75 will be 750,000 pounds, and if this were measured in gold, even counting the value of the gold as three hundred dollars per ounce, we would see that 750,000 pounds is equal to 16 times 750,000, which is 8 times 1,500,000, and that would be 12,000,000 ounces. Now if that in turn is multiplied by three hundred dollars, the result would be that an indebtedness of $3,600,000,000 would be in view. This figure is so staggering that we wonder how anybody could incur privately a debt of this size, and that, I believe, is precisely the purpose of the figure that our Lord mentioned. That is, that there is an immense indebtedness that we have toward God, an indebtedness that we would never be in a position to repay or to cancel out by payment. Therefore, the servant who said to his master, I will repay everything, simply was not functioning in terms of a realistic approach to his own situation, but what was needed is a cancellation of the debt as it is presented in the parable. By contrast, the debt that the other servant had toward the first one mentioned was about 100 days work, and the payment might be something like five thousand dollars, which is not an inconsequential sum, but which bears no comparison with a debt of $3,500,000,000. The impact, therefore, of the figures that Jesus has chosen is to show us the extreme gravity of our plight in terms of our indebtedness toward God and the relatively minor nature of the torts which human beings have toward one another. And it is here that the blessing of justification appears in that the master cancelled the debt. is that action whereby an indebtedness that we have toward God is being cancelled by virtue of the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ has offered a payment that is infinite and that, therefore, can adequately cover all the indebtedness that we may have incurred. The blessing of justification demands also on our part that we should show a forgiving spirit, and so at the end of the prayer, our Lord emphasizes in Matthew 6 that if we do not forgive, the Lord will not either forgive the sins that we have committed against Him. In other words, an attitude of forgiveness must inevitably characterize people who have in fact received justification. We cannot say that we earn our justification by a forgiving spirit. 5 of 10

What we should say rather is that by virtue of justification we are encouraged to maintain an attitude that is such that we are prepared to forgive others and those who are not so prepared would indicate that they have not understood fully what justification entails and that the fruit that must come from the reality of a renewed life has not come forward, which casts a question upon the reality of our appropriation of justification. When we have these three forms of imagery the language of the courts, the language of clothing, and the language of the marketplace to guide us, we are in a better position to understand precisely what justification entails. I would like now, therefore, to consider briefly certain relationships which justification bears to various other aspects. First of all, there is the relationship of justification to Christ and His work, and we can say that justification is the primary and immediate benefit that we derive from the atoning work of Christ. Outside of Christ we are subject to the penalties of our sin, but these have been absorbed by our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary and, therefore, the work of Christ has provided for us all that is necessary for the elimination of condemnation in our lives. It is, therefore, the work of Christ for us that is particularly in view in justification, not so much the work of the Holy Spirit in us, a work that we see particularly apparent in regeneration and sanctification. But [it is] the work of Christ Himself, our Mediator for us, who averts the condemnation that we would ordinarily receive somewhat as a lightning rod averts the charge of electricity of the lightning from a place which otherwise would be struck and destroyed by the storm. In the second place we ask, What is the relation of justification to the work of the Holy Spirit? Here I repeat, it is particularly the work of Christ for us that is in view in justification. That does not mean that the Holy Spirit is not active at this point, for it is He who applies to us the benefits that have been secured by the work of Christ. Therefore, in 1 Corinthians 6:11, we are told that we have been justified and washed by the Spirit of God. We would, therefore, say that by implanting us in Christ in that union which is the essential basis of salvation, the Holy Spirit secures that we who have been benefited by the work of Christ should, in fact, attain unto this benefit and be in the place in which the benefits can in fact be given to us. 6 of 10

Another question is, What is the relationship of justification to faith? We find many passages in Scripture where justification is indicated to be through faith and/or even by faith. The preposition varies somewhat in the New Testament, and faith is the activity whereby we appropriate the blessing that has been done for us by Jesus Christ. It does not add anything in itself to the work of Christ, but it is indispensable in the case of people who have reached the age of accountability that there should be an appropriation, a conscious acceptance of the work that Christ has done for us. Faith may represent the extended hand by which we receive the benefits that God is prepared to give to us. The hand does not add to the value of the gift that is proffered, but it is indispensable for the appropriation of that gift by any particular individual. In this sense, we should not say that faith is the basis of justification or the ground of justification. The ground for the benefit involved is entirely contained in the work of Christ, and there is nothing whatsoever that we need to add to this in order that it might be sufficient for the end in view. That is, that we should receive acceptance with God. In other words, God does not say, These people believe and therefore on account of that faith, I am going to give them justification. It is the work of Christ plus justification that is the ground of acceptance with me. But what God would say, if I may present it in that light. is that the ground of my acceptance is entirely found in Jesus Christ, but in order that people should be at the benefit of the work of Christ, it is necessary, indeed, that they should extend their hand to receive that which is proffered. Faith is therefore a means of appropriation rather than an additional merit or payment which would be made and that would be necessary for the obtaining of the blessing in view. What is the relationship of justification to good works? The good works are never the ground of justification, neither before a person comes to the experience of salvation nor afterwards. The only good work that is involved in justification is the good work of Jesus Christ. That is, it is His merit and His acceptance of our punishment which is the basis for justification. Good works, however, are not immaterial in respect to justification, for inevitably justification, rightly understood, involves us in a renewal of life in which inevitably good works will be produced. God has saved us unto good works that He has prepared that we should walk in them, as it is clearly stated in Ephesians 2:8, and so we need very much to manifest the reality of our justified state by an attitude of obedience and a sincere desire to serve God and 7 of 10

please Him, which may be described as good works. In this respect it is important to notice the teaching of the apostle Paul and that of the apostle James. There are people who have felt that Paul teaches justification by faith and that James teaches justification by works because he said if there are no works, our faith is dead and therefore does not justify. The relationship between these two teachings is not one of contradiction or opposition, but both the apostle Paul and the apostle James desire to clear the doctrine of justification from misunderstanding. Paul in Romans and Galatians particularly, but elsewhere as well, makes it plain that justification is not a reward that is given to us for works that are pleasing to God. It is not grounded in our performance, but it is grounded entirely in the perfect performance of Jesus Christ, the benefits of which are appropriated by the faith of the repentant and believing sinner. The apostle James, by contrast, deals with people who have misunderstood the position of Paul and who have come to think that if we are justified by faith, then what kind of works we do does not matter, and the apostle James shows that when a claim to justification is not supported by a life of obedience and service, then this claim appears to be an empty claim. has not been really appropriated because where it is appropriated it is also functions and produces works that are pleasing to God and which may be characterized as good works. In a sense, we might say that Paul is struggling against those who viewed justification as the result of dead works, works that are accomplished in our own strength and which, therefore, could never achieve for us a claim to acceptance by God, and James struggles against a view of justification where people think that justification may be appropriated by a dead faith, that is, a faith that is not operative but that does not manifest itself in the course of a life of those who claim to have the benefit. What both of them would teach is that justification is appropriated by a living faith, that is, a real attachment to Jesus Christ, a real participation in the blessings that He has secured, and when this occurs, then inevitably good works follow, although they are not the basis on the ground of which God accepts us, but rather the result of that true acceptance by God and of the work of the Holy Spirit in us, which is never absent when true justification occurs. 8 of 10

We may compare this situation to that of grafting. A branch will not produce fruit unless it is grafted into a tree, and it is the engrafting which leads to the production of a fruit that is acceptable, but it is not the fruit itself that is the basis for the grafting. The grafting is an operation which is done on the branch and which inevitably results in an improvement of the fruit because of the way in which nature functions. What is the relation of justification to rewards? We will say there is no relationship. is not a matter of rewards, but in addition to the great blessing of being viewed as acquitted and accepted in the beloved, the Christian, by the mercy of God, is also encouraged to receive rewards. That is to say, the Scripture promises rewards to those people who serve God faithfully. This is apparent in the parable of the talents and the parable of the pounds in Matthew and Luke respectively and where rewards are distributed to those servants who have been faithful. This does not involve justification, which is simply a restoration of a position of integrity in the presence of the judgment seat of God, and rewards represent an additional form of divine grace which is intended to encourage and fill with joy the heart of those who have served God in a faithful manner. What is the relation of justification to imputation? Now imputation is precisely the word to be used for justification, impartation being the word that particularly characterizes regeneration. In an imputation we have a transfer of credits, as it were, or if we take the monetary system, the transfer of funds from the treasury of Jesus Christ to the account of the believer. It is by the imputation of our sins upon Christ that He was able to expunge the burden of divine wrath against us for our sins. And it is by imputation that the righteousness of Christ in its beauty is transferred to our account, as was indicated in the imagery of the clothing. Therefore, imputation is the term that will appear both in the doctrine of original sin, where the sin of Adam is imputed to us (it is reckoned to our account); and in the doctrine of the atonement, in which our sin is imputed to Jesus Christ so that He can be the bearer of the punishment due unto us; and in the doctrine of justification in which, by virtue of the work of Christ, the punishment due unto our sin is cancelled and we are placed in the position of being covered by the righteousness of Christ. 9 of 10

What is the relationship of justification to the resurrection of Christ? We are told in Romans 4:25 that Christ died for our sins and rose again for our justification, and here the resurrection does not add a special benefit to the work of Christ, which is accomplished by His death. In a very real sense, Jesus said on the cross, It is finished! That is, the work that is necessary for the justification of sinners is accomplished. However, if Christ had remained under the power of death, we would be in a position of quandary, not knowing whether or not God had accepted the work of Christ and whether it was sufficient for the covering of all our sins. In the resurrection of Christ we have a manifestation of the fact that God has accepted this work and has received as a payment in full for the sin that we have incurred and that would interrupt our fellowship with Him. The resurrection of Christ from the dead, therefore, is the clear manifestation that justification has been accomplished and that the work of Christ has been accepted as the appropriate substitute for our lives. What is the relation of justification to time? And we would say this is a matter that entails some difficulty, for indeed there are various moments that can be recognized and which have a bearing on the doctrine of justification. There is a sense in which our justification, being a part of the decree of God for us, is from eternity. That is, it belongs to the eternal purpose of God in connection with our lives. But in the same way in which our lives occur in time, even though foreseeing and foreordained from eternity, justification as an actual verdict rather than as an intention must await a time in which we are involved. In that sense, we might say that justification occurred in a very real way at the cross of Calvary, where the Lord Jesus Christ actually did everything that was necessary for our acceptance, or as again at the resurrection, where the good pleasure of God was made manifest. Then again it occurs at the time of our being renewed by the Holy Spirit, and this is, I think, the major moment, for there we have the concurrence of the work of the Spirit and the work of Christ, which is applied to us particularly, but there is a justification at the time of our death and then again at the time of the second coming of Christ when the final judgment will authenticate the verdict of God once and for all. Christ-Centered Learning Anytime, Anywhere 10 of 10