_A Summary of the Christian Faith by Henry Eyster Jacobs, D.D., LL.D Copyright, 1905, BY THE BOARD OF PUBLICATION OF THE GENERAL COUNCIL OF THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH IN NORTH AMERICA. Chapter XVIII. Pages 206-215 -------------------- CHAPTER XVIII. JUSTIFICATION. 1. _In what sense is the word "justify" used in Holy Scripture_? Nowhere, in either the Old or New Testament, does it mean, in any passage or reference, the infusion of a new quality; but it has various other meanings, as in Ps. 51:4, the recognition and celebration of God's righteousness; in James 2:21, the proof or declaration of the justification that had been received; in Ez. 16:51, the manifestation of relative righteousness when contrasted with the greater guilt of others sinning more grievously; in Luke 10:29, the Pharisaic ambition for reputation for righteousness, etc. A well-established meaning is the forensic sense, viz., that by which a judge officially declares one to have a righteous claim, and therefore acquits a defendant of the charges brought against him. Deut. 25:1--"If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, and the judges judge them; then they shall justify the righteous and condemn the wicked." Prov. 17:15--"He that justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the righteous, both of them alike are an abomination to Jehovah." Is. 5:23--"Woe unto them that justify the wicked for a bribe." 2 Sam. 15:41. 2. _In what sense is it used in the treatment of the jus- tification of man, the sinner, before God_? In the forensic sense. For this, the proofs are: (a) The contrast made between "justify" and "con- demn," showing that they are contradictories. Rom. 8:33, 34--"Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth?" 1:16--"The judg- ment came of one to condemnation; but the free gift came of many tres- passes unto justification." Matt. 12:37--"For by thy words shalt thou be justified and by thy words shalt thou be condemned." (b) The use of synonymous forensic phrases. In Ps. 143:2 it is synonymous with "enter not into judg- --------------------End of Page 206-------------------- ment"; in John 3:18, with "not judged"; in John 5:24, with "not come into judgment." (c) The entire argument of the third and fourth chap- ters of Romans. We need cite but one verse: Rom. 4:5--"To him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justi- fieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness." (d) All the factors of a court of justice are given in passages referring to justification. _The Judge_ Rom. 8:33--"It is God that justifieth." _A Defendant_. Rom. 3:19--"That every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be brought under judgment of God." _A Plaintiff or Accuser_. John 5:45--"There is one that accuseth you, even Moses." _A Witness_. Rom. 2:15--"Their conscience bearing witness." _An Indictment_. Col. 2:14--"The bond written in ordinances that was against us." _A Sentence_. Deut. 27:26--"Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them." _A Code of Laws_. Deut. 27:26--"The book of the law." _An Advocate_. 1 John 2:2--"If any man sin we have an advocate with the Father." _A Satisfaction_. Rom. 8:19--"Through the obedience of the one shall the many be made righteous." _An Acquittal_. Rom. 8:1--"There is, therefore, no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus." Ps. 32:1. 3. _Justification being used, therefore, in a forensic sense, how is it defined_? It is non-imputation or forgiveness of sins and the im- putation of the righteousness of Christ. They are actually two sides of one and the same act. For there can be no forgiveness of sins without righteousness; and wherever --------------------End of Page 207-------------------- the righteousness of Christ is interposed there is for- giveness of sins. 4. _What Scriptural proofs are there for this_? (a) The non-imputation of sins. Ps. 32:1, 2--"Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom Jehovah imputeth not iniquity." 2 Cor. 5:19--"God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses." (b) The imputation of Christ's righteousness. Rom. 5:19--"For as through the one man's disobedience, the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the one, shall the many be made righteous." 2 Cor. 5:21--"That we might become the righteousness of God in him." Phil. 3:9--"And he found in him, not having a right- eousness of mine own, even that which is of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith." 5. _Of what sins is there a non-imputation_? Since the satisfaction of Christ was made for all sins (Chapter XIV, 14), there is a non-imputation or for- giveness of all the sins of the justified. 6. _What righteousness of Christ is imputed_? "We unanimously believe teach and confess that Christ is our righteousness, neither according to the divine na- ture alone nor according to the human nature alone, but the entire Christ according to both natures, in His obedi- ence, which as God and man He rendered the Father even to death" (Formula of Concord, 501). The foundation for this is Rom. 5:19, above cited. It is not the right- eousness, therefore, which the unincarnate Son of God had from all eternity, or the righteousness of Christ at the Right Hand of God, mystically united with the believer, but the righteousness alone acquired by the subjection of the God-man to the law (Gal. 4:4, 5). 7. _What is the meaning of the word "impute" or "reckon"_? This can be best learned by the study of the fourth chapter of Romans, in which it occurs eleven times, viz., in verses 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 22, 23, 24. It will be seen, from these passages that, in them, it very clearly means, --------------------End of Page 208-------------------- "to put to the account of." This, when applied to sins, means "to charge against," but when applied to Christ's righteousness, "to credit with." 8. _Where is such distinction drawn_? Rom. 4:4,5--"Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt. But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness." The act of imputation is the same in both cases; but the distinction in its ground, results in two species of impu- tation: (a) Imputation of debt, when the effect of an action is accounted to the person acting, or, in other words, when the imputation is based upon something in the person to whom the effect or fruit of an action is reckoned. (b) Imputation of grace, when the effect is accounted as belonging not to the person acting, but to the one for whose advantages the work was undertaken. It is ex- pressly declared to be "of grace," i. e., _gratis_ or "for nothing," not that it is without a foundation absolutely, but because it is without foundation in the person receiv- ing the benefit. When Paul declares (v. 5), that it is the ungodly who are justified "of grace," he shows that the personal foundation within them, is directly the contrary to the reward which they receive. If a friend were to do the work of another friend, in order that the wages might be given not to the laborer, but to the one in whose stead the labor was done, it would be imputation of grace, or vicarious imputation. 9. _Apply this to the article of Justification_. "The imputation of righteousness consists in the grace and mercy of God, which, on account of a foundation inhering in Christ, covers sin, so that it is not imputed, and so that the foundation which does not inhere in the believer, is imputed to him out of grace, as though it in- hered in him with the perfection that is due" (Chemnitz). --------------------End of Page 209-------------------- 10. _But is there need of any foundation? Could not God have justified man without any ground whatever_? "God has revealed His will in the Law and this cannot be broken. One jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the Law till all be fulfilled (Matt. 5:18). God, therefore, according to His revealed will, will not justify any one without righteousness, i. e., unless satis- faction be made, according to the law for sin, and perfect obedience be rendered. But in Rom. 3:31, Paul declares that, when faith is imputed for righteousness, the Law is not destroyed, but reestablished, i. e., righteousness is imputed not without a foundation. This, however, as has been shown, is not in believers; but God has set forth His Son, as Mediator, made under the Law, which He has satisfied by bearing sins, and by His perfect obedi- ence (1 Cor. 1:30; 2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 5:19; Rom. 8:4)" (Chemnitz). 11. _What is meant by the expression, "Faith is im- puted" (Rom. 4:5)_? Faith receiving the righteousness of Christ, or the righteousness of Christ received by faith. All the value of faith lies in the object which it apprehends. (See Chapter XVII, 12, 15-19.) "Faith is not imputed for righteousness, in so far as it is our act; but only as it re- ceives the righteousness of Christ" (Koenig). "Faith justifies, not because it is so good a work and so fair a virtue, but because, in the promise of the Gospel, it lays hold of and accepts the merits of Christ" (Formula of Concord, 572). 12. _What is meant by the expression, "Faith justifies"_? Not that faith of itself justifies; but that God justifies with respect to faith embracing the merits of Christ, or with respect to the merits of Christ which man by faith embraces. --------------------End of Page 210-------------------- 13. _Has man then no part in his own justification_? None whatever. It is the work of God alone, the Father (Rom. 8:33), the Son (Matt. 9:6), the Holy Ghost (1 Cor. 6:11). 14. _Is it a work of God within man_? Inseparable as it is from Regeneration, a work of God within man, Justification itself is entirely external. It is a work of God by which man is placed in right relations to the Law. 15. _Why cannot love justify or contribute towards justification_? Because it is not by love, but by faith, that man receives the promise of the Gospel and the merits of Christ. Neither can man have love towards God until he is justi- fied. "How can the human heart love God, while it knows that He is terribly angry?" (Apology, 104). 16. _May we not say that faith justifies because it is the root of good works_? This would be to change the ground of justification from the merits of Christ, to something within man. Man would be justified not through faith for Christ's sake, but only through Christ for the sake of the new life of obedi- ence that was to follow. While good works and a godly life are inevitable fruit of faith, they are no condition of Justification, before, in or after regeneration. 17. _In what formulas has this doctrine been ex- pressed_? In the so-called Exclusive Particles: "Without works," "without law," "freely," "not of works." 18. _What is their force_? "These exclusive particles are all comprised in the ex- pression: 'By faith alone in Christ we are justified before God and saved.' For thereby works are excluded, not in the sense that a true faith can exist without contrition, or that good works must not follow faith as sure fruits ... --------------------End of Page 211-------------------- but that they are excluded in the article of Justification before God.... Their true sense is: "(1) That all confidence in our works in the article of Justification be entirely excluded, so that our works be regarded neither entirely, nor in half, nor in the least part the cause or merit of Justification. (2) That this office abide with faith alone, that it alone and nothing else whatever is the means or instrument by and through which, God's grace and the merit of Christ are appropri- ated in the promise of the Gospel; and that from this office, love and all the fruits of the Spirit are excluded. (3) That neither renewal, sanctification, virtues nor good works be constituted a form or part or cause of our Justi- fication" (Formula of Concord, 576). 19. _What then is the meaning of the formula: "We are justified by faith alone, without works"_? Not that faith can ever be alone, or ever be without good works, but that it is only the faith apprehending Christ that receives justification, and that the works in- separably belonging to faith, have nothing whatever to do with faith's appropriation of God's promise and Christ's merit. The words "without works" became necessary, when "by faith alone" was regarded as so ambiguous as to admit of the conception of faith as nothing more than potential good works. 20. _What four reasons did Melanchthon urge for keeping these "exclusives" always in view_? (1) The glory of Christ. By seeking some ground of Justification within self, men extenuate the wrath of God, minimize the significance of sin, and deprive Christ of some of the credit for their salvation. As Luther has somewhere said, they make of Christ only a patch on the garment of their own righteousness. (2) The comfort of distressed consciences. If man has to contribute the smallest part towards his own justification he will always --------------------End of Page 212-------------------- be in anxiety to know whether this part have actually been rendered with the perfection demanded by the Law, and will never be relieved of his doubts. There can never be assurance of faith. Hence the entire Roman Catholic system is "a theology of doubt," and repudiates the doc- trine of the certainty of faith.* (3) The offering of true prayer. For this is impossible until one actually knows that God is reconciled to him. (4) The difference be- tween the Law and the Gospel. It is the particle "gratis" that marks the distinction ("Loci," third edition, Corpus Reformatorum, XXI, 753-5). 21. _How is James 2: 23-24 to be understood_? V. 24--"Ye see that by works man is justified, and not only by his faith." Our answer is: (1) We lay down the general principle that those passages of Scripture which treat of a subject professedly and in extended argument are to be taken as the norms whereby to judge mere incidental allusions in other passages. Applying this principle to the case before us, its result is that the Epistles of St. Paul to the Romans and Galatians are to be taken as the true _sedes doctrinae_ with respect to justification. If a conflict between Paul and James on this subject could be established, the for- mer's statement would have the preponderance. (2) But that such conflict cannot be proved we maintain upon the ground: That Paul treats of Justification before God, while James treats of the manner in which Justification may be recognized by men. Before men one is justified, i. e., declared to be righteous, by works as the inevitable fruits of faith. "Paul is treating of those who are to be -------------------- *"Cum nullus scire valeat certitudine fidei, cui non potest subesse falsum, se gratiam Dei esse consecutum." Decree of Trent "On Justification," Cap. IX. It is such doctrine that Luther criticises on Genesis XLI: "I ought to be certain concerning what I ought to think of God, or rather concerning what God thinks of me. It was a horrible error of the Pontifical doctrine that it led men to doubt concerning the forgiveness of sins and grace. 'Acknowledge,' they said, 'that thou art a sinner, and that, too, such a sin- ner, as not to be able to be sure of thy salvation.' Thus the whole world was sunk in doubt and erroneous opinions concerning God." --------------------End of Page 213-------------------- justified before God, in whose case faith alone, appropri- ating the grace of God and merit of Christ, can avail; but James treats of men who have already been justified through faith, but who are to be recognized in this world by means of their good works" (Hutter). See Apology, pp. 126-128. 22. _Is Justification gradual_? No. It is not a process, but an act of God, and, as such, is instantaneous, perfect and uniform. Faith has degrees. Sanctification has degrees. But Justification is always the same, whether the faith be weak or strong. That which gives faith all its worth being the merit of Christ, this merit is just as effective where the faith is weak as where it is strong, at the very first moment when the least spark of faith appears, as when it has reached the highest grade attainable. 23. _May not some sins be forgiven, while others re- main unforgiven_? If the least sin be forgiven, all sins are forgiven; if the least sin remain unforgiven, not a single sin is actually forgiven. The entire righteousness of Christ is perfectly and completely ours, or we are without any righteousness, or shelter from God's wrath. The righteousness of Christ avails no more for the redeemed in heaven, than it does on earth for the humblest Christian, who with stam- mering tongue addresses God as his reconciled Father, and whose faith is clouded by many infirmities. 1 John 1:7--The blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanseth us from all sin." Rom. 8:1--"There is, therefore, now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus." 24. _But is not the righteousness of some believers much greater than that of others? For instance, is not that of Mary the mother of Jesus, the Apostle John, the Apostle Paul, etc., greater than that of the penitent thief_? There are great differences with respect to inherent righteousness attained through sanctification; but with --------------------End of Page 214-------------------- respect to imputed righteousness which alone is the ground of the forgiveness of sins and the favor of God, all are alike. No righteousness of Christ is attainable, either in this world or in the next, which the humblest child of God does not already have. Rom. 2:22--"Even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe; for there is no distinction." --------------------End of Chapter on Page 215-------------------- This text was converted to ascii format for Project Wittenberg by William Alan Larson and is in the public domain. You may freely distribute, copy or print this text. Please direct any comments or suggestions to: Rev. Robert E. Smith of the Walther Library at Concordia Theological Seminary. E-mail: smithre@mail.ctsfw.edu Surface Mail: 6600 N. Clinton St., Ft. Wayne, IN 46825 USA Phone: (260) 452-2123 Fax: (260) 452-2126