Not At Ease with Two Justifications
Q: We are taught that Christ justified us when he was on the cross, and then we are told that we are justified again when God converts us. Objective and subjective justifications confuse me all the more. I thought there was one justification of us. If we were justified at the cross, why do we need justification again? Reading previous posts and questions on this do not make this issue click for me.
---------------------------------
A: Perhaps all that I can do for you is to point you to the Bible statements dealing with this subject and in this way allow the Holy Spirit to grant you contentment along with the awareness of his truth. First focus on Romans 4:25 and 2 Corinthians 5:19. "He [Christ] was delivered over to death for [because of] our sins and was raised to life for [because of] our justification. . . . God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them." These are sample passages that assure us that our justification and that of mankind was reality at the time of Christ's death and resurrection on our behalf.
Then you may focus on passages like Romans 3:28 ("We maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.") and Romans 4:5 ("To the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness."). These are sample passages that assure us the individual sinner is also declared righteous as he is brought to grasp Christ's righteousness by faith.
The terms objective (or universal) and subjective (or individual) justification are merely terms coined to let all of Scripture speak to our hearts and to describe the truths clearly revealed. Let the twin truths stand as Scripture does. You simply say, "I thought there was one justification of us." And the Apostle Paul simply says, "We take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ" (2 Corinthians 10:5). May you find contentment in Christ and his Word.
***
GJ - False teachers are consistent from denomination to denomination. They deceive their adiences without any sense of shame. I have noticed that Rolf Preus and others on LutherQuest follow the same deceptive line as the WELS AnswerMan. Notice the citation of Romans 4:25. Why do they isolate that verse from a whole chapter on justification by faith? The Bible does not really feature verse breaks. They were imposed a long time ago. Chapter breaks were also imposed, but they tend to follow theme changes.
AnswerMan claims Twin Truths, but OJ and SJ are not in the Scriptures, the Book of Concord, Luther, Chemnitz, et al.
OJ and SJ are the Twin Peaks of Pietism.
So let's look at Romans 4:24-25, adding just one verse for our focus:
KJV Romans 4:24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; 25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.
No UOJ Stormtrooper has offered a single verse where God declared the world to be righteous. Oddly, Rolf Preus never wants to deal with my verbatim quotations from his father's last book, a book edited by Rolf and brother Daniel, another UOJ Stormtrooper. Robert Preus was exceptionally clear on one point - that justification is by faith, that righteousness comes to us only through justification by faith.
The UOJ thesis is that righteousness was imputed, declared, given to the entire world the moment Christ died or the moment Christ rose from the dead. The Resurrection Moment is clinched, they claim, by Romans 4:25. But is it really? The verses above link imputation to faith. No one can escape that, so the UOJ fanatics avoid quoting Romans 4:24.
UOJ is a proposition searching for a foundation in Scripture. Everything is avoided that might fuzz up their false doctrine. That is a logical fallacy called Special Pleading. Notice how the 2 Corinthians passage shows that the public ministry is the proclamation of the Atonement (reconciliation). The old things are passed away for the believer, the individual "in Christ." The old things are not passed way for the whole world. But Christ did die for the sins of the world. That is the Atonement Gospel, the Holy Spirit's energy in creating and sustaining faith: the Word of Reconciliation.
KJV 2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. 6:1 We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.
Rolf Preus is hilarious in his affirmation of the UOJ heresy. He must not know church history very well. He accuses Luther (and those who agree with Luther) of being an Arminian. That's MDiv for decision theology. The MDivs are always invoking their most obtuse technical terms from THEO 101 to make the laity gape at them for their superior learning. I will link the topic from Wikipedia, to refresh the memory of LutherQuest (sic) denizens. "Apt to teach" is a Biblical requirement for ministers. Blowing smoke is not.
Rolf's favorite false doctrine leads to decision theology, as J. P. Meyer shows so clearly in his seminal UOJ (WELS) book:
J-586
I. "Objectively speaking, without any reference to an individual sinner's attitude toward Christ's sacrifice, purely on the basis of God's verdict, every sinner, whether he knows about it or not, whether he believes it or not, has received the status of a saint. What will be his reaction when he is informed about this turn of events? Will he accept, or will he decline?"[41]
J. P. Meyer, Ministers of Christ, A Commentary on the Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1963, p. 103f. 2 Corinthians 5:18-21.
As I wrote in Thy Strong Word: "This statement, with its question at the end, sounds oddly Baptist: decision theology. Will he accept or decline? One can see that the generic Protestant doctrine behind the Church Growth Movement existed before WELS leaders rushed off to study at Fuller Seminary. It also explains why they love a generic Protestant school that rejects the Means of Grace."
