← Back to sermon library

O come, O come, all ye faithful 
joyful and triumphant, O come, O come, all ye faithful joyful We bless you for the glorious fruit your incarnation 
is, the righteousness which praise and youth and faith alone receives. In you we have the righteousness, 
Lord God himself approved. Our walk, our truth, our mission 
is which never can be moved. And by your death must pay for 
all your people's cares. The law you heard read the way 
that David by his measure had. As always. alone in his transgression died. So by the righteousness of God, 
our sinners justified. to your merit, gracious Lord, 
with boundless joy submit. Again to paradise restore, in 
you alone complete. Amen. Our Father, we thank you for 
this beautiful day. The heavens do declare your majesty 
and your righteousness and your glory. We as well appreciate 
and want to glorify you for the work of redemption in the gospel 
of our salvation. We thank you for this wonderful 
doctrine of justification by faith. Amen. And we come to the most 
significant and important topic in terms of Christianity. You've 
probably heard that statement attributed to Martin Luther. 
Justification is the ground upon which the church stands or falls. 
I think it's wrongly attributed to Luther. I think it was a theologian 
with the last name of Alsted that actually said that. But 
the sentiment remains. It is that article of faith upon 
which the church justification of the soul of 
Christianity. And the fountainhead of all true 
comfort and sanctification. He who errs in this doctrine 
errs to his eternal destruction. The devil is therefore continually 
engaged in denying, perverting, and obscuring the truth expressed 
concerning justification. That's not an understatement. 
As long as there has been a church, there has been an attack upon 
this most important and essential doctrine. of justification by 
faith alone. So just in terms of an outline, 
you have the nature of justification in paragraphs one and two, the 
cause or ground of justification in paragraph three, the time 
of justification in paragraph four, the reality of remaining 
sin or forgiveness of sin after justification in paragraph five, 
and then the uniformity or consistency of justification in by looking in faith to the Lord 
Jesus Christ. So let's look first at the nature 
of justification. Look at the recipients, those 
whom God affectionately called. Now this reflects not only the 
trajectory to the confession of faith, but it certainly reflects 
Paul in Romans chapter eight. When Paul gives that order of 
salutis in Romans chapter eight, he begins in eternity past with 
the sovereignty of God, and then he moves to the application of 
the covenant benefit, and the first aspect is the fact calling 
and then justification. So the confession is following 
that particular trajectory. In Romans 8, 28 we have that 
statement, we know that all things work together for good to those 
who love God, to those who are the call according to his purpose. 
For whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to 
the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among 
many brethren. Moreover, whom he predestined, 
these he also we look at the effectual calling, 
and we remember that effectual calling is only for the elect. There is a general or external 
call of the gospel that goes out to every sinner. Jesus says 
in Mark 16 to go and preach the gospel to every preacher. So 
we do that, we obey the Savior, and we preach indiscriminately 
the truth that all who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ will 
have everlasting life. The effectual calling, the internal 
calling of God, of faith and repentance, so that 
he can close with Christ in salvation. Now notice, secondly, after the 
recipients, those who God affectionately called it, he also freely justified 
it. Notice the essence in paragraph 
one. It says, not by. So there's a 
negative statement, and then there's a positive statement. 
So not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their 
sins, and by accounting and accepting or contrast with Roman Catholicism. Roman Catholicism teaches that 
in justification there's an infusion of grace, and that infusion of 
grace enables the sinner not only to look to Jesus, then to 
work for or to be faithful in terms of salvation. Justification 
for the papist is not a one-time act. It's not declarative in 
nature, but rather it is a progress and it is transformative. That's 
not what justification is. In fact, if you're in Romans, 
look at Romans chapter 5, specifically at verse 19. We need to understand, 
sanctification is transformative. In sanctification, the people 
of God are becoming more and more like the Lord Jesus Christ. I realize it's not as we would 
like to be sure, but there is this progress in terms of sanctification. Not so with justification. It's 
a legal declaration made by God. It's forensic in nature. It's 
not transformative. Justification is the same for 
every sinner. justification, as the confession 
goes on, it highlights the part of sin and the accounting and 
accepting of their persons as righteous. So it is a forensic, 
it is a legal category, it's not transformational. So notice 
at Romans 5 at verse 19, it says, for as by one man's disobedience, 
Many were made sinners, so also by one man's obedience, many 
will be made righteous. Now the translation made is not 
bad, but it's not great. Because it seems to indicate 
transformation. It seems to indicate, so also 
by one man's obedience, many will be made righteous. They'll 
be growing in their grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus. 
They will be more and more conformed unto Jesus. But that's not the 
context in Romans 5. Romans 5 is teaching us how it 
is the case that in Adam all died, but in Christ all shall 
be made alive. Again, it's forensic. It's declarative. One man says that the verb is 
best translated constitute or appoint. The term does not speak 
to a moral change within the descendant of Adam. It refers 
to the change in legal or forensic status of the descendant of Adam, 
or of Christ in that particular vein. not by infusing righteousness 
into them, but then in terms of the positive statement, it 
highlights the twin aspects involved in justification by faith. Notice, 
but by pardoning their sins. So justification, when we are 
believed by grace upon the Lord Jesus Christ, we are forgiven 
of our sins. But in justification, it's not 
only the forgiveness of sins that's in view, but it's also 
this accounting and accepting their persons as righteous. So 
it's not only forgiveness, but it is the imputation of the righteousness 
of Jesus Christ our Lord. And that's a most important statement 
that we need to maintain. Because as Brockwell noticed, 
observed, the devil is therefore continually engaged in denying, 
perverting, and obscuring the truth expressed concerning justification. And very often, it's at the point 
of the imputation of the righteousness of Jesus. So most people, I think 
most of them profess Protestantism or even Romanism, would say that 
in justification there is forgiveness. also includes or involves this 
accounting and accepting their persons as righteous, the imputation 
of the righteousness of Jesus Christ. Now, notice the confession 
goes on to highlight how that is the case. It's not by an infusing 
of righteousness, but it is a pardoning of their sins. It is an accounting 
and accepting of their persons as righteous. Now, notice the 
emphasis, not for anything wrought in them or not by imputing faith itself, 
the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to 
them as their righteousness, but by imputing Christ's act 
of obedience under the whole law and passive obedience in 
his death for their whole and sole righteousness, they receiving 
a blessing on him and his righteousness by faith, which faith they have 
not of themselves. both aspects of justification 
are involved. So there is this forgiveness 
of sins, but there's also this imputation of the righteousness 
of Christ, which is received by faith alone. If you look about 
the middle of the paragraph, it says, but by imputing Christ's 
active obedience under the whole law and passive obedience in 
his death for their whole and sole righteousness, But for the most part, they had 
no itch to clog religion with new words. That's what the divine 
said in the preface to the 1689 confession. We're not trying 
to clog religion with new words. So what they did was they copied 
those confessions in the Reformed tradition so that they could 
identify as persons involved in or belonging to that Reformed 
tradition. that statement it comes from the Savoy, it's not 
in the Westminster Confession. There was debate at the Westminster 
General Assembly concerning the imputation of the act of obedience 
of Jesus Christ. So they left that statement, 
this is a more robust So without compromising the truth, 
they nevertheless didn't emphasize the truth the way the London 
Confession following the Savoy Declaration does, by this language 
of active obedience and passive obedience. of this, but in terms of the 
act of obedience and the imputation of his righteousness, there was 
some division of thought with reference to that. Now, in terms 
of this statement or this basis, I want to kind of unpack this 
a little bit more. Notice, first of all, so in terms 
of the origin, in terms of the basis, in terms of the foundation, 
in terms of the rationale for this forgiveness of sin and the 
imputation of righteousness, there's a few things we should 
appreciate. First, the negative. Notice. for anything wrought 
in them or done by them. Not for anything wrought in them 
or done by them. So we're not pardoned and we're 
not given a righteousness because of something we've done. We haven't 
earned it. We haven't worked for it. We 
haven't had this moral transformation. And as a result of our faithfulness, 
God rewards us with this righteousness. Canon 11 of the Council of Trent 
says this. If anyone says that men are justified 
either by by the sole remission of sins, 
to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured 
forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost and remains in them, 
or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the 
good will of God, let it be anathema." So they pronounce damnation upon 
Protestants who affirm what we do in this particular paragraph. 
Now, that's a pretty strong and powerful statement that they 
made. Again, let's look at it. If anyone says that men are justified 
either by the sole invitation of the justice of Christ or by 
the sole remission of sins to the exclusion of grace in the 
charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, 
that's infused grace. So the Roman Catholic system 
infused grace gets the ball rolling, but you're the one who keeps 
it rolling and brings it home to your final acceptance with 
God on that day of judgment. Oh, and by the way, the way you 
keep that ball rolling is by fidelity to Mother Curt. It's 
by fidelity to the sacramental system. It's by fidelity to following 
the pope and the priests and the bishops and whatever it is 
they have to say. So once you do all that, then 
at the end of days, you will be accepted in the sight of God 
as our acceptance with God. Ian 
Murray made this observation. He said, there was the strongest 
biblical reason for the urgency with which the Reformed divines 
have always distinguished the act of justification from the 
process of sanctification. See, in Catholicism, there's 
no distinction there. It's the process of salvation. It's the process of justification. For papists, justification includes 
sanctification. So it not only involves you looking 
unto Jesus in faith, but you living faithfully before God 
until that day when you're accepted by God. Again, brethren, the 
argument is not there's no sanctification. The argument is not there's no 
moral transformation. The argument is not that the 
Holy Spirit doesn't work in us. The argument is that justification 
restifies He says, we surely need Christ 
for us and Christ in us, but the two things are not to be 
denied. They're connected. They're related. 
The one produces the results of the other. But you need to 
keep them separate in terms of the distinctions that are involved. 
Now, notice again the confession. It says, not for anything wrought 
in them. So that's antrop Rome. And the 
infusion of grace, that is wrought in them by the power of the Holy 
Spirit, but as well are done by them. So the emphasis there 
is on justification. in order to be saved by God. 
If you're in Romans, turn back to Romans chapter three. Romans 
chapter three. Now this is a point that is often 
emphasized in the scripture. We'll look at a few key passages 
in terms of no works with reference to our justification. There are 
works involved in the matter of justification, but they're 
not ours. It's the works of Christ, it's what he has accomplished, 
and that's where the emphasis lies with reference to redemption 
by Christ and justification by faith alone. Notice in Romans 
3, 27. Where is ghosting then? It is 
excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but 
by the law of faith. Therefore, we conclude that a 
man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. Sometimes 
people say, well, the language of faith alone isn't in the Bible. It's right there. Therefore, 
we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds 
of the law. Notice in chapter 4, verse 1, 
what then shall we say? That Abraham, our father in Islam, 
was born into the flesh. For if Abraham was justified 
by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. What's the emphasis? He's not 
justified by works. He's justified by grace through 
faith and that alone in the Lord Jesus Christ. And then turn over 
to the book of Galatians, Galatians chapter 2. familiar to you that need to 
be immediately reminded of, is it's very easy, as that is a 
default position, to slide into this thinking that it's my faith, 
fullness, along with faith in Christ, that gets me to heaven. 
That's good for papists, but that's not good for Protestants. 2.16, knowing that a man is not 
justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. Even we have believed in Christ 
Jesus that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by 
the works of the law. For by the works of the law, 
no flesh shall be justified. Again, one wonders how many more 
times Paul can say alone, faith alone, faith only. He says it 
over and over again. And then 221, I do not set aside 
the grace of God, for if righteousness comes to the law, then Christ 
died in vain. Again, that's a condemnation concerning faith plus works for 
salvation. But notice as well what 221 teaches. It teaches the necessity for 
a righteousness, not just forgiveness, but we need a righteousness in 
it in order to stand before God most high. I do not set aside 
the grace of God, for if righteousness, what does he mean? Means that 
we need righteousness. We need to stand before God righteously, 
or obediently, or perfectly. We don't do that in our own strength. We do that as a result of justifying 
grace. We believe we're pardoned. And 
then the righteousness of Jesus is imputed to us and received 
by faith alone. So those who deny the imputed 
righteousness of Jesus Christ have a problem with Galatians 
2.21. If righteousness comes to the 
law, then Christ died in vain, all recognizing in order to stand 
before a thrice holy God. And then turn over to Titus chapter 
3. Titus chapter 3, that passage, 
the simple statement is, He saved us. But Paul surrounds it with 
a lot of modifiers to underscore the nature of that salvation. 
Look at 3 and 4. But when the kindness and the 
love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of 
righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy, He 
saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewing 
of the Holy Spirit when he poured out on us abundantly through 
Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by his 
grace, we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal 
life. Again, verse five, before he even gets to he saved us, 
he wants to make sure that we know not by works of righteousness 
which we have done. So back to the Confession, there's 
a contrast between the Popish doctrine of infused righteousness, 
but then there's also a condemnation of Pharisaism, legalism, Romanism 
to be sure, but a host of other isms wherein persons are taught 
that it's your faith plus your works that commend you to God 
most high. Now notice what the Confession 
goes on to say. It says, not for anything wrought 
in them or done by them, but for Christ's sake alone. It will 
detail that when it mentions the act of impassive obedience 
of Christ. So but for Christ's alone. But 
then there's one more negative. And this speaks to what was called 
Baxterianism. Richard Baxter. You've probably 
all heard of Richard Baxter. He was a prolific author. He 
has a book that's called The Reformed Pastor. Well, he was 
not reformed when it came to justification. He was pope-ish. He was a papist. In that regard, 
he wrote a lot of Christian writings. He's got a big volume called 
the Christian Directory. I mean, it's just massive. It 
deals with every possible thing you could conceive of. It's casuistry 
at its finest. But Baxter was wrong on justification. So as far as I'm concerned, that 
volume was pretty worthless. I want a guy who knows justification 
to tell me how to live with a Christian and whatnot. We've got Paul to 
do that. But in terms of Baxter, look 
at what it says. Not by imputing faith itself, 
the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to 
them as their righteousness. So this kind of backs the idea 
that we bring faith to the table. We bring faith to the table, 
God sees that faith, and God then You can obviously see connection 
to Arminianism. You can even see some connection 
to Elagianism. This idea that the center can 
bring the faith to the table and thus receive justifying grace 
is not right. Faith is the instrument. I quoted 
Machen, I think it was last week. He says, we are never told in 
the New Testament that we bringing faith to the table, 
and God justifies us. Faith is the instrument. It's 
the hand that God gives us to receive the gift that God gives 
us. That's the emphasis with faith. Notice in 2-8, for by grace you've 
been saved, notice, through faith, not because of faith. Paul was 
not Bacsterian. Paul did not teach this evangelical 
obedience pardoned, and with the imputed 
righteousness of Jesus. Well, there's no imputed righteousness 
of Jesus at that point. So for by grace you've been saved 
through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of 
God. So there's a double meaning in that verse. On the one hand, 
it's not because of faith, it's through faith. It's an instrument. 
But even that instrument that you have was given to you by 
God. So it's not like you brought 
this faith, justifies you as one who has 
brought this. So Baxter taught a neonomian 
doctrine. Neonomianism simply means new 
law-ism, much like legalism. Sometimes I'll use those terms 
interchangeably. So you've got antinomianism, 
which is the against law people, the people that say there's no 
law that the Bible enjoins upon believers in Jesus Christ. They've 
been justified freely by grace, and now they have no law. Well, 
in that reformed scheme that the Bible teaches, there's that 
threefold use of the law. And there is a normative use, 
so that the justified by praise through faith in Christ believer 
looks to the law as his pattern for sanctification. The Spirit 
helps him or enables him to comply with that law. So there's antinomianism, 
and then there's neonomianism. Neonomianism is typically legalism. 
It's a twisting of the law. It is a perversion of the law. 
So Baxter taught a Neonomian doctrine of justification by 
denying the imputation of Christ's act of obedience and claiming 
that an obedient faith fulfills the condition for justification. If that's true, we're damned 
eternally, forever, and in a whole host of bad ways. If our obedient 
faith fulfills the condition for justification, there's no 
justification, brethren. MacArthur famously said, if we 
could lose our salvation, we would. If it's enjoined upon 
us to bring an obedient faith to the table, we're never going 
to be saved. Faith is imputed for righteousness, 
because it is an act of obedience to God. It is the performance 
of the condition of the justifying covenant. That's why it's neonomian. It's a new type of legalism. 
It's an evangelical legalism. It's a bring faith, and bring 
repentance, and God will deal with you in grace, and in mercy, 
and in kindness. So the confession sees that, 
makes that contrast, so that we don't end up apists, so that 
we don't end up back-steering, so that we don't end up on the 
wrong track, thinking that somehow faith in Jesus plus our faithfulness 
to Jesus is what ultimately results in our acceptance with God. Now, 
as many times as I say this, I always feel constrained and 
qualified. Doesn't mean that sanctification isn't important. 
Doesn't mean we can live any old way that we want. It simply 
means that the ground It's not us. It's not our sort 
of contribution. It's either before or after conversion 
to Christ. Now notice the positive assertion. So there's the negative, not 
for anything wrought in them or done by them, but for Christ's 
sake. Not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any 
other evangelical obedience to that as their righteousness. 
But now here comes the positive. but by imputing Christ's active 
obedience on the whole law and passive obedience in his death 
for their whole and sole righteousness. So the imputation of the act 
of obedience of Christ. Again, most people don't deny 
there is forgiveness relative to justification. I think everybody 
teaches that, everybody holds to that. Justification certainly 
involves the forgiveness of the sinner. But it's the imputation 
of Christ's righteousness that is oftentimes challenged, denied, 
ignored, or just relegated to the back burner. Now, the Bible 
everywhere teaches the necessity of obedience to God. Turn to 
1 Samuel chapter 15. 1 Samuel chapter 15. The Bible teaches everywhere 
the necessity of obedience to God. 1 Samuel 15.22. So Samuel 
said, as the Lord has great delay in burnt offerings and sacrifices. 
as in obeying the voice of the Lord. Behold, to obey is better 
than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams. And then, of 
course, in Hebrews chapter 10, the same emphasis is maintained. Hebrews chapter 10, specifically 
at verse 5. Therefore, when he came into 
the world, he said, sacrifice and offering you did not desire, 
but a body you have prepared for me. In burnt offerings and 
sacrifices for sin you had no pleasure. Then I said, behold, 
I have come. In the volume of the book, it 
is written of me, to do your will, O God. So what was prophesied 
concerning Messiah? To do the will of the Father. 
Have we seen that emphasis thus far in John's Gospel? I always 
do the will of Him who sent me. I always do that which pleases 
my Father. My need is to do the will of 
Him who sent me. Why is Jesus doing that? It's 
not in the first place exemplary. just be good to one another. 
That's not what it's about. Jesus' statements there reflect 
his insistence upon his obedience to the law of God that would 
eventually result in the imitation of his righteousness unto us. 
Notice in verse 8, previously saying, sacrifices and offerings, 
burnt offerings and offerings for sin you did not desire, nor 
have pleasure in them, which are offered according to the 
law. Then he said, behold, I have come to do your will, O God. 
He takes away the first, that he may establish the second. 
By that will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body 
of Jesus Christ once for all. Our confession of faith teaches 
what is necessary in terms of obeying God. Turn to chapter 
19. Chapter 19 of the law of God 
tells us the original intent by God. And when I say original 
intent, I mean as revealed by God. Obviously, the original 
intent by God was that Adam and Eve would ultimately fall, and 
that that would open up the door for redemption by Jesus Christ. 
The original intent in terms of the precept of a revealed 
will of God for his creatures is that they obey him. And in 
chapter 19, paragraph 1, God gave to Adam a law of universal 
obedience written in his heart, and a particular precept of not 
eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 
by which he bounded in all his prosperity to personal, entire, 
exact, and perpetual obedience. That's the demand of the law. 
If you look at Galatians chapter 3, a confession is not making 
this up. In Galatians chapter 3, specifically 
in verse 10, for as many as are of the works of the law, For 
it is written, cursed is everyone who does not continue in all 
things which are written in the book of the law to do that. This 
is why I say and suggest, and not me alone, but others as well, 
say that the Old Covenant was a covenant of warrants. It was 
designed to show them their need for the Savior. It was pedagogical 
in nature. There were other functions to 
be sure, but there was that aspect looming large in the Old Covenant. 
Cursed is everyone who does not continue, notice, in all things 
which are written in the book of the law to do that. but that 
no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, 
for the just shall live by faith. Yet the law is not of faith, 
but the man who does them shall live by them. You see the problem 
with the cross. It's either A, you choose this 
exact, personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience in order 
to commend yourself to God, or you look to the one who actually 
engaged in personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience 
with the added modifier representative. These are federal act. If you 
look at Romans chapter 5 again, you see the emphasis there. The 
emphasis is upon the need but there is no imputed righteousness 
of Jesus, guess where we're back to? We're at the tree of the 
knowledge of good and evil. It is now up to us to obey sufficiently, 
and perfectly, and entirely, and exactly, because God demands 
perfect obedience. God demands perfect righteousness. You see the crux of the problem. 
If the Bible teaches or we have to earn, or we have 
to modify, or we have to add to that finished work of Jesus, 
then we're ruined. There's not any hope for us. 
Tonight, we're going to notice in Ephesians 1, verse 7. Paragraphs 
and chapters when you go through the Confession. But in verse 
7, he says, it's according to the riches of his grace. I think that's a commentary on 
two things. One, the infinite bounty of God. there's any notion whatsoever 
that having been forgiven, now we can do what God says in such 
a way that he'll accept us. We have not understood the biblical 
doctrine of total depravity. We haven't understood the biblical 
doctrine of remaining corruption. We certainly haven't understood 
the biblical doctrine of love God and his demand that we do 
all that is commanded. There's no grading on the curve. 
God on that final day says, well you know, you did pretty good. 
You got a C, and a C is okay for you to enter into heaven. 
It is absolute perfection. It is what is commanded here. 
Personal, entire, exact, and provincial obedience. There's 
only one who rendered that, and it's Christ. So back in chapter 
five of the Book of Romans, again, that emphasis in verse 19. For 
as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also 
by one man's obedience many will be made righteous, constituted 
righteous. See, it's not just forgiveness, 
but it's a righteousness that is absolutely crucial with reference 
to our acceptance by God. We see it in Galatians 2.21. 
We see it, look at 2 Corinthians chapter five, verse 21. second 
corinthians chapter 5 verse 20, now then we are ambassadors of 
Christ, as we know that God were pleading through us, we implore 
you on Christ's behalf to reconcile with God, for he made him, who 
knew no sin, to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness 
of God in him. So again, every time the scriptures 
emphasize forgiveness of sins, connected to the blood of the 
Lord Jesus Christ, we need to remember that it's this righteousness 
connected to the life of Christ that we desperately need as well. 
Not just, excuse me, forgiveness, but we need the imputed righteousness 
of Jesus Christ received by faith alone. The Bible declares that 
Christ rendered perfect obedience unto the whole law. You think 
about the covenant of grace for Jesus, it was a covenant of works, 
right? It wasn't a covenant of grace 
that Jesus was in when he lived on this earth. He was in the 
covenant of works. Samuel Petal argues that it was 
the specific covenant of works that was imposed upon Old Covenant 
Israel. And Jesus fulfilled every jot 
and every tittle in terms of righteousness. Godward, in terms 
of being that perfect Lamb of God, but it was manward, such 
that when we believe by grace, we're not only forgiven through 
His blood, but we're given a righteousness based on His life. And that's 
the emphasis that the Confession is pointing out in this particular 
section. Now there is something today 
called the New Perspective on Paul. One of its adherents is 
named N.T. Wright. N.T. Wright started off, 
I think, decent. I think Manner of Truth published 
some of his early stuff, or at least one of his books. But N.T. 
Wright adopted what's called the New Perspective on Paul. 
And basically the New Perspective on Paul is Romanism, or what 
has been seen in the last several years in some brand of Presbyterianism 
called federal visionism, a federal vision. It conflates justification 
and sanctification. The new perspective on Paul makes 
much of Second Temple Judaism. And Second Temple Judaism, according 
to him and a guy named E.P. Sanders and a guy named James 
Dunn, teach that with reference to Second Temple Judaism, the 
Jew got for his own faithfulness. So 
you'll realize in a scene like that, there's no place for the 
imputation of the righteousness of Jesus Christ. So N.T. Wright 
not only denies computed righteousness, he mocks it. N.T. Wright on Paul guides, they all got 
Bray Luther and Calvin and Reformed commentaries and theologians. 
So they were just reading Paul in Romans and in Galatians in 
the light of their controversy with Rome. So they got it wrong. They weren't conditioned by their 
culture. And they were simply reading 
Paul as a contrast to Romanism. Well, brethren, if there were 
never any Romanism, what Paul said is true regardless. Faith in Christ that is given 
by God as a gift, which brings justification, which involves 
not only forgiveness, but the imputed righteousness of Jesus 
Christ, which we see in these passages. Machen explains this 
way, with reference to the imputed righteousness of Jesus. If you 
have a book allowance, or your wife lets you buy books, buy 
Machen, not write. NT wrong, as Barcelos refers 
to it. That's what you should know. 
He's brilliant. He's a brilliant writer, an engaging 
writer. Not everybody who writes books 
in the Christian tradition can write well. I mean, there's commentaries 
that are a slugfest. I mean, there's good stuff in 
there, but it's not written well. So you have to kind of fight 
for the nuggets. But then you get people that maybe don't have 
the best theology that write very well. Think C.S. Lewis, 
for instance. think N.G. Wright, as well as, 
I don't think I've listened to much of him, but from what I 
understand, he's quite the engaging speaker, and all that sort of 
thing. But he's a slug in the salad guy. He has emphasis, and 
well, good emphasis, on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus, 
the sort of background he's working out of, his liberal in context, 
and deny things like the resurrection of Jesus. So his arguments for 
that apparently are fantastic. But Machen also had books like 
that. Machen would be the guy that 
I would say spend your shuttles on in terms of books. He says, 
as a matter of fact, Christ has not merely paid the penalty of 
Adam's first sin and the penalty of the sins which we individually 
have committed, but also he has positively merited for us eternal 
life. He was, in other words, our representative, 
both in penalty paying and in probation keeping. He paid the 
penalty of sin for us, and he stood the probation for us. Those 
who have been saved by the Lord Jesus Christ not only are righteous 
in the sight of God, but they are beyond the possibility of 
becoming unrighteous. In their case, the probation 
is over. It is not over because they have 
stood it successfully. It is not over because they themselves 
have earned the reward of assured blessedness, which God promised 
on condition of perfect obedience. But it is over because Christ 
has stood it for them. It is over because Christ has 
merited for them the reward by His perfect obedience to God's 
law. That's gold, brethren. So the 
dying words of Jane Gresson Machen should be those of God. He died 
about 7.30 p.m. on January 1st, 1937. I think 
he was in, where's Bismarck? Is that North or South Dakota? 
I think it's North. What is it? I think it's North. 
North, okay. He was, I think, in Bismarck, North Dakota. He 
died alone, but he fired off a telegram to, I think it was 
Ned Stonehouse's biographer. Here's what his final words were 
in that telegram. I'm so thankful for active obedience 
of Christ. No vote without Him. Brother, if we deny this, we 
deny the salvation of God. This is no small thing. This 
isn't like a little difference with eschatology. You know, I 
had the cause to share with somebody recently. The final chapters 
of our Confession Do not exclude all millennialists. Do not exclude 
post-millennialists. Do not exclude pre-millennialists. You can be any one of those eschatologies 
and find a haven in this confession of faith. If you deny justification 
by faith, you deny what Paul the Apostle says, and not just 
Paul, or Jesus, the Apostles, or the prophets before them, 
you've got big problems. So back to the confession, the 
imputation of the passive obedience of Christ. You've got the active 
obedience. That's the righteousness that we have, but then as well 
his passive obedience. And that language of passive 
is probably connected to the language of passion. It refers 
to the death of Christ. When we hear passive obedience, 
it's not to suggest that Christ was an unwilling victim, that 
he haphazardly ended up on that cross. He had no sort of involvement 
whatsoever. No, because of what we've already 
seen. It was his meat to do the will 
of him who sent him. And that meat included dying 
on the cross. So when we talk about passive 
obedience, we don't mean he was inactive, that he was uninvolved, 
that that wasn't part and parcel of his mission. He says it. He 
announces it. He knows that he's going to embrace 
this. He lays down his life for the 
sheep, according to John chapter 10. Passive, again, probably 
reflects the idea behind passion, the suffering, the death of our 
blessed Savior. So back to the confession on 
justification. But by imputing Christ's act 
of obedience on the whole law, the basis upon which we are accounted 
and accepted, our persons are accounted and accepted as righteous. The basis upon which our sins 
are pardoned is that passive previous part of the chapter, 
after the not, not, not, not, not, but for Christ's sake alone. This just amplifies that statement, 
but for Christ's sake alone. So it's but by imputing Christ's 
active obedience unto the whole lot, passive obedience in his 
death for the whole and sole righteousness. Now, paragraph 
one, the end section, and then paragraph two, deal with the 
instrument of faith. 1 and then in paragraph 2. Notice the instrument. It is 
by faith. Look at after that statement, 
paragraph 1. They receiving and resting on 
him and his righteousness by faith, which faith they have 
not of themselves, it is the gift of God. It's by faith. That's the emphasis. That's the 
issue. That's the instrument by which 
we come into the Saving Union. John Murray comments on Romans 
3, 27 to 31. He says, justification, by works, 
always finds its ground in that which the person is and does. Right? Justification, by works, 
always finds its ground in that which the person is and does. 
Think about those persons in Matthew chapter 7. Now, I don't 
know what it says to me. Lord, Lord, we'll enter the kingdom 
of heaven. What do they do? They don't go, you know, nothing 
in my hand I bring, simply to thy cross I claim. No, Lord, 
didn't we cast out demons in your name? Didn't we heal people 
in your name? Didn't we do all? They look at 
what they do in order to find acceptance with God. So Murray's 
right. Justification by works always finds its ground in that 
which the person is and does. It is always oriented to that 
consideration of virtue attaching to the person justified. Virtue 
signaling is an attempt for self-righteousness. Virtue signaling is an attempt 
to assuage one's conscience that everything is gonna be okay because 
of what they do or are. He goes on to say the specific 
quality of faith is trust and commitment to another. It is 
essentially extraspective. I love that word. Introspective 
means we look into ourselves. Extraspective means we look away 
from ourselves to the Lord Jesus Christ. It is essentially extraspective, 
and in that respect, it is the diametric opposite of works. 
Faith is self-renouncing. Works are self-congratulatory. Faith looks to what God does. 
Works have respect to what we are. It is this antithesis of 
principle that enables the apostle to base upon the principle of 
faith. And again, he's in that context 
of Romans 3, 27 and following. That's exactly what Paul is doing 
there. So back to the confession. It 
says, they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness 
by faith, which faith they have not of themselves, it is the 
gift of God. Notice the language that is metaphorical, receiving 
and resting. Sometimes people load that with 
freight that it was never means to believe. We see that 
in John. We're going to see it in spades 
in John 6 as we close out the chapter, specifically in 53 to 
58. The eating of the flesh and the 
drinking of his blood does not mean we become cannibals. It 
does not mean we violate God's law and drink blood. It is metaphorical 
for believing on him. Jesus uses the language of come 
or receive. Again, it's metaphorical. What's 
the emphasis? It's faith. receiving and resting on him 
and his righteousness by faith. And again, just so that we make 
sure we're not neo-bacterian, which faith they have not of 
themselves, it is the gift of God. Westminster larger catechism 
73 says, how does faith justify a sinner in the sight of God? 
Faith justifies a sinner in the sight of God, not because of 
those other graces, which do always accompany it, which paragraph 
two is going to touch on. or of good works that are the 
fruits of it, nor as if the grace of faith, or any act thereof, 
were imputed to him for his justification, but only as it is an instrument 
by which he receives not because of faith, it is through 
or by faith. It is an instrument that receives 
the gift given by God. And lest we forget, the instrument 
given to receive the gift given by God is a gift given by God 
itself. Faith is a gift, Ephesians 2, 
89, and then Philippians 1, verse 29. It's been appointed to you 
not only believe in him, but also to suffer for his sake. 
So the Bible teaches, and the confession rightly imitates, 
the reality that faith is a gift. Now notice, in terms of the exclusivity, 
of they receiving and resting on him as righteousness by faith, 
which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of 
God. And then paragraph two, faith 
thus receiving and resting on Christ and his righteousness 
is the alone instrument of justification. It is the alone instrument of 
justification. So it's not faith plus words, it's not faith plus 
our merit, it's not faith plus our faithfulness, but it's faith. 
So faith thus receiving and resting on Christ and his righteousness 
is the alone instrument of justification. Listen to Murray again. Murray 
says, this is both the stumbling block and the irresistible appeal 
to the gospel. The stumbling block to those 
who hate the gospel, It is the irresistible appeal to those 
who are conquered by the gospel. It is the stumbling block to 
self-righteousness, and self-righteousness is the arch demon of antithesis 
to grace. It is the glory of the gospel 
for the contrite and brokenhearted. If we put any other exercise 
in the human spirit in the place of faith, then we cut the throat 
of the only confidence a sinner conscious of his lost and helpless 
condition can entertain. Justification by faith is the 
jubilee trumpet of the gospel because it proclaims the gospel 
to the poor and destitute whose only door of hope is to rule 
themselves in total helplessness, and they do that by grace, upon 
the grace and power and righteousness of the Redeemer of the lost. 
In the words of one, cast out your anger into the ocean of 
the Redeemer's merits. So faith thus receiving and resting 
on Christ and his righteousness is the alone instrument of righteousness. Now notice the confession doesn't 
stop there. Paragraph two now nods toward 
sanctification. See, they're connected. There's 
no sanctification if there wasn't a justification. And there's 
no justification if there isn't sanctification. So they're connected. And notice what that distinction 
is. So faith, thus receiving and 
resting on Christ and his righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification. Yet it is not alone in the person 
justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, 
and is no dead faith, but worketh by love. You see? There was a 
debate about this within the last 20 years. I remember seeing 
it on the internet. I saw a whole host of books coming 
out about how we need to make sure that we're holy and we're 
godly. Well, the doctrine of justification 
by faith never mitigates against that. No one's. I mean, they 
were addressing a problem that never existed. I've always thought 
that paragraph two is the corrective. It highlights or underscores. Nevertheless, that faith is accompanied 
by all other same races. So that when you're justified 
freely by this race, when you are blessed by the work of Christ 
for us, you are then blessed by the work of the Spirit in 
us. It is an inevitable, inextricable 
connection. Now, again, the sanctification 
may not be at the heights of Hermon that we would appreciate, 
but it's there, right? There is growth in grace and 
in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Remember, 
there's a process involved. There is a moving forward involved, 
not like justification, which is a one-time, it isn't clear 
to that, but with reference to sanctification, there's progress, 
there's development, there's all that sort of thing. This 
is crucial as it highlights the biblical reality that sanctification 
always follows justification. It's just an inevitability. Westminster 
Larger Catechism, again, number 77, gives the differences or 
gives this statement concerning justification and sanctification. 
Wherein do justification and sanctification differ? Although 
sanctification be inseparably joined with justification, Again, 
the debate over the last 20 years, it was a debate about nothing, 
or a debate about something. It was like, well, we need to 
invent the wheel. The wheel was invented. Paul 
invented it. I mean, Moses invented it. God 
threw Moses, and then the prophets, and then Jesus, and then the 
apostles. They invented. They amplified. We don't need 
to fix that. There's a great mechanism in place in the Reformed 
tradition for holiness of life, for sanctity of life, for godliness 
in life. Goes on to say, so although sanctification 
be inseparably joined with justification, yet they differ, in that God 
in justification imputes the righteousness of Christ. In sanctification, 
his spirit infuses grace and enables to the exercise thereof. 
In the former, sin is pardoned. In the other, it is subdued. 
The one does equally free all believers from the revenging 
wrath of God, and that perfectly in this life. that they never 
fall into condemnation. The other is neither equal in 
all, nor in this life perfect in any, but growing up to perfection. So it's separately connected 
with some obvious distinctions that we must maintain. And paragraph 
two brings that home. So faith thus receiving and resting 
on Christ and his righteousness is the alone instrument of right 
love justification, yet it is not alone in the person justified, 
but is ever accompanied with all other saving praises, and 
is not that faith but worketh by love. Notice the text, Romans 
3, 28, faith alone. And then Galatians 5, talking 
about faith working through love. Again, that is an effect or a 
consequence of justifying faith. And then, of course, James 2, 
17, 22, and 26. James teaches that faith without 
works is dead. Well, how do we explain that? 
Because faith thus receiving and resting on Christ and his 
righteousness is the alone instrument of self-engagement. Yet it is 
not alone in the person justified. James and Paul are at harmony. They're at peace. They don't 
have problems. There's no discrepancy between these two teachers of 
religious faith. There is perfect harmony with 
James and Paul. Obviously, Rome didn't see it 
that way. Rome doesn't understand it that 
way. And many outside of Rome fall into the same trap. Yet 
without sanctity of life, there is no acceptance with God. Yeah, 
I'd agree, but it's the sanctity of life of Jesus. It's the imputed 
righteousness of Jesus, without which there will be no acceptance. 
Well, God willing, we'll pick up the next section next time, 
so I'll close in prayer. Our Father, we thank you for 
this wonderful summation, this summary statement concerning 
the doctrine of justification by faith alone. What a blessed 
and wonderful truth this is, and we say with nature, what 
a glorious thing, the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ 
is. There's no hope without it. Thank you for forgiveness, thank 
you that you have dealt with our Our sin you've dealt with 
all things and have blessed us with every spiritual blessing 
in the heavenly places is Christ. We ask now that as we enter into 
worship you would be glorified and praised and honored and help 
us to respond with that gratitude and that thanksgiving and that 
heart full of delight and joy at what you've done for us in 
your gospel. We pray through Christ our Lord, 
amen. Well, any quick questions? I 
think there's 30 seconds up there. a good corrective to a lot of, 
as you were saying, a lot of modern confusion. Yeah. Yeah, it's a wonderful, wonderful 
statement that we have there. But that would be justified. 
Our works are built erratically for God. So if you're working 
your way to salvation and without justification, it's, you're not 
even going to get an audience. Yeah, it's a fool's errand, that's 
for sure. Also, if it wasn't for Keesley, 
I mean, That's right, he had enough time 
to lock all the things across the street.