386,926
edits
Difference between revisions of "Justification"
From BiblePortal Wikipedia
no edit summary
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
== Charles Buck Theological Dictionary <ref name="term_20016" /> == | == Charles Buck Theological Dictionary <ref name="term_20016" /> == | ||
<p> A forensic term, and signifies the declaring or the pronouncing a person righteous according to law. It stands opposed to condemnation; and this is the idea of the word whenever it is used in an evangelical sense, Romans 5:18 . Deuteronomy 25:1 . Proverbs 17:15 . Matthew 12:37 . It does not signify to make men holy, but the holding and declaring them so. It is defined by the assembly thus: "An act of God's free grace, in which he pardoneth all our sins, and accepteth us as righteous in his sight only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by faith alone." The doctrine of justification, says Mr. Booth, makes a very distinguished figure in that religion which is from above, and is a capital article of that faith which was once delivered to the saints. Far from being a merely speculative point, it spreads its influence through the whole body of divinity, runs through all Christian experience, and operates in every part of practical godliness. Such is its grand importance, that a mistake about it has a malignant efficacy, and is attended with a long train of dangerous consequences. </p> <p> Nor can this appear strange, when it is considered, that the doctrine of justification is no other than the way of a sinner's acceptance with God. Being of such peculiar moment, it is inseparably connected with many other evangelical truths, the harmony and beauty of which we cannot behold while this is misunderstood. It is, if any thing may be so called, an essential article, and certainly requires our most serious consideration. Justification, in a theological sense, is either legal or evangelical. If any person could be found that had never broken the divine law, he might be justified by it in a manner strictly legal. But in this way none of the human race can be justified, or stand acquitted before God. For all have sinned; there is none righteous; no, not one, Romans 3:1-31 : As sinners, they are under the sentence of death by his righteous law, and excluded from all hope and mercy. That justification, therefore, about which the Scriptures principally treat, and which reaches the case of a sinner, is not by a personal, but an imputed righteousness; a righteousness without the law, Romans 3:21 . provided by grace, and revealed in the Gospel; for which reason, that obedience by which a sinner is justified, and his justification itself are called evangelical. </p> <p> In this affair there is the most wonderful display of divine justice and boundless grace. Of divine justice, if we regard the meritorious cause and ground on which the [[Justifier]] proceeds in absolving the condemned sinner, and in pronouncing him righteous. Of boundless grace, if we consider the state and character of those persons to whom the blessing is granted. Justification may be farther distinguished as being either at the bar of God, and in the court of conscience; or in the sight of the world, and before our fellow-creatures. The former is by mere grace through faith; and the latter is by works. To justify is evidently a divine prerogative. It is God that justifieth, Rom 7: 33. That sovereign Being, against whom we have so greatly offended, whose law we have broken by ten thousand acts of rebellion against him, has, in the way of his own appointment, the sole right of acquitting the guilty, and of pronouncing them righteous. He appoints the way, provides the means, and imputes the righteousness; and all in perfect agreement with the demands of his offended law, and the rights of his violated justice. </p> <p> But although this act is in some places of the infallible word more particularly appropriated personally to the Father, yet it is manifest that all the Three [[Persons]] are concerned in this grand affair, and each performs a distinct part in this particular, as also in the whole economy of salvation. The eternal Father is represented as appointing the way, and as giving his own Son to perform the conditions of our acceptance before him, Romans 8:32 : the divine Son as engaged to sustain the curse, and make the atonement; to fulfil the terms, and provide the righteousness by which we are justified, Titus 2:14 : and the Holy Spirit as revealing to sinners the perfection, suitableness, and freeness of the Saviour's work, enabling them to receive it as exhibited in the Gospel of sovereign grace; and testifying to their consciences complete justification by it in the court of heaven, John 16:8; John 16:14 . As to the objects of justification, the [[Scripture]] says, they are sinners, and ungodly. For thus runs the divine declaration: To him that worketh is the reward of justification, and of eternal life as connected with it; not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth </p> <p> whom? the righteous? the holy? the eminently pious? nay, verily, but the ungodly; his faith, or that in which he believes, is counted unto him for righteousness, Romans 4:4-5 . Galatians 2:17 . Here, then, we learn, that the subjects of justification, considered in themselves, are not only destitute of a perfect righteousness, but have performed no good works at all. They are denominated and considered as the ungodly, when the blessing is bestowed upon them. Not that we are to understand that such remain ungodly. "All, " says Dr. Owen, "that are justified, were before ungodly: but al that are justified, are, at the same instant, made godly." That the mere sinner, however, is the subject of justification, appears from hence. The Spirit of God, speaking in the Scripture, repeatedly declares that we are justified by grace. But grace stands in direct opposition to works. Whoever, therefore, is justified by grace, is considered as absolutely unworthy in that very instant when the blessing is vouchsafed to him, Romans 3:1-31 . The person, therefore, that is justified, is accepted without any cause in himself. </p> <p> Hence it appears, that if we regard the persons who are justified, and their state prior to the enjoyment of the immensely glorious privilege, divine grace appears, and reigns in all its glory. As to the way and manner in which sinners are justined, it may be observed that the Divine Being can acquit none without a complete righteousness. Justification, as before observed, is evidently a forensic term, and the thing intended by it a judicial act. So that, were a person to be justified without a righteousness, the judgment would not be according to truth; it would be a false and unrighteous sentence. That righteousness by which we are justified must be equal to the demands of that law according to which the Sovereign Judge proceeds in our justification. Many persons talk of conditions of justification (see article CONDITION;) but the only condition is that of perfect righteousness: this the law requires, nor does the Gospel substitute another. But where shall we find, or how shall we obtain a justifying righteousness? Shall we flee to the law for relief? Shall we apply with diligence and zeal to the performance of duty, in order to attain the desired end? The apostle positively affirms, that there is no acceptance with God by the works of the law; and the reasons are evident. Our righteousness is imperfect, and consequently cannot justify. If justification were by the works of men, it could not be by grace: it would not be a righteousness without works. </p> <p> There would be no need of the righteousness of Christ; and, lastly, if justification were by the law, then boasting would be encouraged; whereas God's design, in the whole scheme of salvation, is to exclude it, Romans 3:27 . Ephesians 2:8-9 . Nor is faith itself our righteousness, or that for the sake of which we are justified: for, though believers are said to be justified by faith, yet not for faith: faith can only be considered as the instrument, and not the cause. That faith is not our righteousness, is evident from the following considerations: No man's faith is perfect; and, if it were, it would not be equal to the demands of the divine law. It could not, therefore, without an error in judgment, be accounted a complete righteousness. But the judgment of God, as before proved, is according to truth, and according to the rights of his law. That obedience by which a sinner is justified is called the righteousness of faith, righteousness by faith, and is represented as revealed to faith; consequently it cannot be faith itself. Faith, in the business of justification, stands opposed to all works; to him that worketh not, but believeth. </p> <p> Now, if it were our justifying righteousness, to consider it in such a light would be highly improper. For in such a connection it falls under the consideration of a work; a condition, on the performance of which our acceptance with God is manifestly suspended. If faith itself be that on account of which we are accepted, then some believers are justified by a more, and some by a less perfect righteousness, in exact proportion to the strength or weakness of their faith. That which is the end of the law is our righteousness, which certainly is not faith, but the obedience of our exalted substitute, Romans 10:4 . Were faith itself our justifying righteousness, we might depend upon it before God, and rejoice in it. So that according to this hypothesis, not Christ, but faith, is the capital thing; the object to which we must look, which is absurd. When the apostle says, "faith was imputed to him for righteousness, " his main design was to prove that the eternal Sovereign justifies freely, without any cause in the creature. Nor is man's obedience to the Gospel as to a new and milder law the matter of his justification before God. </p> <p> It was a notion that some years ago obtained, that a relaxation of the law, and the severities of it, has been obtained by Christ; and a new law, a remedial law, a law of milder terms, has been introduced by him, which is the Gospel; the terms of which are faith, repentance, and obedience; and though these are imperfect, yet, being sincere, they are accepted of by God in the room of a perfect righteousness. But every part of this scheme is wrong, for the law is not relaxed, nor any of its severities abated; there is no alteration made in it, either with respect to its precepts or penalty: besides, the scheme is absurd, for it supposes that the law which a man is now under requires only an imperfect obedience: but an imperfect righteousness cannot answer its demands; for every law requires perfect obedience to its own precepts and prohibitions. Nor is a profession of religion, nor sincerity, nor good works, at all the ground of our acceptance with God, for all our righteousness is imperfect, and must therefore be entirely excluded. By grace, saith the apostle, ye are saved, not of works, lest any man should boast, Ephesians 2:8-9 . Besides, the works of sanctification and justification are two distinct things: the one is a work of grace within men; the other an act of grace for or towards men: the one is imperfect, the other complete; the one carried on gradually, the other done at once. </p> <p> See | <p> A forensic term, and signifies the declaring or the pronouncing a person righteous according to law. It stands opposed to condemnation; and this is the idea of the word whenever it is used in an evangelical sense, Romans 5:18 . Deuteronomy 25:1 . Proverbs 17:15 . Matthew 12:37 . It does not signify to make men holy, but the holding and declaring them so. It is defined by the assembly thus: "An act of God's free grace, in which he pardoneth all our sins, and accepteth us as righteous in his sight only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by faith alone." The doctrine of justification, says Mr. Booth, makes a very distinguished figure in that religion which is from above, and is a capital article of that faith which was once delivered to the saints. Far from being a merely speculative point, it spreads its influence through the whole body of divinity, runs through all Christian experience, and operates in every part of practical godliness. Such is its grand importance, that a mistake about it has a malignant efficacy, and is attended with a long train of dangerous consequences. </p> <p> Nor can this appear strange, when it is considered, that the doctrine of justification is no other than the way of a sinner's acceptance with God. Being of such peculiar moment, it is inseparably connected with many other evangelical truths, the harmony and beauty of which we cannot behold while this is misunderstood. It is, if any thing may be so called, an essential article, and certainly requires our most serious consideration. Justification, in a theological sense, is either legal or evangelical. If any person could be found that had never broken the divine law, he might be justified by it in a manner strictly legal. But in this way none of the human race can be justified, or stand acquitted before God. For all have sinned; there is none righteous; no, not one, Romans 3:1-31 : As sinners, they are under the sentence of death by his righteous law, and excluded from all hope and mercy. That justification, therefore, about which the Scriptures principally treat, and which reaches the case of a sinner, is not by a personal, but an imputed righteousness; a righteousness without the law, Romans 3:21 . provided by grace, and revealed in the Gospel; for which reason, that obedience by which a sinner is justified, and his justification itself are called evangelical. </p> <p> In this affair there is the most wonderful display of divine justice and boundless grace. Of divine justice, if we regard the meritorious cause and ground on which the [[Justifier]] proceeds in absolving the condemned sinner, and in pronouncing him righteous. Of boundless grace, if we consider the state and character of those persons to whom the blessing is granted. Justification may be farther distinguished as being either at the bar of God, and in the court of conscience; or in the sight of the world, and before our fellow-creatures. The former is by mere grace through faith; and the latter is by works. To justify is evidently a divine prerogative. It is God that justifieth, Rom 7: 33. That sovereign Being, against whom we have so greatly offended, whose law we have broken by ten thousand acts of rebellion against him, has, in the way of his own appointment, the sole right of acquitting the guilty, and of pronouncing them righteous. He appoints the way, provides the means, and imputes the righteousness; and all in perfect agreement with the demands of his offended law, and the rights of his violated justice. </p> <p> But although this act is in some places of the infallible word more particularly appropriated personally to the Father, yet it is manifest that all the Three [[Persons]] are concerned in this grand affair, and each performs a distinct part in this particular, as also in the whole economy of salvation. The eternal Father is represented as appointing the way, and as giving his own Son to perform the conditions of our acceptance before him, Romans 8:32 : the divine Son as engaged to sustain the curse, and make the atonement; to fulfil the terms, and provide the righteousness by which we are justified, Titus 2:14 : and the Holy Spirit as revealing to sinners the perfection, suitableness, and freeness of the Saviour's work, enabling them to receive it as exhibited in the Gospel of sovereign grace; and testifying to their consciences complete justification by it in the court of heaven, John 16:8; John 16:14 . As to the objects of justification, the [[Scripture]] says, they are sinners, and ungodly. For thus runs the divine declaration: To him that worketh is the reward of justification, and of eternal life as connected with it; not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth </p> <p> whom? the righteous? the holy? the eminently pious? nay, verily, but the ungodly; his faith, or that in which he believes, is counted unto him for righteousness, Romans 4:4-5 . Galatians 2:17 . Here, then, we learn, that the subjects of justification, considered in themselves, are not only destitute of a perfect righteousness, but have performed no good works at all. They are denominated and considered as the ungodly, when the blessing is bestowed upon them. Not that we are to understand that such remain ungodly. "All, " says Dr. Owen, "that are justified, were before ungodly: but al that are justified, are, at the same instant, made godly." That the mere sinner, however, is the subject of justification, appears from hence. The Spirit of God, speaking in the Scripture, repeatedly declares that we are justified by grace. But grace stands in direct opposition to works. Whoever, therefore, is justified by grace, is considered as absolutely unworthy in that very instant when the blessing is vouchsafed to him, Romans 3:1-31 . The person, therefore, that is justified, is accepted without any cause in himself. </p> <p> Hence it appears, that if we regard the persons who are justified, and their state prior to the enjoyment of the immensely glorious privilege, divine grace appears, and reigns in all its glory. As to the way and manner in which sinners are justined, it may be observed that the Divine Being can acquit none without a complete righteousness. Justification, as before observed, is evidently a forensic term, and the thing intended by it a judicial act. So that, were a person to be justified without a righteousness, the judgment would not be according to truth; it would be a false and unrighteous sentence. That righteousness by which we are justified must be equal to the demands of that law according to which the Sovereign Judge proceeds in our justification. Many persons talk of conditions of justification (see article CONDITION;) but the only condition is that of perfect righteousness: this the law requires, nor does the Gospel substitute another. But where shall we find, or how shall we obtain a justifying righteousness? Shall we flee to the law for relief? Shall we apply with diligence and zeal to the performance of duty, in order to attain the desired end? The apostle positively affirms, that there is no acceptance with God by the works of the law; and the reasons are evident. Our righteousness is imperfect, and consequently cannot justify. If justification were by the works of men, it could not be by grace: it would not be a righteousness without works. </p> <p> There would be no need of the righteousness of Christ; and, lastly, if justification were by the law, then boasting would be encouraged; whereas God's design, in the whole scheme of salvation, is to exclude it, Romans 3:27 . Ephesians 2:8-9 . Nor is faith itself our righteousness, or that for the sake of which we are justified: for, though believers are said to be justified by faith, yet not for faith: faith can only be considered as the instrument, and not the cause. That faith is not our righteousness, is evident from the following considerations: No man's faith is perfect; and, if it were, it would not be equal to the demands of the divine law. It could not, therefore, without an error in judgment, be accounted a complete righteousness. But the judgment of God, as before proved, is according to truth, and according to the rights of his law. That obedience by which a sinner is justified is called the righteousness of faith, righteousness by faith, and is represented as revealed to faith; consequently it cannot be faith itself. Faith, in the business of justification, stands opposed to all works; to him that worketh not, but believeth. </p> <p> Now, if it were our justifying righteousness, to consider it in such a light would be highly improper. For in such a connection it falls under the consideration of a work; a condition, on the performance of which our acceptance with God is manifestly suspended. If faith itself be that on account of which we are accepted, then some believers are justified by a more, and some by a less perfect righteousness, in exact proportion to the strength or weakness of their faith. That which is the end of the law is our righteousness, which certainly is not faith, but the obedience of our exalted substitute, Romans 10:4 . Were faith itself our justifying righteousness, we might depend upon it before God, and rejoice in it. So that according to this hypothesis, not Christ, but faith, is the capital thing; the object to which we must look, which is absurd. When the apostle says, "faith was imputed to him for righteousness, " his main design was to prove that the eternal Sovereign justifies freely, without any cause in the creature. Nor is man's obedience to the Gospel as to a new and milder law the matter of his justification before God. </p> <p> It was a notion that some years ago obtained, that a relaxation of the law, and the severities of it, has been obtained by Christ; and a new law, a remedial law, a law of milder terms, has been introduced by him, which is the Gospel; the terms of which are faith, repentance, and obedience; and though these are imperfect, yet, being sincere, they are accepted of by God in the room of a perfect righteousness. But every part of this scheme is wrong, for the law is not relaxed, nor any of its severities abated; there is no alteration made in it, either with respect to its precepts or penalty: besides, the scheme is absurd, for it supposes that the law which a man is now under requires only an imperfect obedience: but an imperfect righteousness cannot answer its demands; for every law requires perfect obedience to its own precepts and prohibitions. Nor is a profession of religion, nor sincerity, nor good works, at all the ground of our acceptance with God, for all our righteousness is imperfect, and must therefore be entirely excluded. By grace, saith the apostle, ye are saved, not of works, lest any man should boast, Ephesians 2:8-9 . Besides, the works of sanctification and justification are two distinct things: the one is a work of grace within men; the other an act of grace for or towards men: the one is imperfect, the other complete; the one carried on gradually, the other done at once. </p> <p> See [[Sanctification]] If, then, we cannot possibly be justified by any of our own performances, nor by faith itself, nor even by the graces of the Holy Spirit, where then shall we find a righteousness by which we can be justified? The Scripture furnishes us with an answer </p> <p> "By Jesus Christ all that believe are justified from all things from which they could not be justified by the law of Moses, " Acts 13:38-39 . "He was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification, " Romans 4:25 . "Being justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him, " Romans 5:9 . The spotless obedience, therefore, the bitter sufferings, and the accursed death of our heavenly Surety, constitute that very righteousness by which sinners are justified before God. That this righteousness is imputed to us, and that we are not justified by a personal righteousness, appears from the Scripture with superior evidence. "By the obedience of one shall many be made righteous, " Rom 19. "He hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, " 2 Corinthians 5:21 . "And he found in him, not having mine own righteousness which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ; the righteousness which is of God by faith, " Philippians 3:8 . </p> <p> See also Jeremiah 23:6 . Daniel 9:24 . the whole of the 2nd chapter of Galatians. </p> <p> See articles [[Reconcilliation, Righteousness]] As to the properties of justification: </p> <p> 1. It is an act of God's free grace, without any merit whatever in the creature, Romans 3:24 . </p> <p> 2. It is an act of justice as well as grace: the law being perfectly fulfilled in Christ, and divine justice satisfied, Romans 3:26 . Psalms 85:10 . </p> <p> 3. It is an individual and instantaneous act done at once, admitting of no degrees, John 19:30 . </p> <p> 4. It is irreversible, and an unalterable act, Malachi 3:6 . As to the time of justification, divines are not agreed. Some have distinguished it into decretive, virtual, and actual </p> <p> 1. Decretive, is God's eternal purpose to justify sinners in time by Jesus Christ. </p> <p> 2. Virtual justification has a reference to the satisfaction made by Christ. </p> <p> 3. Actual, is, when we are enabled to believe in Christ, and by faith are united to him. Others say it is eternal, because his purpose respecting it was from everlasting: and that, as the [[Almighty]] viewed his people in Christ, they were, of consequence, justified in his sight. But it appears to me, that the principle on which the advocates for this doctrine have proceeded is wrong. They have confounded the design with the execution; for if this distinction be not kept up, the utmost perplexity will follow the consideration of every subject which relates to the decrees of God; nor shall we be able to form any clear ideas of his moral government whatever. </p> <p> To say, as one does, that the eternal will of God to justify men is the justification of them, is not to the purpose; for, upon the same ground, we might as well say that the eternal will of God to convert and glorify his people is the real conversion and glorification of them. That it was eternally determined that there should be a people who should believe in Christ, and that his righteousness should be imputed to them, is not to be disputed; but to say that these things were really done from eternity (which we must say if we believe eternal justification, ) this would be absurd. It is more consistent to believe, that God more consistent to believe, that God from eternity laid the plan of justification; that this plan was executed by the life and death of Christ; and that the blessing is only manifested, received, and enjoyed, when we are regenerated; so that no man can say or has any reason to conclude, he is justified, until he believes in Christ, Romans 5:1 . The effects or blessings of justification, are, </p> <p> 1. An entire freedom from all penal evils in this life, and that which is to come, 1 Corinthians 3:22 . </p> <p> 2. Peace with God, Romans 5:1 . </p> <p> 3. [[Access]] to God through Christ, Ephesians 3:12 . </p> <p> 4. [[Acceptance]] with God, Ephesians 5:27 . </p> <p> 5. Holy confidence and security under all the difficulties and troubles of the present state, 2 Timothy 1:12 . </p> <p> 6. Finally, eternal salvation, Romans 8:30 . Romans 5:18 . Thus we have given as comprehensive a view of the doctrine of justification as the nature of this work will admit; a doctrine which is founded upon the sacred Scriptures; and which, so far from leading to licentiousness, as some suppose, is of all others the most replete with motives to love, dependence, and obedience, Romans 6:1-2 . A doctrine which the primitive Christians held as constituting the very essence of their system; which our reformers considered as the most important point; which our venerable martyrs gloried in, and sealed with their blood; and which, as the church of [[England]] observes, is a "very wholesome doctrine, and full of comfort." </p> <p> See Dr. Owen on Justification; Rawlins on Justification; Edwards's [[Sermon]] on ditto; [[Lime]] Street Aspasio, and [[Eleven]] Letters; Witherspoon's Connexion between Justification and Holiness; Gill and Ridgley's Div. but especially Booth's [[Reign]] of Grace, to which I am indebted for great part of the above article. </p> | ||
== Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology <ref name="term_17982" /> == | == Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology <ref name="term_17982" /> == | ||
<p> Justification is the declaring of a person to be just or righteous. It is a legal term signifying acquittal, a fact that makes it unpalatable to many in our day. We tend to distrust legalism and thus we dismiss anything that savors of a legalistic approach. We should be clear that our hesitation was not shared by the biblical writers. In their day it was axiomatic that a wealthy and important citizen would not be treated in a law court in the same way as an insignificant person. Indeed this was sometimes written into the statutes and, for example, in the ancient Code of [[Hammurabi]] it is laid down that if a citizen knocked out the tooth of another citizen his own tooth should be knocked out. But if the victim was a vassal it sufficed to pay a small fine. Nobody expected strict justice in human tribunals but the biblical writers were sure that God is a God of justice. Throughout the Bible justice is a category of fundamental importance. </p> <p> It mattered to the biblical writers that God is a God is a God of perfect justice, a truth expressed in Abraham's question, "Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?" ( Genesis 18:25 ). God can be relied on to act in perfect justice and without giving preference to the wealthy and the highly placed in our human societies. "The Lord takes his place in court; he rises to judge the people. The Lord enters into judgment against the elders and leaders of his people" ( Isaiah 3:13-14 ). Over and over the punishment of evil is put in legal terms ( Exodus 6:6; 7:4 ) and specifically Israel's sin is brought out with the use of legal imagery ( Micah 6:1-2 ). </p> <p> Accordingly it is not surprising that salvation is often viewed in legal terms. The basic question in all religion is, "How can sinful people be just (i.e., be justified) before the holy God?" Justification is a legal term with a meaning like "acquittal"; in religion it points to the process whereby a person is declared to be right before God. That person should be an upright and good person, but justification does not point to qualities like these. That is rather the content of sanctification. Justification points to the acquittal of one who is tried before God. In both the Old [[Testament]] and the New the question receives a good deal of attention and in both it is clear that people cannot bring about their justification by their own efforts. The legal force of the terminology is clear when Job exclaims, "Now that I have prepared my case, I know I will be vindicated" ( Job 13:18 ). </p> <p> Justification ( <i> dikaiosis </i> []) is connected linguistically with righteousness ( <i> dikaiosune </i> []); in the first century it is clear that all the words with this root were concerned with conformity to a standard of right. And in Scripture it is not too much to say that righteousness is basically a legal term. The law that mattered was, of course, the law of God, so that righteousness signified conformity to the law of God. </p> <p> <i> The Old Testament </i> . We do not find the full New Testament doctrine of justification by faith in the Old Testament, but we do find teachings that agree with it and that in due course were taken up into that doctrine. Thus it is made clear that sin is uNIVersal, but that God provides forgiveness. For the first point, "All have turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one" ( Psalm 14:3 ). And when God looks down from heaven he sees that "they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one" ( Psalm 53:2-3 ). Many such passages could be cited. And for the second point, "If you, [[O]] Lord, kept a record of sins, O Lord, who could stand? But with you there is forgiveness" ( Psalm 130:3-4 ). The end of Micah's prophecy emphasizes that God is a God "who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance" and that he "delights to show mercy" (7:18-20). </p> <p> Sometimes we find the thought that God imputes righteousness to people. He did this to Abraham, who believed God "and he credited it to him as righteousness" ( Genesis 15:6 ). Again [[Phinehas]] took decisive action so that the plague was checked and "This was credited to him as righteousness" ( Psalm 106:31; Phinehas is described in the words, "as zealous as I am for my honor among them, " Numbers 25:11 ). And the prophet can say, "He who vindicates (or justifies) me is near" ( Isaiah 50:8 ). </p> <p> <i> The New Testament </i> . When we turn to the New Testament we must be clear that the righteousness and justification terminology is to be understood in the light of its Hebrew background, not in terms of contemporary Greek ideas. We see this, for example, in the words of Jesus who speaks of people giving account on the day of judgment: "by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned" ( Matthew 12:37; the word NIV translates "acquitted" is the one Paul normally uses for "justified" ). Those acquitted on the day of judgment are spoken of as "the righteous" ( Matthew 25:37; they go into "eternal life, " v. 46 ). </p> <p> The verb translated "to justify" clearly means "to declare righteous." It is used of God in a quotation, which the New International Version renders "So that you may be proved right when you speak" ( Romans 3:4; the NRSV has more exactly, "So that you may be justified in your words" ). Now God cannot be "made righteous"; the expression obviously means "shown to be righteous" and this helps us see that when the word is applied to believers it does not mean "made righteous"; it signifies "declared righteous, " "shown to be in the right, " or the like. </p> <p> Paul is fond of the concept of justification; indeed for him it is the characteristic way of referring to the central truth of the gospel. He makes much more use of the concept than do the other writers of the New Testament. This does not mean that he has a different understanding of the gospel; it is the same gospel that he proclaims, the gospel that the death of Christ on the cross has opened a way of salvation for sinners. But he uses the concept of justification to express it whereas the other writers prefer other terms. He says, "Just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous" ( Romans 5:19 ). We should not understand "were made sinners" in any such sense as "were compelled to be sinners." It signifies "were constituted sinners, " "were reckoned as sinners." Paul is saying that the whole human race is caught up in the effect of Adam's sin; now all are sinners. Paul speaks of God "who justifies the wicked" ( Romans 4:5 ): it is not people who have merited their salvation of whom he writes, but people who had no claim on salvation. It was "while we were still sinners" that Christ died for us ( Romans 5:8 ). But the effect of Christ's saving work is that now all believers are "made righteous, " "accepted by God as righteous." </p> <p> Paul insists that people are not justified by what they themselves do. Justification is not the result of the infusion of new life into people, but comes about when they believe. The apostle points to the important example of Abraham, the great forbear of the Jewish race, as one who was not justified by works ( Romans 4:2-3 ). And, of course, if Abraham was not justified by works, then who could possibly be? Specifically Paul says, "a man is not justified by observing the law"; indeed, "by observing the law no one will be justified" ( Galatians 2:16; cf. also Galatians 3:11 ). </p> <p> There is something of a problem in that, whereas Paul says quite plainly that justification is by faith and not by works, James holds that "a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone" (2:24). James chooses Abraham and [[Rahab]] as examples of people who were justified by works (2:21,25). He points out that Abraham "offered his son Isaac on the altar" and that Rahab lodged the spies and sent them away. </p> <p> But we should notice that both these Old Testament worthies are elsewhere singled out as examples of faith. Paul cited Abraham to establish the truth that we are justified by faith rather than by works. Indeed, he quotes Scripture, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness" ( Romans 4:3 , citing Genesis 15:6; he cites it again in v. 22 ). In Romans 4Paul has a strong argument that it was not works that commended the patriarch to God, but faith: Abraham is, for Paul, the classic example of a man who believed and who was accepted by God because of his faith. And the writer to the Hebrews says plainly that it was "by faith" that Rahab welcomed the spies ( Hebrews 11:31 ). </p> <p> If we look more closely at what James says we see that he is not arguing for works in the absence of faith, but rather for works as the evidence of faith. "Show me your faith without deeds, " he writes, "and I will show you my faith by what I do" (2:18) and goes on to cite the demons who believe that there is one God as examples of the kind of faith he deprecates. James is sure that saving faith transforms the believer so that good works necessarily follow; and he complains about people who say they have faith, but whose lives show quite plainly that they have not been saved. When people have saving faith God transforms their lives and James' point is that in the absence of this transformation we have no reason for thinking that those who profess to be believers really have saving faith. We should not overlook the fact that James as well as Paul quotes Genesis 15:6 to make it clear that Abraham was justified by faith. And we should bear in mind that this was many years before he offered Isaac on the altar; indeed it was before Isaac was born. While the offering of Isaac showed that Abraham was justified, his justification, even on James' premises, took place long before the act that showed its presence. </p> <p> And we must say much the same about Paul. He certainly calls vigorously for faith, but he calls equally vigorously for lives of Christian service. And when he writes, "The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love" ( Galatians 5:6 ), he is saying something with which James would surely agree. For James says, "I will show you my faith by what I do" (2:18). </p> <p> Paul continually emphasizes the importance of justification by faith. In his sermon at [[Antioch]] in [[Pisidia]] he points out that "through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you" and immediately adds, "Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses" ( Acts 13:38-39 ). More than once he quotes the words from Habbakuk 2:4, "the righteous will live by faith" ( Romans 1:17; Galatians 3:11; cf. also Galatians 2:16; Hebrews 10:38 ). He says explicitly that justification is by faith and not by observing the law ( Romans 3:28 ), or simply that "we have been justified through faith" ( Romans 5:1 ). </p> <p> Paul does not, of course, argue that faith is a meritorious act that of itself brings about justification. He is not saying that if we believe strongly enough we somehow get rid of our sins. But real faith means trust in God and when we trust God we are open to the divine power that works in us to make us the sort of people we ought to be and to accomplish the divine purpose. When we insist on our own moral performance we cut ourselves off from the good that God works in believers. </p> <p> At the center of Paul's religion is the cross of Jesus, and faith means trusting the crucified Lord. Thus Paul says that Jesus "was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification" ( Romans 4:25 ). We should not, of course, put too strong a distinction between the effects of Jesus' death and the effects of his resurrection. Paul is saying that Jesus' death and resurrection meant a complete dealing with sins and a perfectly accomplished justification. We are "justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus" ( Romans 3:24 ), which means that Jesus' atoning death is critically important in our justification. Similarly we are justified "by his grace" ( Romans 3:24 ), "by his blood" ( Romans 5:9 ), "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" ( 1 Corinthians 6:11 ), and "in Christ" ( Galatians 2:17 ), which are all ways of saying that it is the saving work of Jesus that brings about the justification of sinners. </p> <p> [[Salvation]] by the way of the cross was so that God would be "just and the one who justifies the man who has faith in Jesus" ( Romans 3:26 ). This will be in mind also in the reference to God as presenting Christ "as a sacrifice of atonement (better, "a propitiation") through faith in his blood" ( Romans 3:25 ). That we are "justified by his blood" ( Romans 5:9 ) points to the same truth: It is the death of Jesus that makes us right with God. This is the meaning also when we read that we are "justified by his grace" ( Titus 3:7 ). It was God's good gift that brought justification, his "one act of righteousness" in Christ that effected it ( Romans 5:16,18 ). Another way of putting it is that the saved are saved not because of their own righteousness (they are sinners), but because of the righteousness that is from God and which they receive by faith ( Philippians 3:9; cf. 2Col 5:21). </p> <p> It is plain from the New Testament teaching throughout that justification comes to the sinner by the atoning work of Jesus and that this is applied to the individual sinner by faith. That God pardons and accepts believing sinners is the truth that is enshrined in the doctrine of justification by faith. </p> <p> [[Leon]] Morris </p> <p> See also Atonement; [[Crucifixion Cross]]; [[Death Of Christ]]; Faith; [[Paul The Apostle]]; [[Works Of The Law]] </p> <p> <i> Bibliography </i> . M. Barth, <i> Justification </i> ; G. C. Berkouwer, <i> Faith and Justification </i> ; J. Buchanan, <i> The [[Doctrine]] of Justification </i> ; F. Colquhoun, <i> The Meaning of Justification </i> ; L. Morris, <i> The [[Apostolic]] [[Preaching]] of the Cross </i> ; idem, <i> The Cross in the New Testament </i> ; P. Toon, <i> Justification and | <p> Justification is the declaring of a person to be just or righteous. It is a legal term signifying acquittal, a fact that makes it unpalatable to many in our day. We tend to distrust legalism and thus we dismiss anything that savors of a legalistic approach. We should be clear that our hesitation was not shared by the biblical writers. In their day it was axiomatic that a wealthy and important citizen would not be treated in a law court in the same way as an insignificant person. Indeed this was sometimes written into the statutes and, for example, in the ancient Code of [[Hammurabi]] it is laid down that if a citizen knocked out the tooth of another citizen his own tooth should be knocked out. But if the victim was a vassal it sufficed to pay a small fine. Nobody expected strict justice in human tribunals but the biblical writers were sure that God is a God of justice. Throughout the Bible justice is a category of fundamental importance. </p> <p> It mattered to the biblical writers that God is a God is a God of perfect justice, a truth expressed in Abraham's question, "Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?" ( Genesis 18:25 ). God can be relied on to act in perfect justice and without giving preference to the wealthy and the highly placed in our human societies. "The Lord takes his place in court; he rises to judge the people. The Lord enters into judgment against the elders and leaders of his people" ( Isaiah 3:13-14 ). Over and over the punishment of evil is put in legal terms ( Exodus 6:6; 7:4 ) and specifically Israel's sin is brought out with the use of legal imagery ( Micah 6:1-2 ). </p> <p> Accordingly it is not surprising that salvation is often viewed in legal terms. The basic question in all religion is, "How can sinful people be just (i.e., be justified) before the holy God?" Justification is a legal term with a meaning like "acquittal"; in religion it points to the process whereby a person is declared to be right before God. That person should be an upright and good person, but justification does not point to qualities like these. That is rather the content of sanctification. Justification points to the acquittal of one who is tried before God. In both the Old [[Testament]] and the New the question receives a good deal of attention and in both it is clear that people cannot bring about their justification by their own efforts. The legal force of the terminology is clear when Job exclaims, "Now that I have prepared my case, I know I will be vindicated" ( Job 13:18 ). </p> <p> Justification ( <i> dikaiosis </i> []) is connected linguistically with righteousness ( <i> dikaiosune </i> []); in the first century it is clear that all the words with this root were concerned with conformity to a standard of right. And in Scripture it is not too much to say that righteousness is basically a legal term. The law that mattered was, of course, the law of God, so that righteousness signified conformity to the law of God. </p> <p> <i> The Old Testament </i> . We do not find the full New Testament doctrine of justification by faith in the Old Testament, but we do find teachings that agree with it and that in due course were taken up into that doctrine. Thus it is made clear that sin is uNIVersal, but that God provides forgiveness. For the first point, "All have turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one" ( Psalm 14:3 ). And when God looks down from heaven he sees that "they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one" ( Psalm 53:2-3 ). Many such passages could be cited. And for the second point, "If you, [[O]] Lord, kept a record of sins, O Lord, who could stand? But with you there is forgiveness" ( Psalm 130:3-4 ). The end of Micah's prophecy emphasizes that God is a God "who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance" and that he "delights to show mercy" (7:18-20). </p> <p> Sometimes we find the thought that God imputes righteousness to people. He did this to Abraham, who believed God "and he credited it to him as righteousness" ( Genesis 15:6 ). Again [[Phinehas]] took decisive action so that the plague was checked and "This was credited to him as righteousness" ( Psalm 106:31; Phinehas is described in the words, "as zealous as I am for my honor among them, " Numbers 25:11 ). And the prophet can say, "He who vindicates (or justifies) me is near" ( Isaiah 50:8 ). </p> <p> <i> The New Testament </i> . When we turn to the New Testament we must be clear that the righteousness and justification terminology is to be understood in the light of its Hebrew background, not in terms of contemporary Greek ideas. We see this, for example, in the words of Jesus who speaks of people giving account on the day of judgment: "by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned" ( Matthew 12:37; the word NIV translates "acquitted" is the one Paul normally uses for "justified" ). Those acquitted on the day of judgment are spoken of as "the righteous" ( Matthew 25:37; they go into "eternal life, " v. 46 ). </p> <p> The verb translated "to justify" clearly means "to declare righteous." It is used of God in a quotation, which the New International Version renders "So that you may be proved right when you speak" ( Romans 3:4; the NRSV has more exactly, "So that you may be justified in your words" ). Now God cannot be "made righteous"; the expression obviously means "shown to be righteous" and this helps us see that when the word is applied to believers it does not mean "made righteous"; it signifies "declared righteous, " "shown to be in the right, " or the like. </p> <p> Paul is fond of the concept of justification; indeed for him it is the characteristic way of referring to the central truth of the gospel. He makes much more use of the concept than do the other writers of the New Testament. This does not mean that he has a different understanding of the gospel; it is the same gospel that he proclaims, the gospel that the death of Christ on the cross has opened a way of salvation for sinners. But he uses the concept of justification to express it whereas the other writers prefer other terms. He says, "Just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous" ( Romans 5:19 ). We should not understand "were made sinners" in any such sense as "were compelled to be sinners." It signifies "were constituted sinners, " "were reckoned as sinners." Paul is saying that the whole human race is caught up in the effect of Adam's sin; now all are sinners. Paul speaks of God "who justifies the wicked" ( Romans 4:5 ): it is not people who have merited their salvation of whom he writes, but people who had no claim on salvation. It was "while we were still sinners" that Christ died for us ( Romans 5:8 ). But the effect of Christ's saving work is that now all believers are "made righteous, " "accepted by God as righteous." </p> <p> Paul insists that people are not justified by what they themselves do. Justification is not the result of the infusion of new life into people, but comes about when they believe. The apostle points to the important example of Abraham, the great forbear of the Jewish race, as one who was not justified by works ( Romans 4:2-3 ). And, of course, if Abraham was not justified by works, then who could possibly be? Specifically Paul says, "a man is not justified by observing the law"; indeed, "by observing the law no one will be justified" ( Galatians 2:16; cf. also Galatians 3:11 ). </p> <p> There is something of a problem in that, whereas Paul says quite plainly that justification is by faith and not by works, James holds that "a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone" (2:24). James chooses Abraham and [[Rahab]] as examples of people who were justified by works (2:21,25). He points out that Abraham "offered his son Isaac on the altar" and that Rahab lodged the spies and sent them away. </p> <p> But we should notice that both these Old Testament worthies are elsewhere singled out as examples of faith. Paul cited Abraham to establish the truth that we are justified by faith rather than by works. Indeed, he quotes Scripture, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness" ( Romans 4:3 , citing Genesis 15:6; he cites it again in v. 22 ). In Romans 4Paul has a strong argument that it was not works that commended the patriarch to God, but faith: Abraham is, for Paul, the classic example of a man who believed and who was accepted by God because of his faith. And the writer to the Hebrews says plainly that it was "by faith" that Rahab welcomed the spies ( Hebrews 11:31 ). </p> <p> If we look more closely at what James says we see that he is not arguing for works in the absence of faith, but rather for works as the evidence of faith. "Show me your faith without deeds, " he writes, "and I will show you my faith by what I do" (2:18) and goes on to cite the demons who believe that there is one God as examples of the kind of faith he deprecates. James is sure that saving faith transforms the believer so that good works necessarily follow; and he complains about people who say they have faith, but whose lives show quite plainly that they have not been saved. When people have saving faith God transforms their lives and James' point is that in the absence of this transformation we have no reason for thinking that those who profess to be believers really have saving faith. We should not overlook the fact that James as well as Paul quotes Genesis 15:6 to make it clear that Abraham was justified by faith. And we should bear in mind that this was many years before he offered Isaac on the altar; indeed it was before Isaac was born. While the offering of Isaac showed that Abraham was justified, his justification, even on James' premises, took place long before the act that showed its presence. </p> <p> And we must say much the same about Paul. He certainly calls vigorously for faith, but he calls equally vigorously for lives of Christian service. And when he writes, "The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love" ( Galatians 5:6 ), he is saying something with which James would surely agree. For James says, "I will show you my faith by what I do" (2:18). </p> <p> Paul continually emphasizes the importance of justification by faith. In his sermon at [[Antioch]] in [[Pisidia]] he points out that "through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you" and immediately adds, "Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses" ( Acts 13:38-39 ). More than once he quotes the words from Habbakuk 2:4, "the righteous will live by faith" ( Romans 1:17; Galatians 3:11; cf. also Galatians 2:16; Hebrews 10:38 ). He says explicitly that justification is by faith and not by observing the law ( Romans 3:28 ), or simply that "we have been justified through faith" ( Romans 5:1 ). </p> <p> Paul does not, of course, argue that faith is a meritorious act that of itself brings about justification. He is not saying that if we believe strongly enough we somehow get rid of our sins. But real faith means trust in God and when we trust God we are open to the divine power that works in us to make us the sort of people we ought to be and to accomplish the divine purpose. When we insist on our own moral performance we cut ourselves off from the good that God works in believers. </p> <p> At the center of Paul's religion is the cross of Jesus, and faith means trusting the crucified Lord. Thus Paul says that Jesus "was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification" ( Romans 4:25 ). We should not, of course, put too strong a distinction between the effects of Jesus' death and the effects of his resurrection. Paul is saying that Jesus' death and resurrection meant a complete dealing with sins and a perfectly accomplished justification. We are "justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus" ( Romans 3:24 ), which means that Jesus' atoning death is critically important in our justification. Similarly we are justified "by his grace" ( Romans 3:24 ), "by his blood" ( Romans 5:9 ), "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" ( 1 Corinthians 6:11 ), and "in Christ" ( Galatians 2:17 ), which are all ways of saying that it is the saving work of Jesus that brings about the justification of sinners. </p> <p> [[Salvation]] by the way of the cross was so that God would be "just and the one who justifies the man who has faith in Jesus" ( Romans 3:26 ). This will be in mind also in the reference to God as presenting Christ "as a sacrifice of atonement (better, "a propitiation") through faith in his blood" ( Romans 3:25 ). That we are "justified by his blood" ( Romans 5:9 ) points to the same truth: It is the death of Jesus that makes us right with God. This is the meaning also when we read that we are "justified by his grace" ( Titus 3:7 ). It was God's good gift that brought justification, his "one act of righteousness" in Christ that effected it ( Romans 5:16,18 ). Another way of putting it is that the saved are saved not because of their own righteousness (they are sinners), but because of the righteousness that is from God and which they receive by faith ( Philippians 3:9; cf. 2Col 5:21). </p> <p> It is plain from the New Testament teaching throughout that justification comes to the sinner by the atoning work of Jesus and that this is applied to the individual sinner by faith. That God pardons and accepts believing sinners is the truth that is enshrined in the doctrine of justification by faith. </p> <p> [[Leon]] Morris </p> <p> See also Atonement; [[Crucifixion Cross]]; [[Death Of Christ]]; Faith; [[Paul The Apostle]]; [[Works Of The Law]] </p> <p> <i> Bibliography </i> . M. Barth, <i> Justification </i> ; G. C. Berkouwer, <i> Faith and Justification </i> ; J. Buchanan, <i> The [[Doctrine]] of Justification </i> ; F. Colquhoun, <i> The Meaning of Justification </i> ; L. Morris, <i> The [[Apostolic]] [[Preaching]] of the Cross </i> ; idem, <i> The Cross in the New Testament </i> ; P. Toon, <i> Justification and Sanctification </i> ; F. B. Westcott, <i> The Biblical Doctrine of Justification </i> . </p> | ||
== Bridgeway Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_18775" /> == | == Bridgeway Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_18775" /> == | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
== Fausset's Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_36003" /> == | == Fausset's Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_36003" /> == | ||
<p> (See [[Impute]] .) "The just shall live by faith" ( Habakkuk 2:4) is thrice quoted by Paul: </p> <p> '''(1)''' Romans 1:17, where the emphasis is on "just," the gospel plan of saving men sets forth "the righteousness (justice) of God" as excluding the righteousness of man, Gentile and Jew alike ( Romans 1:17 ff; Romans 2; Romans 3:25). </p> <p> '''(2)''' Galatians 3:11, etc., where the emphasis is on "faith" as distinguished front works, either distinct from or combined with faith, in the act of justification, this is by faith alone. </p> <p> '''(3)''' Hebrews 10:38-39, where the emphasis is on "live"; as in the first instance in the matter of justification, so throughout, spiritual life is continued only by faith as opposed to "drawing back." </p> <p> Again, the gratuitousness of God's gift of justification is brought out by comparing Romans 3:24, "being justified freely ( | <p> (See [[Impute]] .) "The just shall live by faith" ( Habakkuk 2:4) is thrice quoted by Paul: </p> <p> '''(1)''' Romans 1:17, where the emphasis is on "just," the gospel plan of saving men sets forth "the righteousness (justice) of God" as excluding the righteousness of man, Gentile and Jew alike ( Romans 1:17 ff; Romans 2; Romans 3:25). </p> <p> '''(2)''' Galatians 3:11, etc., where the emphasis is on "faith" as distinguished front works, either distinct from or combined with faith, in the act of justification, this is by faith alone. </p> <p> '''(3)''' Hebrews 10:38-39, where the emphasis is on "live"; as in the first instance in the matter of justification, so throughout, spiritual life is continued only by faith as opposed to "drawing back." </p> <p> Again, the gratuitousness of God's gift of justification is brought out by comparing Romans 3:24, "being justified freely ( '''''Doorean''''' ) by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus," with John 15:25, "they hated ME without a cause" ( '''''Doorean''''' ). As gratuitous as was man's hatred, so gratuitous is God's love justifying believers through Christ. Man had every cause to love, yet he hated, God; God had every cause given by man to hate, yet He loves, man. The Hebrew '''''Tsadaquw''''' , Greek '''''Dikaioo''''' , expresses, not to infuse righteousness into but to impute it to, man; to change his relation to God legally or forensically, not in the first instance to change his character. "Justification" is no more an infusion of righteousness than "condemnation," its opposite, is an infusion of wickedness, as is proved by Deuteronomy 25:1, "the judges shall justify the righteous and condemn the wicked," Proverbs 17:15; Isaiah 5:23; Psalms 143:2, which shows that by inherent righteousness no man could be justified. </p> <p> In 40 Old Testament passages the Hebrew is used in the forensic sense, Isaiah 53:11, "by His knowledge shall My righteous [[Servant]] justify many" is no exception, for the mode of His justifying them follows, "He shall bear their iniquities." So in Daniel 12:3 ministers "justify" or "turn to righteousness" their converts instrumentally, i.e. bring them to God who justifies them. In Daniel 8:14, margin, "the sanctuary shall be justified" means "shall be vindicated from profanation," shall stand in a relation of right before God which it had not done before its cleansing. Similarly the Greek verb means not to make righteous or pure, but to count righteous before God. [[Opposed]] to '''''Katakrinoo''''' , "to condemn", Romans 8:33-34; "who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth; who is he that condemneth?" Also Romans 5:16; Luke 18:14. Matthew 11:19 means like Daniel 8:14, "wisdom is vindicated from the condemnation" east on her by "this generation." </p> <p> Also Matthew 12:37; Luke 7:29, the publicans "justified God"; i.e. vindicated His righteousness, showed they counted Him righteous in His "counsel" by accepting the gospel; opposed to the [[Pharisees]] who "rejected" it, to their own condemnation ( Romans 2:13). Before man's bar, ordinarily, the righteousness on account of which he is justified or counted righteous is his own; before God's bar, the righteousness on account of which he is justified is Christ's, which is God's ( 2 Peter 1:1). Therefore pardon accompanies justification before God's bar, but pardon would be scorned by one innocent and therefore justified before man's bar. Again, acquittal before man is not always accompanied with justification; but the sinner pardoned before God is always justified also. In 1 John 3:7, "he that doeth righteousness is righteous even as He is righteous"; not his doing righteousness makes him righteous, but shows that he is so, i.e. justified by the righteousness of God in Christ ( Romans 10:3-10). </p> <p> A man "deceives" himself if he think himself "righteous," and yet does not righteousness, for "doing righteousness" is the sure fruit and proof of "being righteous," i.e. of having the only principle of true righteousness and the only mean of justification, faith. Paul's epistle to Romans proves Jew and Gentile guilty of breaking God's universal law, therefore incapable of being justified by their own righteousness, i.e. obedience to the law. "By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in God's sight; but now (under the gospel) the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, 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, for all have sinned," etc. ( Romans 3:20-23). Still plainer is Romans 4:3-8 "to hint that worketh not but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith (i.e. not as a merit, but Christ's merit apprehended by faith: Ephesians 2:5; Ephesians 2:8-10) is counted for righteousness. </p> <p> David describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works (as man has no righteousness of his own the 'righteousness imputed' to him can only be the righteousness of God in Christ) ... blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin." The justified man is not only acquitted as innocent but regarded as having perfectly obeyed the law in the person of Christ. There is to him both the non-imputation of sin and the imputation of righteousness. "Being justified by God's grace he is made heir according to the hope of eternal life" ( Titus 3:7; Romans 5:18-19). Christ is "of God made unto us righteousness," so that to believers He is "the Lord our righteousness" ( 1 Corinthians 1:30; Jeremiah 23:6). Faith is the instrument or receptive mean of justification ( Romans 3:28; Galatians 2:16; Galatians 3:8). </p> <p> We are justified judicially by God ( Romans 8:33), meritoriously by Christ ( Isaiah 53:11; Romans 5:19), instrumentally or mediately by faith ( Romans 5:1), evidentially by works. This is the sense of James ( James 2:14-26), otherwise James could no more be reconciled with himself than with Paul, for he quotes the same instance and the same scripture, "Abraham believed God and it (his faith) was counted to him for righteousness," as Paul does. (See [[James]] ; FAITH.) Luther called the doctrine of justification by faith only "the article (test) of a standing or falling church." Justin [[Martyr]] in the second century (Ep. ad Diog.) writes: "what else could cover our sins but His righteousness? in whom could we transgressors be justified but only in the Son of God? O sweet exchange! O unsearchable contrivance! that the transgressions of many should be hidden in one righteous Person and the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors." ( 2 Corinthians 5:21). </p> <p> The Church of England [[Homily]] says: "faith doth not shut out repentance, hope, love, and the fear of God in every man justified, but it shutteth them out from the office of justifying." So: "faith, receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification, yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces." (Westminster Confession xi. 1-2). Rome makes justification the infusion of righteousness by God's Spirit and the rewarding of the good works done under His influence, at the day of judgment. This confounds justification with sanctification whereas Romans 5 and Romans 6 carefully distinguish them, and makes it a continuous process not completed until the judgment, whereas Scripture makes it completed on believing ( Romans 5:1-9; Romans 8:1; John 5:24). </p> | ||
== People's Dictionary of the Bible <ref name="term_70285" /> == | == People's Dictionary of the Bible <ref name="term_70285" /> == | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
== Easton's Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_32110" /> == | == Easton's Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_32110" /> == | ||
Romans 5:1-10 <p> It proceeds on the imputing or crediting to the believer by God himself of the perfect righteousness, active and passive, of his Representative and Surety, Jesus Christ ( Romans 10:3-9 ). Justification is not the forgiveness of a man without righteousness, but a declaration that he possesses a righteousness which perfectly and for ever satisfies the law, namely, Christ's righteousness ( 2 Corinthians 5:21; Romans 4:6-8 ). </p> <p> The sole condition on which this righteousness is imputed or credited to the believer is faith in or on the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith is called a "condition," not because it possesses any merit, but only because it is the instrument, the only instrument by which the soul appropriates or apprehends Christ and his righteousness ( Romans 1:17; 3:25,26; 4:20,22; Philippians 3:8-11; Galatians 2:16 ). </p> <p> The act of faith which thus secures our justification secures also at the same time our sanctification (q.v.); and thus the doctrine of justification by faith does not lead to licentiousness ( Romans 6:2-7 ). Good works, while not the ground, are the certain consequence of justification (6:14; 7:6). (See | Romans 5:1-10 <p> It proceeds on the imputing or crediting to the believer by God himself of the perfect righteousness, active and passive, of his Representative and Surety, Jesus Christ ( Romans 10:3-9 ). Justification is not the forgiveness of a man without righteousness, but a declaration that he possesses a righteousness which perfectly and for ever satisfies the law, namely, Christ's righteousness ( 2 Corinthians 5:21; Romans 4:6-8 ). </p> <p> The sole condition on which this righteousness is imputed or credited to the believer is faith in or on the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith is called a "condition," not because it possesses any merit, but only because it is the instrument, the only instrument by which the soul appropriates or apprehends Christ and his righteousness ( Romans 1:17; 3:25,26; 4:20,22; Philippians 3:8-11; Galatians 2:16 ). </p> <p> The act of faith which thus secures our justification secures also at the same time our sanctification (q.v.); and thus the doctrine of justification by faith does not lead to licentiousness ( Romans 6:2-7 ). Good works, while not the ground, are the certain consequence of justification (6:14; 7:6). (See [[Galatians, Epistle To]] .) </p> | ||
== Webster's Dictionary <ref name="term_135601" /> == | == Webster's Dictionary <ref name="term_135601" /> == | ||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
== International Standard Bible Encyclopedia <ref name="term_5477" /> == | == International Standard Bible Encyclopedia <ref name="term_5477" /> == | ||
<p> ''''' jus ''''' - ''''' ti ''''' - ''''' fi ''''' - ''''' kā´shu ''''' ( צדק , ''''' cedheḳ ''''' , verb צדק , <i> ''''' cādhēḳ ''''' </i> ; [[Septuagint]] and New Testament δικαίωμα , <i> ''''' dikaı́ōma ''''' </i> , δικαίωσις , <i> ''''' dikaı́ōsis ''''' </i> , verb δικαιόω , <i> ''''' dikaióō ''''' </i> , "justification" "to justify," in a legal sense, the declaring just or righteous. In Biblical literature, δικαιοῦν , <i> ''''' dikaioún ''''' </i> , without denying the <i> real </i> righteousness of a person, is used invariably or almost invariably in a declarative or forensic sense. See Simon, <i> Hdb </i> , II, 826; Thayer, Grimm, and Cremer under the respective words): </p> <p> I. The Writings Of Paul </p> <p> 1. Universality of Sin </p> <p> 2. [[Perfection]] of the Law of God </p> <p> 3. Life, Work and Death of the Atoning Saviour </p> <p> (1) Paul's Own [[Experience]] </p> <p> (2) The Resurrection Connected with the Death </p> <p> (3) Faith, Not Works, the [[Means]] of Justification </p> <p> (4) [[Baptism]] Also Eliminated </p> <p> (5) [[Elements]] of Justification </p> <p> (a) Forgiveness of Sins </p> <p> (b) [[Declaring]] or [[Approving]] as Righteous </p> <p> (6) Justification Has to Do with the [[Individual]] </p> <p> II. The Other New Testament Writings </p> <p> 1. The Synoptic [[Gospels]] </p> <p> 2. John's Writings </p> <p> 3. 1 Peter and Hebrews </p> <p> 4. Epistle of James </p> <p> III. The Old Testament </p> <p> IV. Later Development Of The Doctrine </p> <p> 1. Apostolic and Early Church [[Fathers]] </p> <p> 2. Council of Trent </p> <p> 3. Luther </p> <p> 4. Schleiermacher </p> <p> 5. Meaning and [[Message]] to the Modern Man </p> <p> [[Literature]] </p> I. The Writings of Paul. <p> <b> 1. The Universality of Sin: </b> </p> <p> In this article reference will first be made to the writings of Paul, where justification receives its classic expression, and from there as a center, the other New Testament writers, and finally the Old Testament, will be drawn in. According to Paul, justification rests on the following presuppositions: </p> <p> The universality of sin. All men are not only born in sin ( Ephesians 2:3 ), but they have committed many actual transgressions, which render them liable to condemnation. Paul proves this by an appeal to the Old Testament witnesses ( Romans 3:9 ff), as well as by universal experience, both of the heathen ( Romans 1:18-32 ) and [[Jews]] ( Romans 2:17-28; Romans 3:9 ). </p> <p> <b> 2. Perfection of the Law of God: </b> </p> <p> The perfection of the Law of God and the necessity of its perfect observance, if justification is to come by it ( Romans 3:10 ). The modern notion of God as a good-natured, more or less nonchalant ruler, to whom perfect holiness is not inexorable, was not that of Paul. If one had indeed kept the law, God could not hold him guilty ( Romans 2:13 ), but such an obedience never existed. Paul had no trouble with the law as such. Those who have tried to find a difference here between Galatians and Romans have failed. The reminder that the law was ordained by angels ( Galatians 3:19 ) does not mean that it was not also given by God. It might be reckoned in a sense among the elements of the world ( <i> '''''kosmos''''' </i> ), Galatians 4:3 ), as it is an essential part of an ordered universe, but that does not at all mean that it is not also holy, right and good ( Romans 7:12 ). It was added, of course, on account of transgressions ( Galatians 3:19 ), for it is only a world of intelligent, free spirits capable of sin which needs it, and its high and beautiful sanctions make the sin seem all the more sinful ( Romans 7:13 ). </p> <p> <b> 3. Life, Work and Death of the Atoning Savior: </b> </p> <p> It was fundamental in Paul's thinking that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures ( 1 Corinthians 15:3 ). In due season He died for the ungodly ( Romans 5:6 ); while we were yet sinners He died for us ( Romans 5:8 ); we are justified in His blood ( Romans 5:9 ), and it is through Him that we are saved from the wrath ( Romans 5:9 ). While we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son ( Romans 5:10 ), being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus whom God set forth as a propitiation ( Romans 3:24 , Romans 3:25 ). There is no reconciliation, no justification, except through and by and for Christ. </p> (1) Paul's Own Experience. <p> Paul's own experience cannot be left out of the account. He lived through the doctrine, as well as found it through illumination of the Spirit in the Old Testament. It was not that he had only outwardly kept the law. He had been jealous for it, and had been blameless in every requirement of its righteousness ( Philippians 3:6 ). What was borne in upon him was how little such blamelessness could stand before the absolute standard of God. Just how far he was shaken with doubts of this kind we cannot say with certainty; but it seems impossible to conceive the [[Damascus]] conversion scene in the case of such an upright man and strenuous zealot without supposing a psychological preparation, without supposing doubts as to whether his fulfilling of the law enabled him to stand before God. Now, for a Pharisaically educated man like himself, there was no way of overcoming these doubts but in a renewed struggle for his own righteousness shown in the fiery zeal of his Damascus journey, pressing on even in the blazing light of noonday. This conversion broke down his philosophy of life, his Lebensgewissheit, his assurance of salvation through works of the law done never so conscientiously and perfectly. The revelation of the glorified Christ, with the assurance that He, the God-sent Messiah, was the very one whom he was persecuting, destroyed his dependence on his own righteousness, a righteousness which had led him to such shocking consequences. Although this was for him an individual experience, yet it had universal applications. It showed him that there was an inherent weakness in the law through flesh, that is, through the whole physical, psychical and spiritual nature of man considered as sinful, as working only on this lower plane, and that the law needed bracing and illuminating by the Son, who, though sent in the likeness of the flesh of sin, yet (as an offering) for sin condemned sin and cast it out ( Romans 8:3 ), to the end that the law might be fulfilled in those who through Him walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit ( Romans 8:4 ). That was the glory of the new righteousness thus revealed. If the law had been able to do that, to give life, Christ need not have come, righteousness would have been by the law ( Galatians 3:21 ). But the facts show that the law was not thus able, neither the law written on the heart given to all, nor the law given to Moses (Rom 1:18 through 3:19). Therefore every mouth is stopped, and all flesh is silent before God. On the ground of law-keeping, what the modern man would call morality, our hope of salvation has been shattered. The law has spoken its judgment against us ( Galatians 3:10 ). It cannot therefore lead us to righteousness and life, nor was that its supreme intention: <i> it was a pedagogue or tutor </i> (" <i> '''''paidagōgós''''' </i> ") <i> to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith </i> ( Galatians 3:24; see Ihmels in <i> RE3 </i> , 16, 483-84). What made Paul to differ from his companions in the faith was that his own bitter experience under the revelation of Christ had led him to these facts. </p> (2) The Resurrection Connected with the Death. <p> It was remarked above that the ground of justification according to Paul is the work of Christ. This means especially. His death as a sacrifice, in which, as Ritschl well says ( <i> Rechtfertigung und Versohnung </i> , 3. Aufl., 1899, 2 157), the apostles saw exercised the whole power of His redemption. But that death cannot be separated from His resurrection, which first awakened them to a knowledge of its decisive worth for salvation, as well as finally confirmed their faith in Jesus as the Son of God. "The objective salvation," says Ritschl (p. 158), "which was connected with the sacrificial death of Christ and which continued on for the church, was made secure by this, that it was asserted also as an attribute of the resurrected one," who was delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our justification ( Romans 4:25 ). But this last expression is not to be interpreted with literal preciseness, as though Paul intended to distinguish between the forgiveness of sins as brought about by the death, and justification, by the resurrection, for both forgiveness and justification are identified in Romans 4:6-8 . It was the resurrection which gave Christians their assurance concerning Christ ( Acts 17:31 ); by that resurrection He has been exalted to the right hand of God, where He maketh intercession for His people ( Romans 8:34 ), which mediatorship is founded upon His death - the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world ( Revelation 13:8 m; compare Greek text). </p> <p> B. Weiss well says: "It was by the certainty of the exaltation of Christ to Messianic sovereignty brought about by the resurrection that Paul attained to faith in the saving significance of His death, and not conversely. Accordingly, the assurance that God cannot condemn us is owing primarily to the death of Christ, but still more to His resurrection and exaltation to God's right hand ( Romans 8:34 ), inasmuch as these first prove that His death was the death of the mediator of salvation, who has redeemed us from condemnation.... The objective atonement was accomplished by the death of Christ, but the appropriation of it in justification is possible only if we believe in the saving significance of His death, and we can attain to faith in that only as it is sealed by the resurrection" ( <i> Biblical Theology of the New Testament </i> , I, 436-37). </p> (3) Faith, Not Works, the Means of Justification. <p> The means or condition of justification is faith ( Romans 3:22 , Romans 3:25 , Romans 3:26 , Romans 3:28 , etc.) which rests upon the pure grace of God and is itself, therefore, His gift ( Ephesians 2:8 ). This making faith the only instrument of justification is not arbitrary, but because, being the receptive attitude of the soul, it is in the nature of the case the only avenue through which Divine blessing can come. The gifts of God are not against the laws of the soul which He has made, but rather are in and through those laws. Faith is the hand outstretched to the Divine Giver, who, though He sends rain without our consent, does not give salvation except through an appropriate spiritual response. This faith is not simply belief in historical facts, though this is presupposed as to the atoning death ( Romans 3:25 ), and the resurrection ( Romans 10:9 ) of Jesus, but is a real heart reception of the gift ( Romans 10:10 ), and is therefore able to bring peace in our relation to God ( Romans 5:1 ). The object of this faith is Jesus Christ ( Romans 3:22 , etc.), through whom only comes the gift of righteousness and the reigning in life ( Romans 5:17 ), not Mary, not angels, not doctrine, not the church, but Jesus only. This, to be sure, does not exclude God the Father as an object of faith, as the redeeming act of Christ is itself the work of God ( 2 Corinthians 5:19 ), whose love expressed itself toward us in this way ( Romans 5:8 ). Faith in the only one God is always presupposed ( 1 Corinthians 8:6 ), but it was the apostolic custom rather to refer repentance to God and faith to Christ ( Acts 20:21 ). But the oneness of God the Father and Christ the Son in a work of salvation is the best guaranty of the [[Divinity]] of the latter, both as an objective fact and as an inner experience of the Christian. </p> <p> The justification being by faith, it is not by works or by love, or by both in one. It cannot be by the former, because they are lacking either in time or amount or quality, nor could they be accepted in any case until they spring from a heart renewed, for which faith is the necessary presupposition. It cannot be by the latter, for it exists only where the Spirit has shed it abroad in the heart ( Romans 5:5 ), the indispensable prerequisite for receiving which is faith. This does not mean that the crown of [[Christianity]] is not love, for it is ( 1 Corinthians 13:13 ); it means only that the root is faith. Nor can love be foisted in as a partial condition of justification on the strength of the word often quoted for that purpose, "faith working through love" ( Galatians 5:6 ). The apostle is speaking here only of those who are already "in Christ," and he says that over against the [[Galatian]] believers bringing in a lot of legal observances, the only availing thing is not circumcision or its lack, but faith energizing through love. Here the interest is, as Ritschl says ( <i> II </i> , 343), in the kingdom of God, but justification proper has reference to the sinner in relation to God and Christ. See the excellent remarks of Bruce, <i> Paul's [[Conception]] of Christianity </i> , 1894, 226-27. At the same time this text reveals the tremendous ethical religious force abiding in faith, according to Paul. It reminds us of the great sentence of Luther in his preface to the Epistles to the Romans, where he says: "Faith is a Divine work within us which changes and renews us in God according to John 1:13 , 'who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.' This destroys the old Adam and makes new creatures of us in heart, will, disposition, and all our powers. Oh, faith is a living, active, jealous, mighty thing, inasmuch as it cannot possibly remain unproductive of good works" (Werke, <i> Erl. Ausg </i> ., 63, 124-25). </p> (4) Baptism also Eliminated. <p> Not only are good works and love removed as conditions or means of justification of the sinner, but baptism is also eliminated. According to Paul, it is the office of baptism not to justify, but to cleanse, that is, symbolically to set forth and seal the washing away of sin and the entrance into the new life by a dramatic act of burial, which for the subject and all witnesses would mark a never-to-be-forgotten era in the history of the believer. "Baptism," says Weiss ( <i> I </i> , 454), "presupposes faith in Him as the one whom the church designates as Lord, and also binds to adherence to Him which excludes every dependence upon any other, inasmuch as He has acquired a claim upon their devotion by the saving deed of His self-surrender on the cross." So important was baptism in the religious atmosphere at that time that hyperbolical expressions were used to express its cleansing and illuminating office, but these need not mislead us. We must interpret them according to the fundamental conceptions of Christianity as a religion of the Spirit, not of magic nor of material media. Baptism pointed to a complete parting with the old life by previous renewal through faith in Christ, which renewal baptism in its turn sealed and announced in a climax of self-dedication to him, and this, while symbolically and in contemporary parlance of both Jew and Gentile called a new birth, was probably often actually so in the psychological experience of the baptized. But while justification is often attributed to faith, it is never to baptism. </p> (5) Elements of Justification. <p> What are the elements of this justification? There are two: </p> <p> <b> (a) Forgiveness of Sins </b> </p> <p> Forgiveness of sins ( Romans 4:5-8; compare Acts 13:38 , Acts 13:39 ). With this are connected peace and reconciliation ( Romans 5:1 , Romans 5:9 , Romans 5:10; compare Romans 10:11 ). </p> <p> <b> (b) The Declaring or Approving as Righteous </b> </p> <p> The declaring or approving as righteous or just ( Romans 3:21-30; Romans 4:2-9 , Romans 4:22; Romans 5:1 , Romans 5:9-11 , Romans 5:16-21 , etc.). C.F. Schmid is perfectly right when he says that Paul (and James) always uses <i> '''''dikaioun''''' </i> in the sense of esteeming and pronouncing and treating as righteous, both according to the measure of the law ( Romans 2:13; Romans 3:20 ) and also according to grace ( <i> Biblical Theology of the New Testament </i> , 1870, 497). The word is a forensic one, and Godet goes so far as to say that the word is never used in all Greek literature for making righteous ( <i> [[Commentary]] on Romans </i> , English translation, <i> I </i> , 157, American edition, 95). This is shown further by the fact that it is the ungodly who are justified ( Romans 4:5 ), and that the justification is a reckoning or imputation ( <i> '''''logı́zesthai''''' </i> ) of righteousness ( Romans 4:6 , Romans 4:22 ), not an infusing or making righteous. The contrast of "to justify" is not "to be a sinner" but is "to accuse" or "to condemn" ( Romans 8:33 , Romans 8:14 ), and the, contrast of "justification" is "condemnation" ( Romans 5:18 ). Besides, it is not the infusing of a new life, of a new holiness, which is counted for righteousness, but it is faith which is so counted ( Romans 4:5; Philippians 3:9 ). That upon which God looks when He justifies is not the righteousness He has imparted or is to impart, but the atonement He has made in Christ. It is one of the truest paradoxes of Christianity that unless a righteous life follows, there has been no justification, while the justification itself is for the sake of Christ alone through faith alone. It is a " <i> status </i> , rather than a character," says Stevens ( <i> The Pauline Theology </i> , 1892, 265); "it bears the stamp of a legal rather than of an ethical conception," and he refers to the elaborate and convincing proof of the forensic character of Paul's doctrine of justification," in Morison, [[Exposition]] of Romans, chapter III, 163-200. An interesting illustration of how further study may correct a wrong impression is given by Lipsius, who, in his <i> Die Paulinische Rechfertigungslehre </i> , 1853, maintained that righteousness or justification meant not "exclusively an objectively given external relation to God, but always at the same time a real inner condition of righteousness" (p. 10), whereas in his <i> Lehrbuch der evangelisch-protestantischen Dogmatik </i> , 1876, 3. <i> Aufl </i> ., 1893, he makes the righteousness of God properly an "objective gift of grace, not simply in the sense in which the Old Testament just one judged his position of salvation as a gift of grace, but as a righteousness specially reckoned and adjudicated by way of grace and acknowledged before the judgment (or court, <i> Gericht </i> ) of God ( Romans 4:6; compare Romans 4:1-8 , Romans 4:11; Romans 3:23; Galatians 3:6 ). This is always the meaning of <i> '''''dikaioun''''' </i> , <i> '''''dikaioústhai''''' </i> , or <i> '''''dikaiōsis''''' </i> in Paul. It consists in the not-reckoning of sins," etc. (p. 658). Of course justification is only a part of the process of salvation, which includes regeneration and sanctification, but these are one thing and justification is another. </p> (6) Justification Has to Do with the Individual. <p> [[Finally]] it is asked whether justification in Paul's mind has to do with the individual believer or with the society or Christian congregation. Ritschl ( <i> 2 </i> , 217 f) and Sanday-Headlam ( <i> The Epistle to the Rom </i> , 122-23) say the latter; Weiss ( <i> I </i> , 442), the former. It is indeed true that Paul refers to the church as purchased with Christ's blood ( Acts 20:28 , or God's blood, according to the two oldest manuscripts and ancient authorities; compare Ephesians 5:25 ), and he uses the pronoun "we" as those who have received redemption, etc. ( Colossians 1:14; Ephesians 2:18 ); but it is evident on the other hand that faith is an individual matter, a thing first between man and his God, and only after a man has been united to Christ by faith can he enter into a spiritual fellowship with fellow-believers. Therefore the subject of justification must be in the first place the individual, and only in the second place and by consequence the society. Besides, those justified are not the cleansed and sanctified members of churches, but the ungodly ( Romans 4:5 ). </p> <p> As to the argument from baptism urged by Sanday-Headlam, it must be said that Paul always conceives of baptism as taking place in the Christian community with believers and for believers, that that for and to which they are baptized is not justification, but the death and resurrection of Christ ( Romans 6:3 , Romans 6:4 ), and that the righteousness of God has been manifested not through baptism but through faith in Jesus Christ unto all that believe ( Romans 3:22 ), being justified freely, not through baptism, but through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus ( Romans 3:24 ). With Paul baptism has always a mystical significance as symbolizing and externally actualizing union with the death of the Lord, and would be both impossible and impertinent in the case of those not already believers in Christ and thus inwardly united to His society. </p> II. The Other New Testament Writings. <p> So much for Paul. Let us now take a glance at the other New Testament books. It is a commonplace of theology that is called "modern" or "critical," that Paul and not Jesus is the founder of Christianity as we know it, that the doctrines of the Divinity of Christ, atonement, justification, etc., are Paul's work, and not his Master's. There is truth in this. It was part of the humiliation of Christ as well as His pedagogical method to live, teach and act under the conditions of His time and country, on the background of [[Palestine]] of 30 AD; and it was specially His method to do His work and not His disciples', to live a life of love and light, to die for the sins of the world, and then go back to the Father that the Holy Spirit might come and lead His followers into all truth. A full statement of the doctrines of Christianity on His part would have been premature ( John 16:12 ), would have been pedagogically unwise, if not worthless. First the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear ( Mark 4:28 ). It would also have been spiritually and philosophically impossible, for Christianity was not a set of teachings by Christ - but a religion springing out of His life, death, resurrection, ascension, intercession, mediatorial activity in history through the Spirit who works in His disciples and on the world through and by that life, death, etc. The only question is whether the apostles were true to the spirit and content of His teachings in its moral and religious outlines. And especially in this matter of justification, a teaching by Christ is not to be looked for, because it is the very peculiarity of it that its middle point is the exalted Lord, who has become the mediator of salvation by His death and resurrection. Did the Pauline doctrine fit into the concrete situation made by the facts of Christ mentioned above, and was it the necessary consequence of His self-witness? Let us look into the Synoptic Gospels. </p> <p> <b> 1. The Snyoptic Gospels: </b> </p> <p> So far is it from being true, as Harnack says ( <i> What Is Christianity? </i> 2nd edition, revised, New York, 1901,68), that the "whole of Jesus' message may be reduced to these two heads: God as Father, and the human soul so ennobled that it can and does unite with Him," that an essential part of His message is omitted, namely, that salvation is bound up in His (Christ's) own person. (The reader is asked to verify the references for himself, as space will not allow quotation.) See Matthew 10:37-39; Matthew 16:24-27 . Confession of Him (not simply of the Father) determines acknowledgment above ( Matthew 10:32 ), where judgment is rendered according to our attitude to Him in His unfortunate ones Matthew 25:35 ff). No sooner was His person rightly estimated than He began to unfold the necessity of His death and resurrection ( Matthew 16:21 ). The evening before that death occurred, He brings out its significance, perpetuates the lesson in the institution of the Supper ( Mark 14:24 ), and reenforces it after His resurrection ( Luke 24:26 ). Paul himself could hardly have expressed the fact of the atonement through Christ's death more decisively than Matthew 20:28; Matthew 26:28 . With this foundation, could the Christian doctrine of salvation take any other course than that it actually did take? Instead of referring men to the Father, Christ forgives sins Himself ( Matthew 9:2-6 ), and He reckons all men as needing this forgiveness ( Matthew 6:12 ). While the time had not arrived for the Pauline doctrine of righteousness, Jesus prepared the way for it, negatively, in demanding a humble sense of sin ( Matthew 5:3 ), inner fitness and perfection ( Matthew 5:6 , Matthew 5:8 , Matthew 5:20 , Matthew 5:48 ), and positively in requiring recourse to Him by those who felt the burden of their sins ( Matthew 11:28 ), to Him who was the rest-giver, and not simply to God the Father, a passage of which Romans 5:1 is an echo. For it was specially to those to whom, as to the awakened Paul, the law brought condemnation that He came, came to heal and to save ( Mark 2:17; Matthew 9:13; Luke 15:7 ). It was for sinners and to sinners that He came ( Luke 15:2; Luke 7:39; Luke 19:7; Matthew 11:19 ), just as Paul understood; and the way for their salvation was not better law-keeping, but trusting prayer in the confession of sin ( Luke 18:13 ), really equivalent to faith, the humble heart and a hunger for righteousness (= faith). See Matthew 5:3 , Matthew 5:6 . He who brings most of himself, of his own pride and works, is the least likely to obtain the kingdom of heaven ( Matthew 18:3 , Matthew 18:1; Mark 10:14 ). Not only entrance, but the final reward itself is of grace ( Matthew 19:30; 20:1-16), a parable in the true spirit of Paul, and in anticipation of whose message was the promise of [[Paradise]] to the penitent robber ( Luke 23:43 ). At the very beginning the message sounded out, "Repent ye, and believe in the gospel" ( Mark 1:15 ), the gospel which was summed up in Christ, who would gather the people, not directly to God the Father, but to Himself ( Matthew 23:37 ). All this means justification through that faith in Himself, in His Divine-human manifestation ( Matthew 16:13-16 ), of which faith He expresses Himself with anxiety in Luke 18:8 , and the presence of which he greeted with joy in Matthew 8:10 . Ihmels is right therefore in holding ( <i> RE3 </i> , Xvi , 490) that Paul's proclamation was continuous with the self-witness of Jesus, which conversely pointed as a consequence to the witness of Paul. </p> <p> <b> 2. John's Writings: </b> </p> <p> Justification by faith is not more implicit in John's Gospel than in the first three; it is only more explicit ( John 3:14-16 ). [[Eternal]] life is the blessing secured, but this of course is only possible to one not under condemnation ( John 3:36 ). The new Sonship of God came also in the wake of the same faith ( John 1:12 ). The Epistles of John vary from Paul in word rather than in substance. The atoning work of Jesus is still in the background; walking in the light is not conceivable in those under condemnation and without faith; and the confession of sins that leads to forgiveness seems only another name for the justification that brings peace ( 1 John 1:9 , 1 John 1:10; compare 1 John 2:1 , 1 John 2:2 ). Everything is, as with Paul ( Ephesians 2:7; Titus 3:4 ), led back to the love of God ( 1 John 3:1 ), who sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins ( 1 John 4:10 ). </p> <p> <b> 3. 1 Peter and Hebrews: </b> </p> <p> Seeberg's point that the "Pauline doctrine of justification is not found in any other New Testament writer" ( <i> History of Doctrine </i> , I, 48) is true when you emphasize the word "doctrine." Paul gave it full scientific treatment, the others presuppose the fact, but do not unfold the doctrine. Peter's "Repent ye, and be baptized ... in the name of Jesus Christ" ( Acts 2:38 ) is meaningless unless faith were exercised in Christ. It is He in whom, though we see Him not, yet believing, we rejoice greatly with joy unspeakable ( 1 Peter 1:8 ), receiving the end of our faith, the salvation of our souls ( 1 Peter 1:9 ). It is only, however, through the precious blood as of a lamb without blemish, even that of Christ ( 1 Peter 1:19 ), and is only through Him that we are believers in God ( 1 Peter 1:21 ). The familiar expression, "Come to Jesus," which simply means have faith in Jesus for justification and salvation, goes back to Peter ( 1 Peter 2:4 ). The Epistle to the Hebrews has other interests to look after, but it does not deny faith, but rather exhorts us to draw near with a true heart in fullness of faith ( Hebrews 10:22 ), which it lays at the foundation of all true religion, thinking and achievement (Hebrews 11). The writer can give no better exhortation than to look unto Jesus the author and perfecter of our faith ( Hebrews 12:2 ), an exhortation in the true spirit of Paul, whose gospel of faith for justification is also summed up in Hebrews 4:16 . </p> <p> <b> 4. Epistle of James: </b> </p> <p> We come lastly to the core of the matter in regard to New Testament representations of justification - the famous passage in James 2:14-26 , which at first sight seems a direct blow at Paul. Here we are met by the interesting question of the date of James. As we cannot enter into this (see James , Epistle Of ), what we say must be independent of this question. A careful look at this vigorous and most valuable letter (valuable in its own place, which is not that of Paul's letters, in comparison with which it is a "right strawy epistle," as Luther truthfully said ( <i> Erl. Ausg. </i> , 63, 115; see also pp. 156-57), in saying which he did not mean to reject it as useless (straw has most important uses), but as giving the doctrine of salvation, for which we must look to Paul) will show us that contradiction on the part of James to Paul is apparent and not real. </p> <p> (1) In this section James uses the word faith simply for intellectual belief in God, and especially in the unity of God ( James 2:19; see also context), whereas Paul uses it for a saving trust in Christ. As Feine well says (Theol. d. New Testament, Leipzig, 2 1911, 660-63), for Paul faith is the appropriation of the life-power of the heavenly Christ. Therefore he knows no faith which does not bring forth good works corresponding to it. What does not come from faith is sin. For James faith is subordination of man to the heavenly Christ ( James 2:1 ), or it is theoretic acknowledgment of one God ( James 2:19 ). Justification is for James a speaking just of him who is righteous, an analytical judgment. (Feine also says that James did not understand Paul, but he did not fight him. It was left to Luther through his deep religious experience first to understand Paul's doctrine of justification.) (2) James uses the word "works" as meaning practical morality, going back behind legalism, behind Pharisaism, to the position of the Old Testament prophets, whereas Paul uses the word as meritorious action deserving reward. (3) When James is thinking of a deeper view, faith stands central in Christianity ( James 1:3 , James 1:6; James 2:1; James 5:15 ). (4) Paul also on his part is as anxious as James vitally to connect Christianity and good works through faith ( 1 Thessalonians 1:3; Galatians 5:6; 1 Corinthians 13:2; Romans 2:6 , Romans 2:7; see Mayor, <i> The Epistle of James </i> , 1892, lxxxviii ff; Franks, in <i> DCG </i> , I, 919-20; Findlay in <i> HDB </i> , 1-vol edition, 511). (5) The whole argument of James is bent on preserving a real practical Christianity that is not content with words merely ( James 2:15-16 ), but shows itself in deeds. He is not trying to show, as Paul, how men get rid of their guilt and become Christians, but how they prove the reality of their profession <i> after </i> they receive the faith. He is not only writing to Christians, as of course Paul was, but he was writing to them as Christians ("my brethren," James 2:14 ), as already justified and standing on the "faith of our Lord Jesus Christ" ( James 2:1 ), whereas Paul was thinking of men, Gentile and Jew, shivering in their guilt before the Eternal Justice, and asking, How can we get peace with God? "There is not," says Beyschlag ( <i> New Testament Theology </i> , Edinburgh, 1895, <i> I </i> , 367-68), "an objective conflict between the Pauline and Jacobean doctrines; both forms of teaching exist peacefully beside each other. James thought of justification in the simple and most natural sense of <i> justificatio justi </i> , as the Divine recognition of an actually righteous man, and he thought of it as the final judgment of God upon a man who is to stand in the last judgment and become a partaker of the final <i> '''''sōtēría''''' </i> ('salvation'). Paul also demands as a requisite for this last judgment and the final <i> '''''sōtēría''''' </i> right works, the love that fulfills the law and the perfected sanctification, but he (except in Romans 2:13 ) does not apply the expression <i> '''''dikaiousthai''''' </i> ('to be justified') to the final judgment of God, which recognizes this righteousness of life as actual. He applies it rather to that first sentence of God with which He graciously receives the believing sinner returning to Him, and takes him into fellowship with Himself." Beyschlag rightly insists that James undoubtedly taught with the first apostles that whoever believes in Christ and is baptized receives the forgiveness of sins ( Acts 2:38; Acts 3:19; Acts 10:43 ), and that he would not have contested the Pauline idea of justification by grace on account of faith, insisting only that works must follow. Theologically, the chief if not the only difference is that James has not yet made the cross of Christ the center of his point of view, while the atonement was fundamental with all Paul's thinking. See, further, James , Epistle Of . </p> III. The Old Testament. <p> A word in conclusion as to the Old Testament. All the New Testament writers built on the Old Testament. That there should be a cleft or contradiction between the Old Testament and what we call the New Testament would have been to them inconceivable. But they realized that that was the early dawn, while they lived in the light of day. Abraham believed in Yahweh; and He reckoned it to him for righteousness ( Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:3 ). Who does not keep all parts of the law all the time is condemned ( Deuteronomy 27:26 Septuagint; Galatians 3:10; compare Psalm 14:1-7; Psalm 143:2; Romans 3:20; see Romans 3:9-20 , and the references to the Old Testament in the American Standard Revised Version). The prophets insisted upon the practical works of righteousness - "What doth [[Yahweh]] require of thee, but to do justly, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with thy God?" ( Micah 6:8 ). No religious attitude or services could take the place of uprightness of life. This does not mean that the Old Testament writers understood that men were justified simply by their good deeds, for it was always believed that underneath all was the mercy and lovingkindness of God, whose forgiving grace was toward the broken and contrite spirit, the iniquities of whom were to be carried by the Servant of Yahweh, who shall justify many ( Psalm 103:8-13; Psalm 85:10; Isaiah 57:15; Isaiah 53:11 , and many other passages). </p> IV. Later Development of the Doctrine. <p> <b> 1. Apostolic and Early Church Fathers: </b> </p> <p> A brief statement now on the development of the doctrine in the Christian church. It is humiliating to confess that the witness immediately after the apostles (the apostolic Fathers) did not reach the serene heights of Paul, or even the lower levels of his brethren. There are passages which remind one of him, but one feels at once that the atmosphere is different. Christianity is conceived as a new law rather than as a gospel of the grace of God. We cannot go into the reasons for this: suffice it to say that in GentileChristendom the presuppositions for that gospel failed, and the New Testament writings were not yet in the consciousness of the church to the extent that they dominated her thinking. The fine passage in [[Clement]] of Rome (97 AD, chapter xxxii: "They all therefore (i.e. Abraham and other early saints) were glorified and magnified, not through themselves or their own works or the righteous doings which they wrought, but through His (God's) will. And so we, having been called through His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom or understanding or piety or works which we wrought in holiness of heart, but through faith, whereby the Almighty God justified all men that ever have been from the beginning; to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.") is not at all on a paragraph with his whole Epistle, as he coordinates faith with other virtues in chapter xxxv, makes hospitality and godliness the saving virtues for [[Lot]] in chapter xi, couples hospitality and faith together as equal for Rahab in chapter xii, and represents forgiveness of sins through keeping commandments and love in chapter l. [[Ignatius]] (about 110-15 AD) speaks in one place about Jesus Christ dying for us, that believing on His death we might escape death ( <i> Tral </i> . 2), but with him the real saving things are love, concord, obedience to bishops, and the indwelling God = Christ, though he has also the excellent passage: "None of these things is hidden from you if ye be perfect in your faith and love toward Jesus Christ, for these things are the beginning and end of life - faith is the beginning and love the end, and the two being found in unit are God, while all things else follow in their train unto true nobility" ( Ephesians 14 ). The so-called [[Barnabas]] (date uncertain) puts the death of Christ Jesus at the foundation of salvation, which is expressed by the remission of sins through His blood ( Ephesians 5 ), the kingdom of Jesus being on the cross, so that they who set their hope on Him shall live forever ( Ephesians 8 ), while at the time even believers are not yet justified ( Ephesians 4 ), for which finally a whole series of works of light must be done and works of darkness avoided ( Ephesians 19 ). The [[Shepherd]] of [[Hermas]] and the [[Ancient]] Homily = 2 Clem are even more moralistic, where with whatever praise of faith we have the beginning of merit. The same legalistic tone sounds through that invaluable little roll found by Bryennios in 1873 and first published by him in [[Constantinople]] in December, 1883, <i> The Teaching (Didache) of the Twelve [[Apostles]] </i> . That Catholic trend went forward till it is almost full-fledged as early as Tertullian (fl. 200 AD) and [[Cyprian]] (250 AD). See a full statement in my Cyprian, 1906,146 ff. And thus it continued until - as far as our outline is concerned - it struck Augustine, bishop of [[Hippo]] (396 ff), who in a masterly and living way united, so far as they could be united, the Pauline thoughts of sin, grace, and justification with the regular Catholic legalism. His book, <i> De Spiritu et Litera </i> (412 AD), was largely after Paul's own heart, and the [[Reformers]] hailed it with joy. But the Catholic elements he still kept, as for instance, that in justification a good concupiscence and a good-will are infused, that justification grows, that our merits must be taken into the account even though they are God's merits, that the faith which justifies is a faith which works by love, that faith is the holding true what God (and the church) says, though occasionally a deeper view of faith is seen, and that works are emphasized, as in <i> De fide et </i> <i> operibus </i> , in a Catholic fashion. With profound and thoroughly Christian thoughts, [[Augustine]] had not so worked himself clear of his Catholic inheritance that he could reproduce Paul purely. He made a bridge by which we could go either back to Paul or forward to Aquinas. As Harnack well says, Augustine experienced, on the one hand, the last revival in the ancient church of the principle that "faith alone saves," and, on the other, he silenced that principle for a thousand years. The very Catholic theologian who stood nearest to that principle overcame it ( <i> Zeitschrift f. Theol. u. Kirche </i> , 1891,177). His misunderstanding of Paul's "faith that worketh through love" had momentous consequences. </p> <p> <b> 2. Council of Trent: </b> </p> <p> Those consequences are best seen in the decrees of the Council of Trent (Session 6,1547), to which we now turn, and which are the definite and final crystallization of the medieval development, so far as that development was Catholic. (1) Justification is a translation from a natural state to a state of grace. With this works prevenient grace, awakening and assisting, and with this in his man cooperates and prepares himself for justification. This cooperation has the merit of congruity, though the first call comes before any merit. (2) Faith is an element in justification. "Receiving faith by hearing, they of free will draw near to God, believing those things to be true which have been Divinely revealed and promised." Faith as a living trust in a personal Saviour for salvation is lacking. Among the truths believed is the mercy of God and that He wishes to justify the sinner in Christ. (3) This faith begets love to Christ and hatred to sin, which are elements also of the justifying process. (4) Now follows justification itself, "which is not a bare remission of sins, but also sanctification and renewal of the inner man through the voluntary reception of grace and of gifts." (5) But this renewal must take place through baptism, which, to the prepared adult, both gives and seals all the graces of salvation, forgiveness, cleansing, faith, hope and love. (6) Justification is preserved by obeying the commandments and by good works, which also increase it. (7) In case it is lost - and it can be lost, not by venial, but by mortal sin and by unbelief - it can be regained by the sacrament of penance. (8) To get it, to keep or regain it, it is also necessary to believe the doctrines as thus laid down and to be laid down by this Council (see the decrees in any edition, or in Mirbt, <i> Quellen zur Geschichte des Papsttums </i> , 2. Aufl., 206-16, or in Buckley's or in Waterworth's translations, and for an admirable and objective summary see Seeberg, <i> History of Doctrine </i> , <i> 2 </i> , 433-38). </p> <p> <b> 3. Luther: </b> </p> <p> Recent researches in Luther's early writings have shown that almost from the beginning of his earnest study of religious questions, he mounted up to Paul's view of justification by faith alone (Loofs, <i> Dg </i> , 4. <i> Aufl </i> ., 1906,696-98). Faith is the trust in the mercy of God through Christ, and justification is the declaring righteous for His sake, which is followed by a real making righteous. From the beginning to the end of his life as a religious teacher these are the elements of his doctrine. [[Speaking]] of 1513-15, Loofs says (p. 697): "Upon these equations (to justify = to forgive, grace = mercy of the non-imputing God, faith = trust in His mercy) as the regulators of his religious self-judgment, Luther's piety rests, and corresponding to them his view of Christianity, and even later" (than 1513-15); and he adds that "to reckon as righteous" ( <i> reputari justum </i> ) must not be understood with Luther as an opposition "to make righteous," for his "to be justified without merits" in the sense of "to forgive" ( <i> absolvi </i> ) is at the same time the beginning of a new life: <i> remissio peccati </i> ... <i> ipsa resurrectio </i> . "His constantly and firmly held view, even more deeply understood later than in 1513-15, that 'to be justified without merit' = 'to be resurrected (to be born again)' = 'to be sanctified' is a pregnant formulation of his Christianity." So much being said, it is not necessary to draw out Luther's doctrine further, who in this respect "rediscovered Christianity as a religion," but it will suffice to refer to the [[Histories]] of Doctrine (Seeberg gives a full and brilliant exposition), to Kostlin, <i> Luthers Theologie </i> , 2. <i> Aufl </i> ., 1901 (see Index under the word "Rechtfertigung," and <i> I </i> , 349), and especially to Thieme, <i> Die sittliche Triebkraft des Glaubens: eine Untersuchung zu Luthers Theologie </i> , 1895,103-314. </p> <p> From Luther and the other reformers the New Testament doctrine went over to the Protestant churches without essential modification, and has remained their nominal testimony until the present. A classic expression of it, which may be taken as representing evangelical Christendom, is the 11th of the 39 Articles of [[Religion]] of the Church of England: "We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings: wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort; as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification." It is true that at one time Wesley's opponents accused him of departing from this doctrine, especially on account of his famous Minute of 1770, but this was due to a radical misunderstanding of that Minute, for to the last he held staunchly Paul's doctrine (for proof see my article in <i> Lutheran Quarterly </i> , April, 1906,171-75). </p> <p> <b> 4. Schleiermacher: </b> </p> <p> A new point of view was brought into modern theology by Schleiermacher, who starts from the fundamental fact of Christian experience that we have redemption and reconciliation with Christ, which fact becomes ours by union with Christ through faith. This union brings justification with other blessings, but justification is not considered as even in thought a separate act based on Christ's death, but as part of a great whole of salvation, historically realized step by step in Christ. The trend of his teaching is to break down the distinction between justification and regeneration, as they are simply different aspects of union with Christ. </p> <p> Ritschl carried forward this thought by emphasizing the grace of the heavenly Father mediated in the first instance through the Son to the Christian community, "to which God imputes the position toward him of Christ its founder," and in the second instance to individuals "as by faith in the Gospel they attach themselves to this community. Faith is simply obedience to God and trust in the revelation of his grace in Christ." This brings sinners into fellowship with God which means eternal life, which is here and now realized, as the Fourth Gospel points out, in lordship over the world (compare [[Franks]] in <i> Dcg </i> , <i> I </i> , 922-23). The judicial or forensic aspect of justification so thoroughly in-wrought in Paul's thought is denied by Ritschl. "In whatsoever way we view the matter," he says, "the attitude of God in the act of justification cannot be conceived as that of a judge" ( <i> Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation </i> , English translation, 1900,90). W.N. Clarke agrees with Schleiermacher in eliminating justification as a separate element in the work of salvation, and harks back to the Catholic view in making it dependent on the new life and subsequent to it ( <i> Christian Theology </i> , 407-8). No book has had as much influence in destroying the New Testament conception of justification among English-speaking readers as that of J. H. Newman, <i> Lectures on Justification </i> , 1838,3edition, 1874, which contains some of the finest passages in religious literature (pp. 270-73,302, 338-39), but which was so sympathetic to the Catholic view that the author had nothing essential to retract when he joined Rome in 1845. "Whether we say we are justified by faith, or by works, or by sacraments, all these but mean this one doctrine that we are justified by grace which is given through sacraments, impetrated by faith, manifested in works" (p. 303). </p> <p> <b> 5. Meaning and Message to the Modern Man: </b> </p> <p> Lastly, has the New Testament conception of justification by faith any message to the modern man, or is it, as Lagarde held, dead in the Protestant churches, something which went overboard with the old doctrine of the [[Trinity]] and of Atonement? After an able historical, survey, Holl concludes ( <i> Die Rechtfertigungslehre im Licht der Geschichte d. Protestantismus </i> , Tubingen, 1906,40-42) that there are two principles thoroughly congenial to modern thought which favor this doctrine, namely, that of the sanctity and importance of personality, the "I" that stands face to face with God, responsible to Him alone; and second, the restoration of the Reformation-thought of an all-working God. Whoever feels the pressure of these two principles, for him the question of justification becomes a living one. "The standard on which he must measure himself is the Absolute God, and who can stand in this judgment? Not simply on account of single acts, but with his 'I' and even with his good-willing. For that is just the curse which rests upon a man that his 'I' is the thing with which alone he wills and can seek God, and that it is this very 'I' which by its willfulness, vanity and self-love poisons all his willing. Accordingly, it remains true, what the Reformers said, that man is entirely corrupt, and that he can do no otherwise than to despair when the majesty of God dawns upon him" (p. 41). There is, then, no other solution than the venture of faith that the same God who crushes our self-deceit lifts up with His sovereign grace, that we live through Him and before Him. Luther is right that religiously we can find no hold except on the Divine act of grace, which through faith in the Divine love and power working in us and for us ever makes us new in Christ. To give up the doctrine of justification, says H </p> | <p> ''''' jus ''''' - ''''' ti ''''' - ''''' fi ''''' - ''''' kā´shu ''''' ( צדק , ''''' cedheḳ ''''' , verb צדק , <i> ''''' cādhēḳ ''''' </i> ; [[Septuagint]] and New Testament δικαίωμα , <i> ''''' dikaı́ōma ''''' </i> , δικαίωσις , <i> ''''' dikaı́ōsis ''''' </i> , verb δικαιόω , <i> ''''' dikaióō ''''' </i> , "justification" "to justify," in a legal sense, the declaring just or righteous. In Biblical literature, δικαιοῦν , <i> ''''' dikaioún ''''' </i> , without denying the <i> real </i> righteousness of a person, is used invariably or almost invariably in a declarative or forensic sense. See Simon, <i> Hdb </i> , II, 826; Thayer, Grimm, and Cremer under the respective words): </p> <p> I. The Writings Of Paul </p> <p> 1. Universality of Sin </p> <p> 2. [[Perfection]] of the Law of God </p> <p> 3. Life, Work and Death of the Atoning Saviour </p> <p> (1) Paul's Own [[Experience]] </p> <p> (2) The Resurrection Connected with the Death </p> <p> (3) Faith, Not Works, the [[Means]] of Justification </p> <p> (4) [[Baptism]] Also Eliminated </p> <p> (5) [[Elements]] of Justification </p> <p> (a) Forgiveness of Sins </p> <p> (b) [[Declaring]] or [[Approving]] as Righteous </p> <p> (6) Justification Has to Do with the [[Individual]] </p> <p> II. The Other New Testament Writings </p> <p> 1. The Synoptic [[Gospels]] </p> <p> 2. John's Writings </p> <p> 3. 1 Peter and Hebrews </p> <p> 4. Epistle of James </p> <p> III. The Old Testament </p> <p> IV. Later Development Of The Doctrine </p> <p> 1. Apostolic and Early Church [[Fathers]] </p> <p> 2. Council of Trent </p> <p> 3. Luther </p> <p> 4. Schleiermacher </p> <p> 5. Meaning and [[Message]] to the Modern Man </p> <p> [[Literature]] </p> I. The Writings of Paul. <p> <b> 1. The Universality of Sin: </b> </p> <p> In this article reference will first be made to the writings of Paul, where justification receives its classic expression, and from there as a center, the other New Testament writers, and finally the Old Testament, will be drawn in. According to Paul, justification rests on the following presuppositions: </p> <p> The universality of sin. All men are not only born in sin ( Ephesians 2:3 ), but they have committed many actual transgressions, which render them liable to condemnation. Paul proves this by an appeal to the Old Testament witnesses ( Romans 3:9 ff), as well as by universal experience, both of the heathen ( Romans 1:18-32 ) and [[Jews]] ( Romans 2:17-28; Romans 3:9 ). </p> <p> <b> 2. Perfection of the Law of God: </b> </p> <p> The perfection of the Law of God and the necessity of its perfect observance, if justification is to come by it ( Romans 3:10 ). The modern notion of God as a good-natured, more or less nonchalant ruler, to whom perfect holiness is not inexorable, was not that of Paul. If one had indeed kept the law, God could not hold him guilty ( Romans 2:13 ), but such an obedience never existed. Paul had no trouble with the law as such. Those who have tried to find a difference here between Galatians and Romans have failed. The reminder that the law was ordained by angels ( Galatians 3:19 ) does not mean that it was not also given by God. It might be reckoned in a sense among the elements of the world ( <i> ''''' kosmos ''''' </i> ), Galatians 4:3 ), as it is an essential part of an ordered universe, but that does not at all mean that it is not also holy, right and good ( Romans 7:12 ). It was added, of course, on account of transgressions ( Galatians 3:19 ), for it is only a world of intelligent, free spirits capable of sin which needs it, and its high and beautiful sanctions make the sin seem all the more sinful ( Romans 7:13 ). </p> <p> <b> 3. Life, Work and Death of the Atoning Savior: </b> </p> <p> It was fundamental in Paul's thinking that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures ( 1 Corinthians 15:3 ). In due season He died for the ungodly ( Romans 5:6 ); while we were yet sinners He died for us ( Romans 5:8 ); we are justified in His blood ( Romans 5:9 ), and it is through Him that we are saved from the wrath ( Romans 5:9 ). While we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son ( Romans 5:10 ), being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus whom God set forth as a propitiation ( Romans 3:24 , Romans 3:25 ). There is no reconciliation, no justification, except through and by and for Christ. </p> (1) Paul's Own Experience. <p> Paul's own experience cannot be left out of the account. He lived through the doctrine, as well as found it through illumination of the Spirit in the Old Testament. It was not that he had only outwardly kept the law. He had been jealous for it, and had been blameless in every requirement of its righteousness ( Philippians 3:6 ). What was borne in upon him was how little such blamelessness could stand before the absolute standard of God. Just how far he was shaken with doubts of this kind we cannot say with certainty; but it seems impossible to conceive the [[Damascus]] conversion scene in the case of such an upright man and strenuous zealot without supposing a psychological preparation, without supposing doubts as to whether his fulfilling of the law enabled him to stand before God. Now, for a Pharisaically educated man like himself, there was no way of overcoming these doubts but in a renewed struggle for his own righteousness shown in the fiery zeal of his Damascus journey, pressing on even in the blazing light of noonday. This conversion broke down his philosophy of life, his Lebensgewissheit, his assurance of salvation through works of the law done never so conscientiously and perfectly. The revelation of the glorified Christ, with the assurance that He, the God-sent Messiah, was the very one whom he was persecuting, destroyed his dependence on his own righteousness, a righteousness which had led him to such shocking consequences. Although this was for him an individual experience, yet it had universal applications. It showed him that there was an inherent weakness in the law through flesh, that is, through the whole physical, psychical and spiritual nature of man considered as sinful, as working only on this lower plane, and that the law needed bracing and illuminating by the Son, who, though sent in the likeness of the flesh of sin, yet (as an offering) for sin condemned sin and cast it out ( Romans 8:3 ), to the end that the law might be fulfilled in those who through Him walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit ( Romans 8:4 ). That was the glory of the new righteousness thus revealed. If the law had been able to do that, to give life, Christ need not have come, righteousness would have been by the law ( Galatians 3:21 ). But the facts show that the law was not thus able, neither the law written on the heart given to all, nor the law given to Moses (Rom 1:18 through 3:19). Therefore every mouth is stopped, and all flesh is silent before God. On the ground of law-keeping, what the modern man would call morality, our hope of salvation has been shattered. The law has spoken its judgment against us ( Galatians 3:10 ). It cannot therefore lead us to righteousness and life, nor was that its supreme intention: <i> it was a pedagogue or tutor </i> (" <i> ''''' paidagōgós ''''' </i> ") <i> to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith </i> ( Galatians 3:24; see Ihmels in <i> RE3 </i> , 16, 483-84). What made Paul to differ from his companions in the faith was that his own bitter experience under the revelation of Christ had led him to these facts. </p> (2) The Resurrection Connected with the Death. <p> It was remarked above that the ground of justification according to Paul is the work of Christ. This means especially. His death as a sacrifice, in which, as Ritschl well says ( <i> Rechtfertigung und Versohnung </i> , 3. Aufl., 1899, 2 157), the apostles saw exercised the whole power of His redemption. But that death cannot be separated from His resurrection, which first awakened them to a knowledge of its decisive worth for salvation, as well as finally confirmed their faith in Jesus as the Son of God. "The objective salvation," says Ritschl (p. 158), "which was connected with the sacrificial death of Christ and which continued on for the church, was made secure by this, that it was asserted also as an attribute of the resurrected one," who was delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our justification ( Romans 4:25 ). But this last expression is not to be interpreted with literal preciseness, as though Paul intended to distinguish between the forgiveness of sins as brought about by the death, and justification, by the resurrection, for both forgiveness and justification are identified in Romans 4:6-8 . It was the resurrection which gave Christians their assurance concerning Christ ( Acts 17:31 ); by that resurrection He has been exalted to the right hand of God, where He maketh intercession for His people ( Romans 8:34 ), which mediatorship is founded upon His death - the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world ( Revelation 13:8 m; compare Greek text). </p> <p> B. Weiss well says: "It was by the certainty of the exaltation of Christ to Messianic sovereignty brought about by the resurrection that Paul attained to faith in the saving significance of His death, and not conversely. Accordingly, the assurance that God cannot condemn us is owing primarily to the death of Christ, but still more to His resurrection and exaltation to God's right hand ( Romans 8:34 ), inasmuch as these first prove that His death was the death of the mediator of salvation, who has redeemed us from condemnation.... The objective atonement was accomplished by the death of Christ, but the appropriation of it in justification is possible only if we believe in the saving significance of His death, and we can attain to faith in that only as it is sealed by the resurrection" ( <i> Biblical Theology of the New Testament </i> , I, 436-37). </p> (3) Faith, Not Works, the Means of Justification. <p> The means or condition of justification is faith ( Romans 3:22 , Romans 3:25 , Romans 3:26 , Romans 3:28 , etc.) which rests upon the pure grace of God and is itself, therefore, His gift ( Ephesians 2:8 ). This making faith the only instrument of justification is not arbitrary, but because, being the receptive attitude of the soul, it is in the nature of the case the only avenue through which Divine blessing can come. The gifts of God are not against the laws of the soul which He has made, but rather are in and through those laws. Faith is the hand outstretched to the Divine Giver, who, though He sends rain without our consent, does not give salvation except through an appropriate spiritual response. This faith is not simply belief in historical facts, though this is presupposed as to the atoning death ( Romans 3:25 ), and the resurrection ( Romans 10:9 ) of Jesus, but is a real heart reception of the gift ( Romans 10:10 ), and is therefore able to bring peace in our relation to God ( Romans 5:1 ). The object of this faith is Jesus Christ ( Romans 3:22 , etc.), through whom only comes the gift of righteousness and the reigning in life ( Romans 5:17 ), not Mary, not angels, not doctrine, not the church, but Jesus only. This, to be sure, does not exclude God the Father as an object of faith, as the redeeming act of Christ is itself the work of God ( 2 Corinthians 5:19 ), whose love expressed itself toward us in this way ( Romans 5:8 ). Faith in the only one God is always presupposed ( 1 Corinthians 8:6 ), but it was the apostolic custom rather to refer repentance to God and faith to Christ ( Acts 20:21 ). But the oneness of God the Father and Christ the Son in a work of salvation is the best guaranty of the [[Divinity]] of the latter, both as an objective fact and as an inner experience of the Christian. </p> <p> The justification being by faith, it is not by works or by love, or by both in one. It cannot be by the former, because they are lacking either in time or amount or quality, nor could they be accepted in any case until they spring from a heart renewed, for which faith is the necessary presupposition. It cannot be by the latter, for it exists only where the Spirit has shed it abroad in the heart ( Romans 5:5 ), the indispensable prerequisite for receiving which is faith. This does not mean that the crown of [[Christianity]] is not love, for it is ( 1 Corinthians 13:13 ); it means only that the root is faith. Nor can love be foisted in as a partial condition of justification on the strength of the word often quoted for that purpose, "faith working through love" ( Galatians 5:6 ). The apostle is speaking here only of those who are already "in Christ," and he says that over against the [[Galatian]] believers bringing in a lot of legal observances, the only availing thing is not circumcision or its lack, but faith energizing through love. Here the interest is, as Ritschl says ( <i> II </i> , 343), in the kingdom of God, but justification proper has reference to the sinner in relation to God and Christ. See the excellent remarks of Bruce, <i> Paul's [[Conception]] of Christianity </i> , 1894, 226-27. At the same time this text reveals the tremendous ethical religious force abiding in faith, according to Paul. It reminds us of the great sentence of Luther in his preface to the Epistles to the Romans, where he says: "Faith is a Divine work within us which changes and renews us in God according to John 1:13 , 'who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.' This destroys the old Adam and makes new creatures of us in heart, will, disposition, and all our powers. Oh, faith is a living, active, jealous, mighty thing, inasmuch as it cannot possibly remain unproductive of good works" (Werke, <i> Erl. Ausg </i> ., 63, 124-25). </p> (4) Baptism also Eliminated. <p> Not only are good works and love removed as conditions or means of justification of the sinner, but baptism is also eliminated. According to Paul, it is the office of baptism not to justify, but to cleanse, that is, symbolically to set forth and seal the washing away of sin and the entrance into the new life by a dramatic act of burial, which for the subject and all witnesses would mark a never-to-be-forgotten era in the history of the believer. "Baptism," says Weiss ( <i> I </i> , 454), "presupposes faith in Him as the one whom the church designates as Lord, and also binds to adherence to Him which excludes every dependence upon any other, inasmuch as He has acquired a claim upon their devotion by the saving deed of His self-surrender on the cross." So important was baptism in the religious atmosphere at that time that hyperbolical expressions were used to express its cleansing and illuminating office, but these need not mislead us. We must interpret them according to the fundamental conceptions of Christianity as a religion of the Spirit, not of magic nor of material media. Baptism pointed to a complete parting with the old life by previous renewal through faith in Christ, which renewal baptism in its turn sealed and announced in a climax of self-dedication to him, and this, while symbolically and in contemporary parlance of both Jew and Gentile called a new birth, was probably often actually so in the psychological experience of the baptized. But while justification is often attributed to faith, it is never to baptism. </p> (5) Elements of Justification. <p> What are the elements of this justification? There are two: </p> <p> <b> (a) Forgiveness of Sins </b> </p> <p> Forgiveness of sins ( Romans 4:5-8; compare Acts 13:38 , Acts 13:39 ). With this are connected peace and reconciliation ( Romans 5:1 , Romans 5:9 , Romans 5:10; compare Romans 10:11 ). </p> <p> <b> (b) The Declaring or Approving as Righteous </b> </p> <p> The declaring or approving as righteous or just ( Romans 3:21-30; Romans 4:2-9 , Romans 4:22; Romans 5:1 , Romans 5:9-11 , Romans 5:16-21 , etc.). C.F. Schmid is perfectly right when he says that Paul (and James) always uses <i> ''''' dikaioun ''''' </i> in the sense of esteeming and pronouncing and treating as righteous, both according to the measure of the law ( Romans 2:13; Romans 3:20 ) and also according to grace ( <i> Biblical Theology of the New Testament </i> , 1870, 497). The word is a forensic one, and Godet goes so far as to say that the word is never used in all Greek literature for making righteous ( <i> [[Commentary]] on Romans </i> , English translation, <i> I </i> , 157, American edition, 95). This is shown further by the fact that it is the ungodly who are justified ( Romans 4:5 ), and that the justification is a reckoning or imputation ( <i> ''''' logı́zesthai ''''' </i> ) of righteousness ( Romans 4:6 , Romans 4:22 ), not an infusing or making righteous. The contrast of "to justify" is not "to be a sinner" but is "to accuse" or "to condemn" ( Romans 8:33 , Romans 8:14 ), and the, contrast of "justification" is "condemnation" ( Romans 5:18 ). Besides, it is not the infusing of a new life, of a new holiness, which is counted for righteousness, but it is faith which is so counted ( Romans 4:5; Philippians 3:9 ). That upon which God looks when He justifies is not the righteousness He has imparted or is to impart, but the atonement He has made in Christ. It is one of the truest paradoxes of Christianity that unless a righteous life follows, there has been no justification, while the justification itself is for the sake of Christ alone through faith alone. It is a " <i> status </i> , rather than a character," says Stevens ( <i> The Pauline Theology </i> , 1892, 265); "it bears the stamp of a legal rather than of an ethical conception," and he refers to the elaborate and convincing proof of the forensic character of Paul's doctrine of justification," in Morison, [[Exposition]] of Romans, chapter III, 163-200. An interesting illustration of how further study may correct a wrong impression is given by Lipsius, who, in his <i> Die Paulinische Rechfertigungslehre </i> , 1853, maintained that righteousness or justification meant not "exclusively an objectively given external relation to God, but always at the same time a real inner condition of righteousness" (p. 10), whereas in his <i> Lehrbuch der evangelisch-protestantischen Dogmatik </i> , 1876, 3. <i> Aufl </i> ., 1893, he makes the righteousness of God properly an "objective gift of grace, not simply in the sense in which the Old Testament just one judged his position of salvation as a gift of grace, but as a righteousness specially reckoned and adjudicated by way of grace and acknowledged before the judgment (or court, <i> Gericht </i> ) of God ( Romans 4:6; compare Romans 4:1-8 , Romans 4:11; Romans 3:23; Galatians 3:6 ). This is always the meaning of <i> ''''' dikaioun ''''' </i> , <i> ''''' dikaioústhai ''''' </i> , or <i> ''''' dikaiōsis ''''' </i> in Paul. It consists in the not-reckoning of sins," etc. (p. 658). Of course justification is only a part of the process of salvation, which includes regeneration and sanctification, but these are one thing and justification is another. </p> (6) Justification Has to Do with the Individual. <p> [[Finally]] it is asked whether justification in Paul's mind has to do with the individual believer or with the society or Christian congregation. Ritschl ( <i> 2 </i> , 217 f) and Sanday-Headlam ( <i> The Epistle to the Rom </i> , 122-23) say the latter; Weiss ( <i> I </i> , 442), the former. It is indeed true that Paul refers to the church as purchased with Christ's blood ( Acts 20:28 , or God's blood, according to the two oldest manuscripts and ancient authorities; compare Ephesians 5:25 ), and he uses the pronoun "we" as those who have received redemption, etc. ( Colossians 1:14; Ephesians 2:18 ); but it is evident on the other hand that faith is an individual matter, a thing first between man and his God, and only after a man has been united to Christ by faith can he enter into a spiritual fellowship with fellow-believers. Therefore the subject of justification must be in the first place the individual, and only in the second place and by consequence the society. Besides, those justified are not the cleansed and sanctified members of churches, but the ungodly ( Romans 4:5 ). </p> <p> As to the argument from baptism urged by Sanday-Headlam, it must be said that Paul always conceives of baptism as taking place in the Christian community with believers and for believers, that that for and to which they are baptized is not justification, but the death and resurrection of Christ ( Romans 6:3 , Romans 6:4 ), and that the righteousness of God has been manifested not through baptism but through faith in Jesus Christ unto all that believe ( Romans 3:22 ), being justified freely, not through baptism, but through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus ( Romans 3:24 ). With Paul baptism has always a mystical significance as symbolizing and externally actualizing union with the death of the Lord, and would be both impossible and impertinent in the case of those not already believers in Christ and thus inwardly united to His society. </p> II. The Other New Testament Writings. <p> So much for Paul. Let us now take a glance at the other New Testament books. It is a commonplace of theology that is called "modern" or "critical," that Paul and not Jesus is the founder of Christianity as we know it, that the doctrines of the Divinity of Christ, atonement, justification, etc., are Paul's work, and not his Master's. There is truth in this. It was part of the humiliation of Christ as well as His pedagogical method to live, teach and act under the conditions of His time and country, on the background of [[Palestine]] of 30 AD; and it was specially His method to do His work and not His disciples', to live a life of love and light, to die for the sins of the world, and then go back to the Father that the Holy Spirit might come and lead His followers into all truth. A full statement of the doctrines of Christianity on His part would have been premature ( John 16:12 ), would have been pedagogically unwise, if not worthless. First the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear ( Mark 4:28 ). It would also have been spiritually and philosophically impossible, for Christianity was not a set of teachings by Christ - but a religion springing out of His life, death, resurrection, ascension, intercession, mediatorial activity in history through the Spirit who works in His disciples and on the world through and by that life, death, etc. The only question is whether the apostles were true to the spirit and content of His teachings in its moral and religious outlines. And especially in this matter of justification, a teaching by Christ is not to be looked for, because it is the very peculiarity of it that its middle point is the exalted Lord, who has become the mediator of salvation by His death and resurrection. Did the Pauline doctrine fit into the concrete situation made by the facts of Christ mentioned above, and was it the necessary consequence of His self-witness? Let us look into the Synoptic Gospels. </p> <p> <b> 1. The Snyoptic Gospels: </b> </p> <p> So far is it from being true, as Harnack says ( <i> What Is Christianity? </i> 2nd edition, revised, New York, 1901,68), that the "whole of Jesus' message may be reduced to these two heads: God as Father, and the human soul so ennobled that it can and does unite with Him," that an essential part of His message is omitted, namely, that salvation is bound up in His (Christ's) own person. (The reader is asked to verify the references for himself, as space will not allow quotation.) See Matthew 10:37-39; Matthew 16:24-27 . Confession of Him (not simply of the Father) determines acknowledgment above ( Matthew 10:32 ), where judgment is rendered according to our attitude to Him in His unfortunate ones Matthew 25:35 ff). No sooner was His person rightly estimated than He began to unfold the necessity of His death and resurrection ( Matthew 16:21 ). The evening before that death occurred, He brings out its significance, perpetuates the lesson in the institution of the Supper ( Mark 14:24 ), and reenforces it after His resurrection ( Luke 24:26 ). Paul himself could hardly have expressed the fact of the atonement through Christ's death more decisively than Matthew 20:28; Matthew 26:28 . With this foundation, could the Christian doctrine of salvation take any other course than that it actually did take? Instead of referring men to the Father, Christ forgives sins Himself ( Matthew 9:2-6 ), and He reckons all men as needing this forgiveness ( Matthew 6:12 ). While the time had not arrived for the Pauline doctrine of righteousness, Jesus prepared the way for it, negatively, in demanding a humble sense of sin ( Matthew 5:3 ), inner fitness and perfection ( Matthew 5:6 , Matthew 5:8 , Matthew 5:20 , Matthew 5:48 ), and positively in requiring recourse to Him by those who felt the burden of their sins ( Matthew 11:28 ), to Him who was the rest-giver, and not simply to God the Father, a passage of which Romans 5:1 is an echo. For it was specially to those to whom, as to the awakened Paul, the law brought condemnation that He came, came to heal and to save ( Mark 2:17; Matthew 9:13; Luke 15:7 ). It was for sinners and to sinners that He came ( Luke 15:2; Luke 7:39; Luke 19:7; Matthew 11:19 ), just as Paul understood; and the way for their salvation was not better law-keeping, but trusting prayer in the confession of sin ( Luke 18:13 ), really equivalent to faith, the humble heart and a hunger for righteousness (= faith). See Matthew 5:3 , Matthew 5:6 . He who brings most of himself, of his own pride and works, is the least likely to obtain the kingdom of heaven ( Matthew 18:3 , Matthew 18:1; Mark 10:14 ). Not only entrance, but the final reward itself is of grace ( Matthew 19:30; 20:1-16), a parable in the true spirit of Paul, and in anticipation of whose message was the promise of [[Paradise]] to the penitent robber ( Luke 23:43 ). At the very beginning the message sounded out, "Repent ye, and believe in the gospel" ( Mark 1:15 ), the gospel which was summed up in Christ, who would gather the people, not directly to God the Father, but to Himself ( Matthew 23:37 ). All this means justification through that faith in Himself, in His Divine-human manifestation ( Matthew 16:13-16 ), of which faith He expresses Himself with anxiety in Luke 18:8 , and the presence of which he greeted with joy in Matthew 8:10 . Ihmels is right therefore in holding ( <i> RE3 </i> , Xvi , 490) that Paul's proclamation was continuous with the self-witness of Jesus, which conversely pointed as a consequence to the witness of Paul. </p> <p> <b> 2. John's Writings: </b> </p> <p> Justification by faith is not more implicit in John's Gospel than in the first three; it is only more explicit ( John 3:14-16 ). [[Eternal]] life is the blessing secured, but this of course is only possible to one not under condemnation ( John 3:36 ). The new Sonship of God came also in the wake of the same faith ( John 1:12 ). The Epistles of John vary from Paul in word rather than in substance. The atoning work of Jesus is still in the background; walking in the light is not conceivable in those under condemnation and without faith; and the confession of sins that leads to forgiveness seems only another name for the justification that brings peace ( 1 John 1:9 , 1 John 1:10; compare 1 John 2:1 , 1 John 2:2 ). Everything is, as with Paul ( Ephesians 2:7; Titus 3:4 ), led back to the love of God ( 1 John 3:1 ), who sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins ( 1 John 4:10 ). </p> <p> <b> 3. 1 Peter and Hebrews: </b> </p> <p> Seeberg's point that the "Pauline doctrine of justification is not found in any other New Testament writer" ( <i> History of Doctrine </i> , I, 48) is true when you emphasize the word "doctrine." Paul gave it full scientific treatment, the others presuppose the fact, but do not unfold the doctrine. Peter's "Repent ye, and be baptized ... in the name of Jesus Christ" ( Acts 2:38 ) is meaningless unless faith were exercised in Christ. It is He in whom, though we see Him not, yet believing, we rejoice greatly with joy unspeakable ( 1 Peter 1:8 ), receiving the end of our faith, the salvation of our souls ( 1 Peter 1:9 ). It is only, however, through the precious blood as of a lamb without blemish, even that of Christ ( 1 Peter 1:19 ), and is only through Him that we are believers in God ( 1 Peter 1:21 ). The familiar expression, "Come to Jesus," which simply means have faith in Jesus for justification and salvation, goes back to Peter ( 1 Peter 2:4 ). The Epistle to the Hebrews has other interests to look after, but it does not deny faith, but rather exhorts us to draw near with a true heart in fullness of faith ( Hebrews 10:22 ), which it lays at the foundation of all true religion, thinking and achievement (Hebrews 11). The writer can give no better exhortation than to look unto Jesus the author and perfecter of our faith ( Hebrews 12:2 ), an exhortation in the true spirit of Paul, whose gospel of faith for justification is also summed up in Hebrews 4:16 . </p> <p> <b> 4. Epistle of James: </b> </p> <p> We come lastly to the core of the matter in regard to New Testament representations of justification - the famous passage in James 2:14-26 , which at first sight seems a direct blow at Paul. Here we are met by the interesting question of the date of James. As we cannot enter into this (see James , Epistle Of ), what we say must be independent of this question. A careful look at this vigorous and most valuable letter (valuable in its own place, which is not that of Paul's letters, in comparison with which it is a "right strawy epistle," as Luther truthfully said ( <i> Erl. Ausg. </i> , 63, 115; see also pp. 156-57), in saying which he did not mean to reject it as useless (straw has most important uses), but as giving the doctrine of salvation, for which we must look to Paul) will show us that contradiction on the part of James to Paul is apparent and not real. </p> <p> (1) In this section James uses the word faith simply for intellectual belief in God, and especially in the unity of God ( James 2:19; see also context), whereas Paul uses it for a saving trust in Christ. As Feine well says (Theol. d. New Testament, Leipzig, 2 1911, 660-63), for Paul faith is the appropriation of the life-power of the heavenly Christ. Therefore he knows no faith which does not bring forth good works corresponding to it. What does not come from faith is sin. For James faith is subordination of man to the heavenly Christ ( James 2:1 ), or it is theoretic acknowledgment of one God ( James 2:19 ). Justification is for James a speaking just of him who is righteous, an analytical judgment. (Feine also says that James did not understand Paul, but he did not fight him. It was left to Luther through his deep religious experience first to understand Paul's doctrine of justification.) (2) James uses the word "works" as meaning practical morality, going back behind legalism, behind Pharisaism, to the position of the Old Testament prophets, whereas Paul uses the word as meritorious action deserving reward. (3) When James is thinking of a deeper view, faith stands central in Christianity ( James 1:3 , James 1:6; James 2:1; James 5:15 ). (4) Paul also on his part is as anxious as James vitally to connect Christianity and good works through faith ( 1 Thessalonians 1:3; Galatians 5:6; 1 Corinthians 13:2; Romans 2:6 , Romans 2:7; see Mayor, <i> The Epistle of James </i> , 1892, lxxxviii ff; Franks, in <i> DCG </i> , I, 919-20; Findlay in <i> HDB </i> , 1-vol edition, 511). (5) The whole argument of James is bent on preserving a real practical Christianity that is not content with words merely ( James 2:15-16 ), but shows itself in deeds. He is not trying to show, as Paul, how men get rid of their guilt and become Christians, but how they prove the reality of their profession <i> after </i> they receive the faith. He is not only writing to Christians, as of course Paul was, but he was writing to them as Christians ("my brethren," James 2:14 ), as already justified and standing on the "faith of our Lord Jesus Christ" ( James 2:1 ), whereas Paul was thinking of men, Gentile and Jew, shivering in their guilt before the Eternal Justice, and asking, How can we get peace with God? "There is not," says Beyschlag ( <i> New Testament Theology </i> , Edinburgh, 1895, <i> I </i> , 367-68), "an objective conflict between the Pauline and Jacobean doctrines; both forms of teaching exist peacefully beside each other. James thought of justification in the simple and most natural sense of <i> justificatio justi </i> , as the Divine recognition of an actually righteous man, and he thought of it as the final judgment of God upon a man who is to stand in the last judgment and become a partaker of the final <i> ''''' sōtēría ''''' </i> ('salvation'). Paul also demands as a requisite for this last judgment and the final <i> ''''' sōtēría ''''' </i> right works, the love that fulfills the law and the perfected sanctification, but he (except in Romans 2:13 ) does not apply the expression <i> ''''' dikaiousthai ''''' </i> ('to be justified') to the final judgment of God, which recognizes this righteousness of life as actual. He applies it rather to that first sentence of God with which He graciously receives the believing sinner returning to Him, and takes him into fellowship with Himself." Beyschlag rightly insists that James undoubtedly taught with the first apostles that whoever believes in Christ and is baptized receives the forgiveness of sins ( Acts 2:38; Acts 3:19; Acts 10:43 ), and that he would not have contested the Pauline idea of justification by grace on account of faith, insisting only that works must follow. Theologically, the chief if not the only difference is that James has not yet made the cross of Christ the center of his point of view, while the atonement was fundamental with all Paul's thinking. See, further, James , Epistle Of . </p> III. The Old Testament. <p> A word in conclusion as to the Old Testament. All the New Testament writers built on the Old Testament. That there should be a cleft or contradiction between the Old Testament and what we call the New Testament would have been to them inconceivable. But they realized that that was the early dawn, while they lived in the light of day. Abraham believed in Yahweh; and He reckoned it to him for righteousness ( Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:3 ). Who does not keep all parts of the law all the time is condemned ( Deuteronomy 27:26 Septuagint; Galatians 3:10; compare Psalm 14:1-7; Psalm 143:2; Romans 3:20; see Romans 3:9-20 , and the references to the Old Testament in the American Standard Revised Version). The prophets insisted upon the practical works of righteousness - "What doth [[Yahweh]] require of thee, but to do justly, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with thy God?" ( Micah 6:8 ). No religious attitude or services could take the place of uprightness of life. This does not mean that the Old Testament writers understood that men were justified simply by their good deeds, for it was always believed that underneath all was the mercy and lovingkindness of God, whose forgiving grace was toward the broken and contrite spirit, the iniquities of whom were to be carried by the Servant of Yahweh, who shall justify many ( Psalm 103:8-13; Psalm 85:10; Isaiah 57:15; Isaiah 53:11 , and many other passages). </p> IV. Later Development of the Doctrine. <p> <b> 1. Apostolic and Early Church Fathers: </b> </p> <p> A brief statement now on the development of the doctrine in the Christian church. It is humiliating to confess that the witness immediately after the apostles (the apostolic Fathers) did not reach the serene heights of Paul, or even the lower levels of his brethren. There are passages which remind one of him, but one feels at once that the atmosphere is different. Christianity is conceived as a new law rather than as a gospel of the grace of God. We cannot go into the reasons for this: suffice it to say that in GentileChristendom the presuppositions for that gospel failed, and the New Testament writings were not yet in the consciousness of the church to the extent that they dominated her thinking. The fine passage in [[Clement]] of Rome (97 AD, chapter xxxii: "They all therefore (i.e. Abraham and other early saints) were glorified and magnified, not through themselves or their own works or the righteous doings which they wrought, but through His (God's) will. And so we, having been called through His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom or understanding or piety or works which we wrought in holiness of heart, but through faith, whereby the Almighty God justified all men that ever have been from the beginning; to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.") is not at all on a paragraph with his whole Epistle, as he coordinates faith with other virtues in chapter xxxv, makes hospitality and godliness the saving virtues for [[Lot]] in chapter xi, couples hospitality and faith together as equal for Rahab in chapter xii, and represents forgiveness of sins through keeping commandments and love in chapter l. [[Ignatius]] (about 110-15 AD) speaks in one place about Jesus Christ dying for us, that believing on His death we might escape death ( <i> Tral </i> . 2), but with him the real saving things are love, concord, obedience to bishops, and the indwelling God = Christ, though he has also the excellent passage: "None of these things is hidden from you if ye be perfect in your faith and love toward Jesus Christ, for these things are the beginning and end of life - faith is the beginning and love the end, and the two being found in unit are God, while all things else follow in their train unto true nobility" ( Ephesians 14 ). The so-called [[Barnabas]] (date uncertain) puts the death of Christ Jesus at the foundation of salvation, which is expressed by the remission of sins through His blood ( Ephesians 5 ), the kingdom of Jesus being on the cross, so that they who set their hope on Him shall live forever ( Ephesians 8 ), while at the time even believers are not yet justified ( Ephesians 4 ), for which finally a whole series of works of light must be done and works of darkness avoided ( Ephesians 19 ). The [[Shepherd]] of [[Hermas]] and the [[Ancient]] Homily = 2 Clem are even more moralistic, where with whatever praise of faith we have the beginning of merit. The same legalistic tone sounds through that invaluable little roll found by Bryennios in 1873 and first published by him in [[Constantinople]] in December, 1883, <i> The Teaching (Didache) of the Twelve [[Apostles]] </i> . That Catholic trend went forward till it is almost full-fledged as early as Tertullian (fl. 200 AD) and [[Cyprian]] (250 AD). See a full statement in my Cyprian, 1906,146 ff. And thus it continued until - as far as our outline is concerned - it struck Augustine, bishop of [[Hippo]] (396 ff), who in a masterly and living way united, so far as they could be united, the Pauline thoughts of sin, grace, and justification with the regular Catholic legalism. His book, <i> De Spiritu et Litera </i> (412 AD), was largely after Paul's own heart, and the [[Reformers]] hailed it with joy. But the Catholic elements he still kept, as for instance, that in justification a good concupiscence and a good-will are infused, that justification grows, that our merits must be taken into the account even though they are God's merits, that the faith which justifies is a faith which works by love, that faith is the holding true what God (and the church) says, though occasionally a deeper view of faith is seen, and that works are emphasized, as in <i> De fide et </i> <i> operibus </i> , in a Catholic fashion. With profound and thoroughly Christian thoughts, [[Augustine]] had not so worked himself clear of his Catholic inheritance that he could reproduce Paul purely. He made a bridge by which we could go either back to Paul or forward to Aquinas. As Harnack well says, Augustine experienced, on the one hand, the last revival in the ancient church of the principle that "faith alone saves," and, on the other, he silenced that principle for a thousand years. The very Catholic theologian who stood nearest to that principle overcame it ( <i> Zeitschrift f. Theol. u. Kirche </i> , 1891,177). His misunderstanding of Paul's "faith that worketh through love" had momentous consequences. </p> <p> <b> 2. Council of Trent: </b> </p> <p> Those consequences are best seen in the decrees of the Council of Trent (Session 6,1547), to which we now turn, and which are the definite and final crystallization of the medieval development, so far as that development was Catholic. (1) Justification is a translation from a natural state to a state of grace. With this works prevenient grace, awakening and assisting, and with this in his man cooperates and prepares himself for justification. This cooperation has the merit of congruity, though the first call comes before any merit. (2) Faith is an element in justification. "Receiving faith by hearing, they of free will draw near to God, believing those things to be true which have been Divinely revealed and promised." Faith as a living trust in a personal Saviour for salvation is lacking. Among the truths believed is the mercy of God and that He wishes to justify the sinner in Christ. (3) This faith begets love to Christ and hatred to sin, which are elements also of the justifying process. (4) Now follows justification itself, "which is not a bare remission of sins, but also sanctification and renewal of the inner man through the voluntary reception of grace and of gifts." (5) But this renewal must take place through baptism, which, to the prepared adult, both gives and seals all the graces of salvation, forgiveness, cleansing, faith, hope and love. (6) Justification is preserved by obeying the commandments and by good works, which also increase it. (7) In case it is lost - and it can be lost, not by venial, but by mortal sin and by unbelief - it can be regained by the sacrament of penance. (8) To get it, to keep or regain it, it is also necessary to believe the doctrines as thus laid down and to be laid down by this Council (see the decrees in any edition, or in Mirbt, <i> Quellen zur Geschichte des Papsttums </i> , 2. Aufl., 206-16, or in Buckley's or in Waterworth's translations, and for an admirable and objective summary see Seeberg, <i> History of Doctrine </i> , <i> 2 </i> , 433-38). </p> <p> <b> 3. Luther: </b> </p> <p> Recent researches in Luther's early writings have shown that almost from the beginning of his earnest study of religious questions, he mounted up to Paul's view of justification by faith alone (Loofs, <i> Dg </i> , 4. <i> Aufl </i> ., 1906,696-98). Faith is the trust in the mercy of God through Christ, and justification is the declaring righteous for His sake, which is followed by a real making righteous. From the beginning to the end of his life as a religious teacher these are the elements of his doctrine. [[Speaking]] of 1513-15, Loofs says (p. 697): "Upon these equations (to justify = to forgive, grace = mercy of the non-imputing God, faith = trust in His mercy) as the regulators of his religious self-judgment, Luther's piety rests, and corresponding to them his view of Christianity, and even later" (than 1513-15); and he adds that "to reckon as righteous" ( <i> reputari justum </i> ) must not be understood with Luther as an opposition "to make righteous," for his "to be justified without merits" in the sense of "to forgive" ( <i> absolvi </i> ) is at the same time the beginning of a new life: <i> remissio peccati </i> ... <i> ipsa resurrectio </i> . "His constantly and firmly held view, even more deeply understood later than in 1513-15, that 'to be justified without merit' = 'to be resurrected (to be born again)' = 'to be sanctified' is a pregnant formulation of his Christianity." So much being said, it is not necessary to draw out Luther's doctrine further, who in this respect "rediscovered Christianity as a religion," but it will suffice to refer to the [[Histories]] of Doctrine (Seeberg gives a full and brilliant exposition), to Kostlin, <i> Luthers Theologie </i> , 2. <i> Aufl </i> ., 1901 (see Index under the word "Rechtfertigung," and <i> I </i> , 349), and especially to Thieme, <i> Die sittliche Triebkraft des Glaubens: eine Untersuchung zu Luthers Theologie </i> , 1895,103-314. </p> <p> From Luther and the other reformers the New Testament doctrine went over to the Protestant churches without essential modification, and has remained their nominal testimony until the present. A classic expression of it, which may be taken as representing evangelical Christendom, is the 11th of the 39 Articles of [[Religion]] of the Church of England: "We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings: wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort; as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification." It is true that at one time Wesley's opponents accused him of departing from this doctrine, especially on account of his famous Minute of 1770, but this was due to a radical misunderstanding of that Minute, for to the last he held staunchly Paul's doctrine (for proof see my article in <i> Lutheran Quarterly </i> , April, 1906,171-75). </p> <p> <b> 4. Schleiermacher: </b> </p> <p> A new point of view was brought into modern theology by Schleiermacher, who starts from the fundamental fact of Christian experience that we have redemption and reconciliation with Christ, which fact becomes ours by union with Christ through faith. This union brings justification with other blessings, but justification is not considered as even in thought a separate act based on Christ's death, but as part of a great whole of salvation, historically realized step by step in Christ. The trend of his teaching is to break down the distinction between justification and regeneration, as they are simply different aspects of union with Christ. </p> <p> Ritschl carried forward this thought by emphasizing the grace of the heavenly Father mediated in the first instance through the Son to the Christian community, "to which God imputes the position toward him of Christ its founder," and in the second instance to individuals "as by faith in the Gospel they attach themselves to this community. Faith is simply obedience to God and trust in the revelation of his grace in Christ." This brings sinners into fellowship with God which means eternal life, which is here and now realized, as the Fourth Gospel points out, in lordship over the world (compare [[Franks]] in <i> Dcg </i> , <i> I </i> , 922-23). The judicial or forensic aspect of justification so thoroughly in-wrought in Paul's thought is denied by Ritschl. "In whatsoever way we view the matter," he says, "the attitude of God in the act of justification cannot be conceived as that of a judge" ( <i> Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation </i> , English translation, 1900,90). W.N. Clarke agrees with Schleiermacher in eliminating justification as a separate element in the work of salvation, and harks back to the Catholic view in making it dependent on the new life and subsequent to it ( <i> Christian Theology </i> , 407-8). No book has had as much influence in destroying the New Testament conception of justification among English-speaking readers as that of J. H. Newman, <i> Lectures on Justification </i> , 1838,3edition, 1874, which contains some of the finest passages in religious literature (pp. 270-73,302, 338-39), but which was so sympathetic to the Catholic view that the author had nothing essential to retract when he joined Rome in 1845. "Whether we say we are justified by faith, or by works, or by sacraments, all these but mean this one doctrine that we are justified by grace which is given through sacraments, impetrated by faith, manifested in works" (p. 303). </p> <p> <b> 5. Meaning and Message to the Modern Man: </b> </p> <p> Lastly, has the New Testament conception of justification by faith any message to the modern man, or is it, as Lagarde held, dead in the Protestant churches, something which went overboard with the old doctrine of the [[Trinity]] and of Atonement? After an able historical, survey, Holl concludes ( <i> Die Rechtfertigungslehre im Licht der Geschichte d. Protestantismus </i> , Tubingen, 1906,40-42) that there are two principles thoroughly congenial to modern thought which favor this doctrine, namely, that of the sanctity and importance of personality, the "I" that stands face to face with God, responsible to Him alone; and second, the restoration of the Reformation-thought of an all-working God. Whoever feels the pressure of these two principles, for him the question of justification becomes a living one. "The standard on which he must measure himself is the Absolute God, and who can stand in this judgment? Not simply on account of single acts, but with his 'I' and even with his good-willing. For that is just the curse which rests upon a man that his 'I' is the thing with which alone he wills and can seek God, and that it is this very 'I' which by its willfulness, vanity and self-love poisons all his willing. Accordingly, it remains true, what the Reformers said, that man is entirely corrupt, and that he can do no otherwise than to despair when the majesty of God dawns upon him" (p. 41). There is, then, no other solution than the venture of faith that the same God who crushes our self-deceit lifts up with His sovereign grace, that we live through Him and before Him. Luther is right that religiously we can find no hold except on the Divine act of grace, which through faith in the Divine love and power working in us and for us ever makes us new in Christ. To give up the doctrine of justification, says H </p> | ||
== Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature <ref name="term_46691" /> == | == Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature <ref name="term_46691" /> == | ||
<p> (some form of the verbs צָדִק | <p> (some form of the verbs '''''צָדִק''''' '''''Δικαιόω''''' ), a forensic term equivalent to ''Acquittal'' , and opposed to condemnation; in an apologetic sense it is often synonymous with ''Vindication'' or freeing from unjust imputation of blame. </p> <p> '''I.''' ''Dogmatic Statement'' . '''''—''''' This term, in theological usage, is employed to designate the judicial act of God by which he pardons all the sins of the sinner who believes in Christ, receiving him into favor, and regarding him as relatively righteous, notwithstanding his past actual unrighteousness. Hence justification, and the remission or forgiveness of sin, relate to one and the same act of God, to one and the same privilege of his believing people ( Acts 13:38-39; Romans 4:5; Romans 4:8). So, also, "the justification of the ungodly," the "covering of sins," "not visiting for sin," "not remembering sin," and "imputing not inequity," mean to pardon sin and to treat with favor, and express substantially the same thing which is designated by "imputing or counting faith for righteousness." (See Pardon). </p> <p> Justification, then, is an act of God, not in or upon man, but for him and in his favor; an act which, abstractly considered, respects man only as its object, and translates him into another relative state; while sanctification respects man as its subject, and is a consequent of this act of God, and inseparably connected with it. (See [[Regeneration]]). </p> <p> The originating cause of justification is the free grace and spontaneous love of God towards fallen man ( Romans 15:3; Romans 15:24; Titus 2:11; Titus 3:4-5). Our Lord Jesus Christ is the sole meritorious cause of our justification, inasmuch as it is the result of his atonement for us. The sacrificial death of Christ is an expedient of infinite wisdom, by which the full claims of the law may be admitted, and yet the penalty avoided, because a moral compensation or equivalent has been provided by the sufferings of him who died in the sinner's stead ( Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14; Revelation 5:9). Thus, while it appears that our justification is, in its origin, an act of the highest grace, it is also, in its mode, an act most perfectly consistent with God's essential righteousness, and demonstrative of his inviolable justice. It proceeds not on the principle of abolishing the law or its penalty, for that would have implied that the law was unduly rigorous either in its precepts or in its sanctions. (See Atonement). </p> <p> Faith is the instrumental cause of justification, present faith in him who is able to save, faith actually existing and exercised. (See Faith). The atonement of Jesus is not accepted for us, to our individual justification, until we individually believe, nor after we cease to live by faith in him. (See Imputation). </p> <p> The immediate results of justification are the restoration of amity and intercourse between the pardoned sinner and the pardoning God ( Romans 5:1; James 2:23); the adoption of the persons justified into the family of God, and their consequent right to eternal life ( Romans 8:17); and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit ( Acts 2:38; Galatians 3:14; Galatians 4:6), producing tranquillity of conscience ( Romans 8:15-16), power over sin ( Romans 8:1) and a joyous hope of heaven ( Romans 15:13; Galatians 5:3). (See [[Fruits]] Of Spirit). </p> <p> We must not forget that the justification of a sinner does not in the least degree alter or diminish the evil nature and desert of sin. Though by an act of divine clemency the penalty is remitted, and the obligation to suffer that penalty is dissolved, still it is naturally due, though graciously remitted. Hence appear the propriety and duty of continuing to confess and lament even pardoned sin with a lowly and contrite heart ( Ezekiel 16:62). (See [[Penitence]]). </p> <p> '''II.''' ''History Of The Doctrine.'' '''''—''''' </p> <p> '''1.''' ''The Early Church Fathers And The Latin Church'' . '''''—''''' [[Ecclesiastical]] science, from the beginning of its development, occupied itself with a discussion on the relation of faith to knowledge; but even those who attributed the greatest importance to the latter recognized faith as the foundation. A merely logical division into subjective and objective faiths and an intimation of a distinction between a historic and a rational faith (in [[Clemens]] Alexandrinus, ''Stromata.'' 2 '','' 454; Augustine, ''De Trinitate,'' 13, 2), were of little consequence. Two conceptions became prevailing: Faith as a general religious conviction, particularly as confidence in God, and the acceptance of the entire doctrine of the Church, ''Fides Catholica'' . The formula that faith alone without the works justifies is found in the full Pauline sense in Clemens Romanus (1 ''Ad Corinthios. C.'' 32) and is sometimes used by Augustine polemically in order to defend the freedom of grace and the priority of faith. More generally it is used as an argument against the necessity of the Jewish law (Irenaeus, 4:25 Tertullian, ''Adv. Marcell.'' 5, 3). The oecumenical synods were instrumental in gradually giving to the conception of ''Fides Catholica'' the new sense that salvation could be found only by adherence to ecclesiastical orthodoxy. But as a mere acceptance was possible without a really, Christian sentiment, and as the Pauline doctrine was misused by heretics in an antinomian sense, it was demanded that faith, be proved by works. Church discipline developed this idea with regard to the sins of the faithful, so as to demand a satisfaction through penances and good works (Augustine, Serm. 151, 12). It became, therefore, the doctrine of the Church that such faith alone works salvation as shows itself in acts of charity, while to merely external works faith or charity is opposed as something accessory. [[Pelagius]] assumed only a relative distinction between naturally good works and the good works that proceed from faith; in opposition to which Augustine insisted that the difference is absolute, and that without faith no good works at all are possible. As salvation was thought to be conditioned by works also, it was, even when it was represented as being merely an act of God, identified with sanctification. The importance attributed to abstention created gradually a distinction between commands and advices, and the belief that through the fulfilment of the latter a virtue greater than required would arise (Hermas, [[Pastor]] Simil. 3, 5, 3; Origen, In Epistolam, ad Romans 3; Ambrose, De Viduis, 4, 508). </p> <p> '''2.''' ''The Greek Church.'' '''''—''''' Little discussion and little controversy has occurred on this doctrine in the Greek Church. Faith and works together are regarded as the conditions of salvation. The words of James are referred to first, yet faith is declared to be the stock from which the good works come as the fruits. The description of faith proceeds from the definition in the Epistle to the Hebrews to the acceptance of the entire ecclesiastical tradition. Man is said to participate in the merit of the Mediator not only through faith, but also through good works. Among the latter are comprised the fulfilment of the commandments of God and of the Church, and, in particular, prayers, fastings, pilgrimages, and monastic life. They are considered useful and necessary not only as a means of promoting sanctification, but also as penances and satisfaction. </p> <p> '''3''' '''.''' ''Doctrine Of The Roman Catholic Church During The Middle Ages'' . '''''—''''' The Scholastics regarded faith as an acceptance of the supersensual as far as it belongs to religion, differing both from intuition and from knowledge; and although essentially of a theoretic character, yet conditioned by the consent of the will; which, however, in the description of faith, is reduced to a ''Minimum.'' Originally only God is an object of faith, but mediately also the holy Scriptures; as a summary of the Biblical doctrines, the Apostles Creed, and, as its explication, the entire doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. As an accurate knowledge of the doctrines of the Church cannot be expected from every one, the subjective distinction was made between fides ''Implicita'' and ''Explicita;'' the former sufficient for the people, yet with the demand of a developed belief in some chief articles. There was, however, a difference of opinion on what these articles were, and even [[Thomas]] Aquinas wavered in his views. Faith may, even upon earth, partly become a science, and appears in this respect only as the popular form of religion. It is a condition of salvation, but becomes a virtue only when love, as animating principle [forma], pervades it [fides formata]; with a mere faith [informis] one may be damned. The fides formata includes the necessity of the good works for salvation, but they must be founded in pious sentiment. All other works not proceeding from faith, are dead though not entirely useless. The necessity of good works is fully carried out only by the inculcation of penance as satisfactiones, but with constant reference to a union of the soul with Christ, and the moral effect of the good works. Justification, according to Thomas Aquinas, is a movement from the state of injustice into the state of justice, in which the remission of sins is the main point, though it is conditioned by an infusion of grace which actually justifies men. As an act of God which establishes in man a new state [habitus], it is accomplished in a moment. Among the people the Pelagian views prevailed, that man, by merely outward works, had to gain his salvation, and the Church became, especially through the traffic in indulgences, a prey to the immoral and insipid worship of ceremonies. In opposition to this corruption, many of the pious [[Mystics]] pointed to the Pauline doctrine of faith. </p> <p> '''4.''' ''Doctrine Of The Reformers Of The'' 16 ''Th Century And The Old Protestant Dogmatics'' . '''''—''''' The Reformation of the 16th century renewed the Pauline doctrine of justification by faith alone, emphasizing in the sense of Augustine, the entire helplessness of man, and made it the fundamental doctrine of the Reformed Church. This faith is represented as not merely an acceptance of historic facts, but is distinguished as ''Fides Specialis'' from the general religious conviction, arising amidst the terrors of conscience, and consisting in an entire despair of one's own merit and a confident surrender to the mercy of God in the atoning death of Christ. Worked by God, it does not work as virtue or merit, but merely through the apprehension of the merit of Christ. Its necessity lies in the impossibility of becoming reconciled with God through one's own power. Hence this reconciliation is impossible through good works, which are not necessary for salvation, though God rewards them, according to his promise, upon earth and in heaven; but, as a necessary consequence, the really good works will flow forth from faith freely and copiously. The opinion of Amsdorf, that good works are an obstacle to salvation, was regarded as an unfortunate expression, which may be taken in a true sense, though it is false if understood in a general sense. As man is unable to satisfy the law supererogatory works and a satisfaction through one's own works are impossible. Justification through love is impossible, because man cannot love God truly amidst the terrors of conscience. Hence justification is a divine judicial act, which, through the apprehension of the justice of Christ, apprehended in faith, accepts the sinner as just, though he is not just. This strict distinction between justification and sanctification was maintained on the one hand against Scholasticism, which, through its Pelagian tendencies, seemed to offend against the honor of Christ, and to be unable to satisfy conscience, and on the other hand against Osiander, who regarded justification as being completed only in sanctification. The works even of the regenerated, according to the natural side, were regarded by the Reformers as sins. The Reformed theology in general agreed with the doctrine of justification as stated above, yet did not make it to the same extent the fundamental doctrine of the whole theology. According to Calvin, justification and sanctification took place at the same time. The dogmatic writers of the Lutheran Church distinguished in faith knowledge, assent, and, confidence, assigning the former two to the intellect, the latter to the will. From the fides generalis they distinguished the justifying faith (specialis seu salvifica), and rejected the division into fides informis et formata. As a distinguishing mark, they demanded from a true faith that it be efficient in charity. For works they took the [[Decalogue]] as a rule; a certain necessity of works was strictly limited. But, however firmly they clung in general to the conception of justification as something merely external (actus forensis) and foreign (imputatio justitiae Christi), some dogmatic writers held that justification had really changed something in man, and indeed presupposed it as changed. Hollaz pronounced this doctrine openly and incautiously, while Quenstedt designated these preceding acts as merely preparatory to conversion. </p> <p> '''5.''' ''Doctrine Of The Roman Catholic Church Since The Reformation'' . '''''—''''' The Council of Trent, in order to make a compromise with the Pauline formula, recognized faith as the beginning and the foundation of justification, but the full sense which [[Protestantism]] found in it was rejected. This faith is the general belief in divine revelation, though in transition to a special faith, yet a mere knowledge which still gives room to mortal sins. Justification is remission of sins and sanctification, through an infusion of the divine grace, in as far as the merit of Christ is not merely imputed, but communicated. It is given through grace, but as a permanent state it grows through the merit of good works according to the commandments of God and the Church, through which works the justified, always aided by the grace of God in Christ, have to render satisfaction for the temporal punishment of their sins and to deserve salvation. Not all the works done before justification are sins, and to the justified the fulfilment of the commandments of God is quite possible, although even the saints still commit small, venial sins. A further development of this doctrine is found in the writings of Bellarmine. He admits faith only as fides generalis, as a matter of the intellect, yet as a consent, not a knowledge. Though only the first among many preparations for justification a certain merit is ascribed to faith. The Council of Trent had rejected the imputation of the merits of Christ only as the exclusive ground of justification; Bellarmine rejected it altogether. He explicitly proclaimed the necessity of good works for salvation, though only a relative salvation. "The opera supererogationis, which were not mentioned at Trent, though they remained unchanged in tradition and practice, are further developed by Bellarmine. According to him, they go beyond nature, are not destined for all, and not commanded under penalties. </p> <p> '''6''' '''.''' ''Modern Protestantism'' . '''''—''''' Socinus denied any foreign imputation, also that of the merit of Christ. When supranaturalism in general declined, the points of difference from the Roman Catholic Church were frequently lost sight of Kant found in the doctrine of justification the relation of the always unsatisfactory reality of our moral development to the future perfection recognized in the intuition of God. De Wette declared it to be the highest moral confidence which is founded on the communion with Christ, and turns from an unhappy past to a better future. Modern mystics have often found fault with the Protestant doctrine as being too outward, and approached the doctrine of the Roman Church. The Hegelian School taught that justification is the reception of the subject into the spirit, i.e. the knowledge of the subject of his unity with the absolute spirit or, according to Strauss, with the concrete idea of mankind. According to Schleiermacher, it is the reception into the communion of life with both the archetypal and historical Christ, and the appropriation of his perfection. Justification and sanctification are to him only different sides of the carrying out of the same divine decree. Many of the recent dogmatic writers of [[Germany]] have again proclaimed this doctrine to be the essential principle of Protestantism, some (Dorner, Das Princip unserer Kirche, Kiel, 1841) taking justification in the sense of a new personality founded in Christ, others (Hundeshagen, Der deutsche Protestantismus. Frankft. 1847) in the sense that God, surveying the whole future development of the principle which communion with Christ establishes in the believer, views him as righteous. One of the last dogmatic manuals of the Reformed Church (Schweizer, 2, 523 sq.) distinguishes conversion and sanctification as the beginning and progress of a life of salvation, and assigns justification to the former. See Hase, Evangelische Dogmatik (Leipzic, 1850) p. 310 sq.; C.F. Baur, Lehrbuch der christlichen Dogmengeschichte (Stuttgart, 1847); Hahn, Das Bekenntniss der evangelischen Kirchengeschichte in seinem Verhaltniss zu dem der Romischen und Griechischen. </p> <p> '''III.''' [[Literature]] . '''''—''''' See, for Roman Cath. views, M '''''Ö''''' hler, ''Symbolism,'' ch. 3; Willett, ''Syn. Pap.'' 8, 67 sq.; Cramp, ''Text-Book Of Popery,'' ch. 5; Bossuet, ''Works,'' vol. 1 and 2 Stud. und Krit. 1867. vol. 2; D'Aubigne, Hist. Reformation, vol. 2; Forbes, Considerations, 1, 1; Nicene Creed; 1, 173; Hughes, Works, 1, 410. For Protestant views, see Buchanan, Justification (Edinb. 1867, 8vo; reviewed at length in Lond. Review, Oct. 1867, p. 179); Brit. and For. Evang. Rev. Oct. 1867, art. 6; Wesley, Works, 5, 255; 6, 106; Calvin, Instit. vol. 2; Cunningham, Reformers, p. 402; Planck, Hist. Prot. Theol. (see Index); Knapp, Theology (see Index); Wardlaw, System. Theology, 2, 67.8 sq.; Graves, Works, vol. 4; Monsell, 4, 232, 240; Waterland, Works, vol. 6; T. Goodwin, Works (see Index); Wilson, Apostol. Fathers (see Index); Martensen, Dogmatics, p. 390 sq.; Pye Smith, Introd. to Theol. (see Index); Burnet, On the 39 Articles (see Index); Carmich, Theol. of the Scriptures, vol. 2; Neander, Prot. and Cath. p. 131-146; Ch. Dog. 2, 66 sq.; [[Planting]] and Train. of Christian Church, vol. 2; Riggenbach, in the Stud. und Krit. 1863, 4:691; 1867, 1, 405, 2, 294; 1868, 2, 201; North Brit. Review, June, 1867; p. 191 sq.; Dr. Schaff, Protestantism, p. 54-57; Good Words, Jan. 1866 Heppe, Dogmatics, p. 392; Biblioth.-Sacra, 1863, p. 615; Bibl. Repos. 11, 448 Christ. Review, Oct. 1846; Jahrb. deutsch. Theol. 7, 516; Ware, Works, 3, 381; Journal of Sac. Lit. 21; 1869, 3, 545; Christian Monthly, 1845, Jan. p. 102; Feb., p. 231; New Englander (see Index); Hauck, Theolog. Jahresber. Jan. 1869, 59; 1867, p. 543; Bull. Theologique. 1, 25, 41; Brit. and For. Evang. Rev. July, 1868, p. 537; Brit. and For. Rev. Oct. 1868. p. 683, 692; Amer. Presbyt. Review, Jan. 1867. p. 69. 202; Evang. Quart. Rev. Oct. 1869, p. 48; British Quart. Rev. Jan. 1871, p. 144; Church Rev. Oct. 1870, p. 444, 462; Zeitschr. wissensch. Theol. 1871, 4. </p> | ||
==References == | ==References == | ||
