Is Justification Permanent? Part Seven

I here conclude my response to the objection about the permanence of justification:

Finally, for all the verses raised in the objection, one consideration is that they weren't written to the church in heaven, but to the church in earth. And in the church on earth, there are always weeds mixed in with the wheat until the end (Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43). There are times when there are less (such as when the church is undergoing persecution, and the hypocrites have no reason to stay), and there are times when there are more (such as when Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire in the 4th century), but there are always some. And any good teacher or pastor knows that in an assembled congregation of Christians here on earth, there are some there that have no saving faith in Christ, who have not been born again, who have not been justified, and who have not been sealed by the Holy Spirit. For those, a failure to repent and obey the gospel will surely result in condemnation. Hence, it is only appropriate for a teacher to warn his teachers about that truth, even if his hearers are predominantly permanently justified (and the justified ones will demonstrate their justification by continuing to repent and believe).

In Mark 3:28-29, Jesus is not even addressing his disciples. He is speaking to the unbelieving Pharisees (who had just accused him of driving out demons by the prince of demons), and he is speaking about men and sins in general, pointing out that their sin is in a permanently unforgiven category (and I believe we can conclude from Scripture as a whole that one who commits this sin will never be justified and that one who is justified will never commit this sin).

It is useful to read Matthew 6:15 with 6:14. I don't believe either of them are meant as a general statement to all mankind, as the context would indicate otherwise. These are his disciples who he is teaching here, and they are addressing God as Father (a distinctly Christian concept). We know that forgiveness of sins comes through faith in Christ, not through forgiving others (or else any Buddhist, Muslim, or atheist out there who forgives others would then be
forgiven by God regardless of their lack of faith in Christ). Yet there is still a lesson here for those who are following Christ. If I forgive others, then I have legitimate reason to expect God to forgive me (taking into account everything else the Bible says about the requirements of faith in Christ and his gospel for forgiveness). But if I don't forgive others, then I have no reason to expect God to forgive me (likewise, I would then have no reason to think that I have been justified).

In Luke 12:46, perhaps the wicked servant is assigned a place with the unbelievers because he is himself an unbeliever? Just a thought... still, it's a strong warning against hypocrisy. If somebody is an unbeliever, why would they go into the ministry, as a servant who is set over the master's household? Don't they realize that they're just setting themselves up for worse punishment at Christ's return?

Revelation 2:5 and 3:16 are each addressed to a church as a whole. When dealing with specific congregations, it is not out of the ordinary for God to discipline an entire congregation for the wicked behavior of as few as one member of the church. 1 Corinthians 5:6-11 and Hebrews 12:15-17 both warn of the consequences for a church as a whole for the unbelief or wickedness of one member. If it's that severe for one, how much more severe will it be if a large part of the church is involved in some heresy or sinful behavior?

Revelation 3:5 is definitely the source of some confusion and disagreement. Here Christ says this about the one who conquers: "I will never blot his name out of the book of life." Are we to take a promise of Christ's that he will not do something as an implicit threat that he might? Christ does not himself give us a parallel statement to this, so we're left to form our own opinions as to what will happen to the one who doesn't conquer. According to some, his name will be blotted out of the book of life. But according to others, his name was never in the book of life in the first place, so this promise is irrelevant to him. And there may be more opinions. But however many opinions there may be, they must all be evaluated by the word of God.

We may firstly draw a parallel to the promise to the one who conquers in Revelation 3:12. Here Jesus says that for the one who he makes a pillar in the temple of God, "Never shall he go out of it." It is more likely in promises such as these that we are reminded of the eternal permanence of salvation (for those who conquer, anyway).

A more useful route, though, is to see what else Revelation says about the book of life (a very useful method for learning about anything in Revelation, I might add). If we look at Revelation
20:11-15, we see that "if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire." And in Revelation 21:27, we see about the city that "nothing unclean will ever enter it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or false, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life." It is clear from those two passages that at the final judgment one's destination, holy city vs. lake of fire, is determined by the presence or absence of one's name in the book of life. But will the names in the Lamb's book of life ever change? Have they ever changed? There are two more verses about the book of life in Revelation, and they give us a
clue about that question.

Revelation 13:7-8 says this about the beast and his followers: "Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation, and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was slain." Regardless of one's particular interpretation of who or what the beast in John's vision represents (a particular person or government, past, present, or future), we know one thing about the beast's worshipers. Their names weren't written before the foundation of the world in the book of life. And Revelation 17:8 tells us the same thing over again: "The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come."

And that's all that Revelation has to say about the book of life (it's presence in the KJV of 22:19 is a well-documented Erasmian error). For those who conquer, we are told two things: 1) at the
final judgment, their names are in the book of life, and 2) Jesus will never blot their names out of the book of life. We are not told explicitly when their names were written in the book of life. For those who do not conquer, we are told two things: 1) at the final judgment, their names are not in the book of life, and 2) their names were not written before the foundation of the world in the book of life. We are not told explicitly that their names were ever written in the book of life and then blotted out. In fact, we are not told explicitly that the names in the book of life ever change at all! I'm personally convinced that the names are "set in stone," so to speak, and are fixed from the foundation of the world (hence, the relevance for the statement in Revelation 13:8 and 17:8 about the beast's worshipers names not being written from the foundation of the world). So going back to Revelation 3:5, I think it should be clear by now why I'm of the opinion that the promise for the one who conquers is a promise of the eternal permanence of our salvation in Christ, and for the ones who do not conquer, it would be an irrelevant promise because their names are not in the book of life in the first place.

Hebrews 5:9 doesn't present any problem for the permanence of justification if we understand from elsewhere that "all who obey him" is the same group of people as those who are justified.

I'm reluctant to use Romans 2:7 as a description of a Christian's salvation simply because of its location in the book of Romans. Chapter 2 is where Paul presents his teaching on the day of judgment, before he comes to his conclusion in 3:19-20 that every person stands guilty before God. Paul does present two different options at the judgment for people, but it seems from his argument as a whole that apart from the righteousness of God revealed in the gospel, everybody, Jew and Gentile, would end up receiving wrath and fury, not eternal life. However, the description of the final judgment is similar here to the other descriptions in the New Testament, and we know from other passages in the New Testament that believers will be rewarded for their good works, so it could still apply to the judgment of believers' works. But again, if those who are justified are also sanctified, then only those who have been justified will be those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality.

In Romans 11, Paul never explicitly interprets for us what specifically the root or the olive tree represent, although it is clear from the context that the natural branches represent natural Israelites, and the wild branches represent Gentiles. Does the olive tree represent inheritance in the kingdom of God? Possibly, but not necessarily. It's more likely that the olive tree represents something closer to the nation of Israel or the children of Abraham. Two things may be noted about this passage, though. First of all, Paul is dealing throughout all of chapter 11 primarily with people groups (Jews and Gentiles), and only consequently with any specific individuals. And secondly, the reasons for breaking off and being grafted in are unbelief and faith (11:20, 23), so while this passage does address the necessity of continuing in faith, it doesn't even address the necessity of continuing in good works, too.

I hope all that I've been able to write about this has been helpful for you. Even if there are still points where you disagree, I hope that the presentation of my view has at least helped you to see where I'm coming from biblically, and at the very least to reassure you that I don't believe in some kind of "easy-believism" where people can have Jesus as their Savior but not follow him as Lord and somehow be saved without repentance.

Is Justification Permanent? Part Six

I here continue my response to the objection about the permanence of justification:

Next, I would like to answer a question about the purpose of the doctrine of justification. If justification is invisible (because we can't know perfectly this side of Christ's return whom God has justified), and if repentance and holy living are required of people for them to inherit eternal life, why even bother with the doctrine of justification? What's the purpose of having the righteousness of Christ permanently imputed to us if we still need to persevere to the end to be saved?

The question can firstly be answered by addressing its purposes for man, then by its purpose for God. The first purpose of the doctrine of justification is to provide hope for sinners, since the righteousness of Christ is sufficient righteousness for any sinner who will come to Christ in faith and repentance. For example, we can read in Luke 18:9-14, in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector, how the tax collector knew he had no righteousness of his own, and prayed, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner!" The righteousness of Christ was sufficient for him, so as the next verse says, he went down to his house justified, while the Pharisee (who trusted in his own righteousness) was not justified. And in 2 Corinthians 5:21, in describing how Christians are ambassadors for Christ to the world, he refers to justification ("For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God").

The doctrine of justification also provides hope for Christians who recognize that they are still sinners. For example, in 1 Timothy 1:15-16, Paul, even near the end of his life, after following Christ for close to 30 years, still recognizes that he is the foremost of sinners, and still looks to Christ for salvation, not to his 30 years of service to the Lord. And in 1 John 2:1, we read this: "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." Our righteousness is always imperfect in this life, and we always have to deal with the presence of sin. That is why we, when we act unrighteous, still need our advocate, Jesus Christ the righteous. And going back to Romans, it is immediately after chapter 7 (in which Paul laments the ongoing struggle between the flesh and the Spirit in a believer) that he proclaims that "there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus."

The second purpose of the doctrine of justification is to completely demolish any grounds of boasting by Christians. For example, after presenting the doctrine of justification in Romans 3:21-26, Paul asks a question in verse 27: "Then what becomes of our boasting?" And his answer is, "It is excluded." Because we are justified by faith apart from works of the law, we have no grounds to boast of our own righteousness over another believer. I may be more righteous in my sanctification than other believers, and there may be other believers that are more righteous in their sanctification than I am, but that is no grounds for boasting because all of us have the same righteousness in Christ. Paul illustrates the same point in 1 Corinthians 1. In verse 10 and following, he appeals to the Corinthians to not be divided. He then discusses how the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing but to those who are being saved it is the power of God, demonstrating in the following verses that the wisdom and power of God is greater than the wisdom and power of the world. In wrapping up his discussion about that, Paul points out (in a verse we saw earlier) to the Corinthian believers that God "is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom and our righteousness and sanctification and redemption."

We may also speak about a purpose of the doctrine of justification for God. By permanently imputing the righteousness of Christ to believers, God satisfies his own perfect standard of righteousness. Our own righteousness, as I mentioned earlier (and the testimony of Paul demonstrates), is never enough to match up to God's perfect standard of righteousness, no matter how sanctified we are. And there's nothing in the Scriptures that indicate that there is a lesser standard of righteousness that we need to attain to if we're believers; instead, we are still called to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength, and to love our neighbor as ourselves. And as Romans 3:20 says, "by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight." Therefore, by giving to Christ the wrath that we deserve and giving to us the eternal life that Christ deserves, God can "be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (Romans 3:26). It also can be noted that in 1 John 1:9 ("If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness"), the attributes of God that account for his ongoing forgiveness of believers is his faithfulness and his justice (or righteousness, coming from the same root word in the Greek). Without the doctrine of justification, God would certainly appear to be unjust in his salvation of sinners.

Is Justification Permanent? Part Five

I here continue my response to the objection about the permanence of justification:

So if it is clear that those whom God justifies he also sanctifies, and if is also clear that it is only genuine persevering faith that justifies, not imitation faith (whether hypocritical or temporary), then the objections to the permanence of justification based on the demands in the New Testament for holy living are gone. And in fact, if addressing justification in its New Testament usage, it is clear from several passages that it is permanent. There are no passages, though, that deny its permanence (one needs to make the assumption that the false teachers and temporary believers were justified in the first place to come to that conclusion).

Romans 5:9-10 - "Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life."

Who is the "we" and "us" in this passage? The context answers that. In Romans 4:24-25 Paul is explicit that it is "us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification." And a verse later he points out that "since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." So if you have certain individuals who have been justified by Christ's blood, as Romans 5:9 indicates, and these certain individuals are believers who now (because of that justification) have peace with God, will God then pour out his wrath on those who are no longer his enemies but are now his friends? If so, then Paul was dead wrong here. It is clear from these two verses that those who are justified by Christ's blood are reconciled to God and will be saved from the wrath of God.

Romans 8:31-39 contain a series of rhetorical questions that would be rendered meaningless and hopeless if God were to condemn those whom he has justified. But on the contrary, Paul is certain that believers will not be condemned, as it is God who justifies, and Christ Jesus is at the right hand of God interceding for us. And as Paul eloquently states it in Romans 8, nothing will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

The writer of Hebrews, whoever he was, uses certain words with a slightly different technical nuance than Paul does sometimes. So we can see the same concept in Hebrews 10:10-14 - "And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being
sanctified." Even though the term "justification" isn't used, we can see the same permanent effect ("for all time") resulting from Christ's work on our behalf.

It is helpful, when examining whether or not justification is permanent, to look at the definitions of those two words. Now, justification means "to declare righteous," and permanent means
"lasting or remaining without essential change" or "not expected to change in status, condition, or place." (fuller definitions of justification can be find in bible dictionaries). Now, what is the opposite of "to declare righteous"? That would be "to declare unrighteous," of course. There's a New Testament word for that, too - condemnation (to see them used in parallel in the Old Testament, see Proverbs 17:15). So if we grant from the evidence in the Scriptures that there are certain individuals who are justified, and we see other Scriptures that state they will not be condemned, then their justification is... (drum roll, please)... permanent.

For Scriptures that explicitly state that certain individuals will not be condemned, we only have two (but when searching for something that specific, a small number is to be expected). In 1 Corinthians 11:32, Paul says that "we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world." But the most explicit statement of all is back in Romans (where Paul is talking at length about justification). What does Paul say is a result of all that he has said in chapters 1-7? "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus" (Romans 8:1). One could try to make an exception and say that there is condemnation for some who are in Christ Jesus, but Paul isn't talking about them here. But twisting verses around that wildly would result in a loss of meaning to any verse in the Bible. For example, Peter said that "there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." Could we believe that there is another name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved, but Peter just wasn't talking about it here? Of course not! And as one more point on Romans 8:1, note that in 8:4 Paul identifies those who are in Christ Jesus as "us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit." Three verses after affirming the permanence of justification, Paul affirms the necessity of holy living. Maybe all those Protestant confessions were onto something after all.

Is Justification Permanent? Part Four

I here continue my response to the objection about the permanence of justification:

I think I should let you in on a little secret... I can't see somebody's justification. I can't see your justification, or that of any of my roommates... I can't even see my own justification! But we do know that those who are justified are also sanctified, and sanctification is a lot more visible than justification. Therefore in the New Testament, good works are the fruit or evidence of salvation. For example, we can read in Matthew 7:15-20 how we are to recognize false teachers: by their fruit. A good tree bears good fruit, and a bad tree bears bad fruit. 1 John is almost entirely an extended lesson on how to recognize who is and who isn't born of God, both how to recognize the traits of a child of God in ourself and how to recognize the lack of those same traits in a false teacher.

As a corollary to that idea, it also needs to be pointed out that not all "faith" is saving faith. We're justified not by the profession of faith but by the posession of faith. And as the old saying goes, "not everybody who's talking about heaven is going there." It is possible for someone to just be a hypocrite in this matter, and claim to believe in Christ but all the time regard Christ and the gospel as a worthless myth. There's plenty of examples of hypocritical faith in the Scriptures. It's also possible to be self-deceived in this matter, to be sincere in one's faith and to honestly believe that one is a believer when one isn't. I would guess that many heretics throughout history would fall into this category, men like Arius and Pelagius and Cardinal Cajetan. For examples of this in Scripture, we can see how Paul describes false teachers in the pastoral epistles, when he says in 2 Timothy 3:13 that "evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived."

If we go back to the gospels, the parable of the soils in Matthew 13, Mark 4, and Luke 8 describes four different reactions to the word of God. One kind of soil (the path) has no reaction to the word. Two kinds of soil (the rocky ground and the thorns) receive it for a short time, but they do not continue. Their temporary faith was certainly not saving faith. But the fourth soil, the good soil, hears the word, understands it, and then bears fruit.

James also sets up a contrast between two kinds of faith in James 2. He there denies the validity of a faith that does not demonstrate itself in works. He even uses Abraham as his Old Testament example. In Genesis 15, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as
righteousness." But that justifying faith demonstrated itself in Genesis 22, where Abraham offered his son Isaac on the altar. This is why the Reformers said that we are justified through faith alone, but the faith that justifies is never alone. And there's another old saying, too, about time and trials testing or proving the genuineness of one's faith.

Charles Spurgeon, the great Baptist preacher of London in the 19th century, brought out this same point in regards to the genuineness of repentance in one of his sermons:

"And lastly, upon this point, this repentance must be perpetual. It is not my turning to God during to-day that will be a proof that I am a true convert; it is forsaking of my sin throughout the entire of my life, until I sleep in the grave. You need not fancy that to be upright for a week will be a proof that you are saved; it is a perpetual abhorrence of evil. The change which God works is neither a transitory nor a superficial change; not a cutting off the top of the weed, but an away of that which is the cause of the defilement. In old times, when rich and generous monarchs came into their cities they made the fountains run milk and wine; but the fountain was not therefore a fountain of milk and wine always; one the morrow it ran with water as before. So you may to-day go home and pretend to pray; you may to-day be serious, to-morrow you may be honest, and the next day you may pretend to be devout, but yet if thou return, as Scripture has it, 'like the dog to its vomit, and like the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire,' your repentance shall but sink you deeper into hell, instead of being a proof of divine grace in your hearts."

One may, of course, object to all this by claiming that it's just a way of cleverly using words to get around the fact that temporary believers were, for a while anyways, just as attached to Christ as true believers are. This idea is contradicted by several verses demonstrating otherwise.

The New Testament states in several places that believers are known by God (1 Corinthians 8:3, 13:12; Galatians 4:9). In fact, the writers go so far as to say that believers are foreknown by God (Romans 8:29; 1 Peter 1:2). Yet in Matthew 7:23, Jesus says that he will say to false believers "I never knew you." Now, this "know" obviously includes something more than just "cognitive awareness of the existence of something," as God obviously is aware of the existence of the unrighteous. The Greek word "ginosko" often refers to some kind of more intimate relational knowledge. For example, it (and the corresponding Hebrew word in the OT, "yada") is often used as the term for sexual relations between a man and his wife (such as Adam and Eve in Genesis 4:1 and Joseph and Mary in Matthew 1:25). So even though it may appear to us now that false believers are known by God just as true believers are known by God, it will become evident on the last day that true believers were always known by God and false believers were in fact never known by God.

One also needs to take into account the description of false teachers and their relation to believers in 1 John 2:18-25 - "Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge. I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth. Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you too will abide in the Son and in the Father. And this is the promise that he made to us - eternal life."

On one hand, John affirms the necessity of abiding in the truth of the gospel. Yet on the other hand, for those who didn't, he says that they were not of us, because if they were of us, they would have continued with us. Or, as I would draw the parallel with my key point, they were never justified, because if they had been justified, they would also have been sanctified.

There is one final passage that I want to address that deals with good works being the evidence of salvation. This is 2 Peter 1:5-11. Here believers are told to make every effort to add to their faith virtue, knowledge, self-control, steadfastness, godliness, brotherly affection, and love. Now, the reason for all of this, according to the apostle Peter, is so that one can make his calling and election sure. Romans 8:29-30 not only says that those who are justified are sanctified, it says that they are also called. So we find out whether or not we were called the same way we find out whether or not we were justified: by the presence or absence of sanctification - specifically, those seven attributes from 2 Peter 1.

Is Justification Permanent? Part Three

I here continue my response to the objection about the permanence of justification:

So far I have demonstrated the historical existence of my doctrine and distinguished it from two other doctrines out there. To complete my case that it is possible to believe what I believe about both the permanence of justification and the necessity of good works, I have one sentence from the Welsh Methodist confession of faith of 1823: "All those who are united to Christ and justified through his righteousness are also sanctified." This is the key right here, and the point I want to defend biblically. Those God justifies (declares righteous), he also sanctifies (makes righteous). Both of these are acts of God, not man, and there is no evidence that God is schizophrenic in his work of salvation. There are many who are neither justified nor sanctified, and there are some who are both justified and sanctified. But there are none who are justified and not sanctified, and there are none who are sanctified but not justified.

Much in my earlier blog post addresses the fact that it is God who justifies us. So I now want to focus attention on some passages in the Bible where the sanctification of believers is attributed to the work of God:

John 17:17-19 - "Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth."

Here Jesus prays for the sanctification of believers. Earlier in his prayer he has made it explicit that he is praying for his disciples (except for Judas), and not for the world. He also prays for all who will believe in him in the future. And will the Father reject the prayer of the Son?

Acts 20:32 - "And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified."

Paul's address to the Ephesian elders contains a similar point to Jesus' prayer, in that God uses his word in his work of sanctification.

Romans 6:17-18, 22 - "But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves to sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness... But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life."

Interestingly, when addressing the topic of the Roman church's sanctification, Paul, instead of thanking them, thanks God!

Romans 8:29-30 - "For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified."

Paul here explicitly identifies that the same people that are justified are also conformed to the image of Christ (usually understood to include both sanctification and glorification). And the grammar in this passage (nicknamed "the golden chain of redemption") is such that each "those" means "those, all of those, and only those."

1 Corinthians 1:4-9 - "I give thanks to my God always for you because of the grace of God that was given you in Christ Jesus, that in every way you were enriched in him in all speech and all knowledge - even as the testimony about Christ was confirmed among you - so that you
are not lacking in any spiritual gift, as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord."

Philippians 1:3-6 - "I thank my God in all my remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine for you all making my prayer with joy, because of your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now. And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ."

1 Thessalonians 3:11-13 - "Now may our God and Father himself, and our Lord Jesus, direct our way to you, and may the Lord make you increase and abound in love for one another and for all, as we do for you, so that he may establish your hearts blameless in holiness before our God and Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints."

1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 - "Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful; he will surely do it."

In all four of these passages, Paul looks forward to Christ's return, and he looks to God to make all these believers holy and to keep them holy.

1 Corinthians 1:30 - "He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom and our righteousness and sanctification and redemption."

The "righteousness" and "redemption" spoken of here are most likely the same "righteousness" and "redemption" spoken of in Romans 3:21-26. Again, we see a unified work of Christ - it is not possible that we can split up Christ so that one person gets the "wisdom-Christ," another gets the "righteousness-Christ," another gets the "sanctification-Christ," and another gets the
"redemption-Christ." Those who are in Christ are given all the spiritual blessings (see Ephesians 1:3). And those spiritual blessings are found only in Christ, so those who are not in Christ are not given any of them.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 - "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of
our God."

Ah, see, now I'm guilty of stacking the deck in my favor! I started out by introducing verses 9 and 10 as verses defending the necessity of holy living in order to inherit eternal life. Now I'm using them (with verse 11) to show that those whom God justifies he also sanctifies. Again, Paul links the two together.

Ephesians 2:8-10 - "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."

This is the crowning statement on an excellent passage where Paul twice says that salvation is by grace. He speaks of how we were dead, and then God "made us alive together with Christ." But he regenerates us (gives us new life) because he intends to sanctify us (make us holy). God has prepared good works for us to walk in.

Ephesians 5:25-27 - "Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish."

Here's a reference to the sanctification of the church, and another reference to the word as an instrument of sanctification.

2 Thessalonians 2:13-14 - "But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth. To this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Again, we see Paul thanking God for his act of sanctifying Christians.

Titus 2:11-14 - "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works."

This one is similar to the ones in Ephesians. It's like the one in Ephesians 5, because it's about the whole church, and it's like the one in Ephesians 2, because it shows that good works of the redeemed are a necessary consequence of Christ's redemption.

1 Peter 1:1-5 - "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God's power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

Peter's phrasing of these concepts is different than Paul's familiar way, but he still speaks of God's work in sanctification and about how he preserves believers' holiness for the second coming.

Jude 24-25 - "Now to him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you blameless before the presence of his glory with great joy, to the only God, our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen."

Now Jude takes his turn among the apostles affirming that God is able to both make us holy and keep us holy.

Philippians 2:12-13 - "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure."

Of all the verses addressing God's role in sanctification, this one is probably the most clear and the most important. The biblical doctrine of sanctification avoids two errors. On one hand, we do not attribute it to the Christian. Paul did not tell the Philippians to make themselves holy, to work out their salvation on their own strength, because God had already done his part and it was up to them to do the rest. And on the other hand, we do not ignore human responsibility. Paul did not tell the Philippians to just sit back and relax because God was at work so they did not need to work. On the contrary, Paul tells them to work, because God is at work in their willing and working. If God works in me, I will consequently will and work for his good pleasure. Likewise, if I'm willing and working for God's good pleasure, then it can only be because he is at
work in me.

Both of those two other views that Paul steers clear of in this passage come from a deficient view of man's will in relation to God's will. We are not endowed with a divine will equivalent to God's; rather, the will of the creature is insignificant compared to the will of the Creator. Without God choosing to work in us, we can't do anything. But with God at work in us,
good stuff happens.

And bringing that back to the question of whether there could be anybody whom God justifies but fails to sanctify... not when we have a God as powerful as our God! "Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever. Amen" (Ephesians 3:20-21).

Is Justification Permanent? Part Two

I here begin my response to the objection about the permanence of justification:

First of all, I think you left out some of the best and the most relevant verses for the point you were trying to make. My favorite summary verse is "But the one who endures to the end will be saved" (Matthew 24:13). In the same book, we also read at the end of the sermon on the mount that Christ will say to many, "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness" (Matthew 7:23). And Paul warns both the church at Corinth and the churches in Galatia that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19-21).

Now, I definitely believe all that. And I agree with all the verses you quoted (although I may raise some objections to some of what you inferred from them, but we'll get to that later). The question then comes down to this: is it possible for me to believe that "the one who endures to the end will be saved" and to simultaneously believe that justification is permanent? It appears that you would expect me to only believe one or the other, but not both. I hope to show that believing both is not only possible but also biblical.

In order to show that it is possible to believe that, I would like to bring forth a bit of church history as a witness... the point at which the doctrine of justification was debated most thoroughly was the time of the Reformation. The late medieval church, in an attempt to build a
great new church in Rome, used the practice of selling indulgences to earn money for this new building. A young German monk objected to this practice, as it undermined the gospel and was contrary to the doctrine of justification. This German Reformer, Martin Luther, called the doctrine of justification the doctrine on which the church stands or falls.

The various Reformed confessions of the 1500's and 1600's shed some light on where the various parties stood on this particular issue. The Augsburg Confession (Lutheran, 1530) doesn't explicitly address the permanence of justification (although other writings of Martin Luther imply it). The Belgic Confession (Reformed, 1561) affirms the permanence of justification. The Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England (1563) imply the permanence of justification. And the Roman Catholic Church, in its response to the reformers (Council of Trent, 1564) explicitly denies the permanence of justification. And a century later, due to the
refusal of the Church of England to reform thoroughly, three more denominations formed (once the religious laws were relaxed enough in England to allow the existence of more than one denomination in one country). These three use virtually identical language in their confessions - the Westminster Confession of Faith (Presbyterian, 1646), the Savoy Declaration (Congregationalist, 1658), and the London Baptist Confession of Faith (1689) - and all three explicitly affirm the permanence of justification. So as a whole, the Protestants were mostly in agreement on this question (although one could raise honest objections about the Lutherans and the Anglicans), in opposition to the Roman Catholics. In fact, no major Protestant denomination denied the permanence of justification until the Methodists left the Church of England in the late 1700's (and even then, there is no uniform Methodist confession of faith - the Welsh Methodists, for example, affirmed the permanence of justification while the English Methodists denied it).

So does all of that history in any way prove that justification is permanent? No, of course not, but it confirms that many throughout history (namely, the majority of the Protestants in the 1500's, 1600's, and 1700's) have believed both that justification is permanent and that good works are required of believers (as all six of those Protestant confessions affirm, as well as the Council of Trent).

The problem, though, is that in the last 100 years or so, a new doctrine has arisen in the United States that has never been accepted by any denomination historically. This corrupt and false doctrine treats justification by faith alone as nothing more than fire insurance. It affirms the permanence of justification but denies that good works are required of believers. For example, the Free Grace Seminary in Georgia says that "a Christian, having believed in Christ as Savior at one moment in time, God forever keeps secure." Another webpage out there, while on the one hand affirming much that is true about the permanence of salvation, goes on to make the outlandish claim that someone who formerly believed in Christ but no longer believes is still saved.

So rightfully speaking, there are three different views being advanced out there. The first one, the one historically held by Roman Catholics and certain recent Protestants, believes that "the
one who endures to the end will be saved" and therefore denies that justification is permanent. The second one, the historic Protestant doctrine, believes that "the one who endures to the end will be saved" and also believes that justification is permanent. The third one, the wacked-out dispensational doctrine, believes that justification is permanent so it denies the necessity of enduring to the end to be saved.

As a side note, the KJV has "he who perseveres to the end will be saved" at Matthew 24:13, so the historic Protestant doctrine is commonly known as "the perseverance of the saints." And by the way, I also recognize that you were essentially arguing against the third view, which I most certainly do not hold, but you were pretty much arguing for the first view, which I also do not hold, so I'll continue to defend the second view even if it's not what you expected to read in my response.

Is Justification Permanent? Part One

Hello,
In my earlier post on justification, I said that God's justification of sinners is a permanent act. Justification doesn't give us a temporary righteous standing before God, but a permanent one. However, my older sister, Maria, objected to that claim (with a blog comment and an e-mail) based on the passages in the Bible that warn that holy living is necessary in order to enter heaven. I will first reproduce the verses she raised in objection to the permanence of justification before moving on to my response:

Mark 3:28-29 - "Truly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the children of man, and whatever blasphemies they utter, but whoever blasphemies against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"

Matthew 6:15 - "but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."

If I have a permanent righteous standing before God, how would these verses (in the future tense) still apply to me?

Luke 12:46 - "the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces and put him with the unfaithful."

This was a servant of Christ, yet he was unfaithful, so when Christ returned, he was assigned a place with the unfaithful. Likewise, even though we're now servants of Christ, we don't know yet what final places (heaven or hell) we will be assigned when Christ returns.

Revelation 2:5 - "Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent."

Revelation 3:16 - "So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth."

Revelation 3:5 - "The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels."

Why would Christ mention that he isn't going to "blot his name out of the book of life" if that's something he wasn't ever going to do anyway?

If our justification were permanent, then we could sin unrepentantly until the day we die and still go to heaven. The Bible clearly says that it doesn't work that way:

Hebrews 5:9 - "And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him,"

Romans 2:7 - "to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;"

We can't obey God once and go to heaven, we must continue to obey him as evidence of our love and reverence for him. We can't do good once and get eternal life. We must be persistent in doing good.

And Paul says in Romans that we can lose our standing as heirs of the kingdom of God:

Romans 11:17-22 - "But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. Then you will say, 'Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.' That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off."

That doesn't sound very permanent to me!

John 14:15 - "If you love me, you will keep my commandments."

On one hand, Jesus died for the forgiveness of our sins. But on the other hand, we need to keep his commandments to receive eternal life.

Veith & Ryle

Without a doubt, Christianity permeates our culture historically, and it's a bit on the "stupid" side, I'd say, to insist that schoolchildren not be exposed to it...

http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/displayarticle.cfm?id=11279

But all that cultural Christianity, in all its forms, is no good at all without a right understanding of the cross of Christ...

http://www.anglicanlibrary.org/ryle/cross/index.htm

The Promise-Driven Life

The current issue (Nov/Dec 05) of Modern Reformation is entitled "The Promise-Driven Life." The articles present a great alternative to Rick Warren's The Purpose-Driven Life. Here's a link to Michael Horton's article:

http://www.modernreformation.org/mh05promise.htm

Todd Wilken's article, "The Promise-Driven Church," is also excellent (the only improvement would be to change the Lutheran "means of grace" in the article to the Baptist "means of grace"). And there's also a recent Reverend Fun comic worth checking out. Especially for those who like an 80's cartoon about robots from Cybertron...

http://www.reverendfun.com/index.php?date=20051025