Some Brief, Simple Suggestions for Speaking to Catholics

Note: Please be advised that what follows will not be a detailed theological treatise or apologetic for the gospel. That's not the point of this post. Instead, I'll offer brief, simple, suggestions for evangelicals talking to their Catholic friends about the gospel. Thus, this post is not designed to interact with modern-day Roman Catholic apologists or deal with their assertions and denunciations of Biblical Christianity.

Background Info

I walked into an elderly lady's room today and told her I wanted to speak to her about her soul. She has visited our church on and off for years and is the mother of one of our members. She comes from a traditional Catholic background and I spent a while trying to figure out what her understanding of various Biblical concepts were such as regeneration, repentance, grace, faith, the purpose of Christ's death on the cross, and how someone is made right with God.

The Problems

She simply didn't understand the reason why Jesus had to die on the cross nor did she understand God's grace. I spent a good 15 minutes explaining why Jesus died on the cross and probably 15-20 minutes explaining the concept of grace to her. Then I quoted some relevant Bible passages to support what I was saying. I then asked her, "Does that make sense?" and also "Do you have any questions for me?" She said, "I guess I need to repent". I said, "That's true, but don't trust in your repentance to get you to heaven, trust in Christ alone. Cling to Him alone, and nothing else, not even your repentance. Don't trust your repentance to get you to heaven, trust Christ alone to get you there." Allow me to explain why I said this to her.

Oftentimes, when you tell someone from a traditional Catholic background that they need to repent and believe in Jesus to be saved, they often interpret what you are saying as "I need to do some religious works or activity to be saved." They have been so conditioned to think that you have to go through a required series of steps, participate in various rituals and/or ceremonies, and perform good works to be saved, and then God will mete out to you salvation as a reward of said obeisance. Thus, when you say, "you must repent and believe on Christ" they think "I must do something to be saved, just like Father So-and-So told me back when I was knee-high to a grasshopper." Such was the case with this woman. So here's some examples I used to help her understand the cross and grace:

1. Why Jesus had to die: I explained that all of us die once and after this comes judgment (Heb. 9:27). I then explained that we have broken God's laws, He is a good and perfect Judge, and a completely good judge must give criminals justice, or else He's not good (Rom. 3:26). She agreed. I then explained that sin is breaking God's law (1 John 3:4). I then asked her that if God is fair, good, and just, what must He do to criminals who have broken His laws millions of times? She said, "I don't know". I said, "Well, He must give them justice right?" She agreed. I asked, "Do you know that justice is for unrepentant sinners?" She nodded affirmatively. I said, "Hell. Forever." She got the point. I then explained that Jesus, the heavenly Judge, became man, and stepped down off the judgment seat as it were, and took the penalty that sinners deserve on the cross. Jesus took the Father's sentence against sin when He died on the cross in the place of the guilty criminals so that those who are guilty but trust in His work on the cross can receive a merciful pardon instead of divine justice (Rom. 3:25-29; 4-5:1; Heb. 10:14). She seemed to get it. But like many I come across, she needs to hear it again and again from patient and loving Christians.

2. Grace: I explained to her that grace is God's unmerited favor; meaning, you can't earn it, work for it, or get it in any way by anything that you do; whether a religious activity, participating in a ritual or ceremony, or by being nice and doing good things for people every once in a while. I then quoted Eph. 2:8-9 to her from the NLT: "God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it is a gift from God. Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it." I told her that trying to earn her salvation is like trying to pay me for a Christmas gift that I freely and lovingly gave her. Trying to pay for the gift would not only be insulting to the giver, but would even anger the gift-giver since by definition, a gift is not something you pay for, work for, or earn. Its like telling the gift-giver: "I don't need your free gift, I can get it all by myself thank you very much!" I then explained to her that to try to earn your salvation by "being good" or "doing good works; religious or otherwise" is guaranteed to anger a good, righteous, and holy God. Instead, salvation is freely and lovingly given by God and must be freely received. She seemed to understand some of what I was saying, but I could tell it was still foggy to her.

IN CONCLUSION, I would encourage all of you to be ready to speak to people like this about how God's grace is free (Rom. 6:23), it can't be earned (Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5; Phil. 3:9). Drive that point home, spend some time in prayer for this person, and maybe God will use your "watering" (1 Cor. 3:8) as a means to stimulate Godly sorrow that leads to repentance.

My Favorite Arminian

I agree with Paul Washer; I'd take one guy like Leonard Ravenhill over 20 dead Calvinists:

Spent for the Gospel? a Deacon Minute . . .

We provide a Deacon Minute each Lord’s Day to encourage you from God’s Word to serve the body and to keep you informed of service opportunities in the body.

I do not have a Service Position Outline today for cleaning broken glass and dead rats from our meeting space, but it is good to remember that, that is going on today in Indonesia.

Many opportunities have passed this year, and the question we must each ask ourselves is this, “Have I worn myself out serving Jesus this year, or did I just do as much as I felt was required.”

The apostle Paul had many things to say about his dedication and serving of the body of Christ as he served Jesus.

2 Timothy 4:6-8 says

“For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing.”

2 Corinthians 2:15 “I will most gladly spend and be expended (or spent) for your souls.”

Can you say that in 2010 you have been “most gladly spent” for Jesus? If not, there is still 25 days in 2010, and all of 2011, if Jesus tarries his return. Will you start today, and be spent for Jesus?

Behold the Lamb - Part II

INTRODUCTION: In part one, we saw that the Word that was made flesh and conceived in the womb of a virgin was the Divine hand that created the world. We’ll review those precious doctrines and then behold the Lamb of God as He’s presented in John chapter one.

Jesus is eternal: Before the beginning of history the Word was eternally existing. The term “Word” is the common Greek word logos, which meant “speaking, a message, or words.” “Logos” was widely used in Greek philosophical teaching as well as in Jewish wisdom literature and philosophy. John chose that term because it was familiar to his readers, but he invested it with his own meaning, which becomes evident in the prologue of John.

Jesus is in eternal relationship with the Father: When we read in 1:1b that “The Word was with God”, we are reminded of that a special, eternal fellowship and relationship within the Trinity. The word “with” translates the Greek pros, which here suggests “in company with, in a face-to-face relationship” (cf. the same use of pros in 1:2; 1 Thess. 3:4; 1 John 1:2). John then added in 1:1c “the Word was God”. Jehovah’s Witnesses translate this clause in their NWT as, “the Word was a god. ” This is incorrect and implies polytheism. Others have translated it “the Word was divine,” but this is ambiguous and could lead to a faulty view of Jesus in that He could be interpreted as something less than fully divine. If this verse is correctly understood, it helps clarify the doctrine of the Trinity. The Word is eternal; the Word is in relationship to God (the Father); and the Word is as to His nature, fully divine (cf. Col. 2:9 – “For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form” (Col. 2:9 NAU) – Gk. hoti en auto katoikei pan to pleroma tes theotetos somatikos).

Just so you don’t commit the error of modalism, John emphasizes again in 1:2 that the Word has always been in a relationship “with God” the Father. John writes the way that he does in order to specifically avoid the idea that Christ came into existence at some point in time or began a relationship with the Father. In eternity past, the Father (God) and the Son (the Word) have always been in a loving communion with each other. Both Father and Son are God, yet there are not two Gods, but only one God that exists as a composite unity (cf. Gen. 1:1, 26; 3:22; 11:7).

Jesus is the eternal Creator God: In 1:3, John tells us why there is something rather than nothing: the eternal existence of Jesus! He is eternal, and He is the Creator of everything. The Word was the Divine agent of creation (cf. 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2). All Creation was “made” by the Word in relation with the Father and the Spirit (cf. Gen. 1:2). John also stressed that the work of the Word was not only to create everything, but also that He came to reveal the Father (John 1:14, 18); and the work of that revelation began in creation for creation reveals God (Ps. 19:1-6; Rom. 1:19-20).

Jesus is Life-giver and Light-giver: In 1:4, John reminds us that life is our most precious possession and that life is in Jesus. John affirmed that in the ultimate sense, “life” is “in” Christ. Man’s spiritual and physical life comes from Him (1 Sam 2:6; John 5:26; 6:57; 10:10; 11:25; 14:6; 17:3; 20:31). Jesus, the Source of “life” (cf. 11:25), is also “the Light of men” (cf. 8:12). Light is commonly used in the Bible as a figure for God, His truth, and His love; darkness is commonly used to denote death, ignorance, sin, and separation from God, His truth, and His love. Isaiah described the coming of salvation as the people living in darkness seeing a great light (Isa. 9:2; cf. Matt. 4:16).

In 1:5 we learn that Light’s nature is to shine and dispel darkness. Darkness is almost personified in this verse: darkness is unable to overpower light. By this, John summarized his Gospel record: (a) “Light” will invade the dominion of “darkness”, (b) Satan the ruler and his subjects will resist the light, but they will be unable to frustrate its power. (c) The Word will be victorious in spite of any opposition. Now we turn to the witness of John the Baptist.

TEACHING & APPLICATION

The witness of John the Baptist (1:6-8)

1:6 - In verse 6, we learn that in addition to the eternal Word, a man named John came on the stage of world history as prophesied by Isaiah (Is. 40:3). This John was not the author of the Gospel of the same name, but was the great forerunner of Jesus known as John the Baptist. He was sent from God, which was the secret of his importance. As the last in the long line of OT prophets, he was equipped and commissioned by God for a special ministry.

1:7 - The word “witness” in verse 7 (both as a noun [marturia] and a verb [martureo]) is important in this Gospel (cf. v. 15, 32, 34; 3:11, 26; 5:31-32, 36-37; 18:37; 19:35; etc). John the Baptist was sent for people’s benefit to be an additional witness to the truth of Jesus, the great Revealer of the Father. Sinners are in such darkness that they need someone to tell them Who the light is. John’s goal was that all people might come to believe in the Light of Christ.

1:8 - John the Baptist was a great prophet, the greatest of the OT and the greatest man born of women (Matt. 11:11), but he “was not the Light”. Sadly, even though John testified about the Light for only a short period of time, the movement he started continued long after the death and resurrection of Jesus (4:1; cf. Mark 6:29; Luke 5:33). Twenty years after Jesus’ resurrection (cf. Acts 18:25; 19:1-7) Paul found about 12 disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus. Worse yet, a modern cult still continues in southern Iraq, which, though hostile to Christianity, claims an ancestral link to John the Baptist. So, while John pointed to the Light of Christ, men still missed Him and focused on the way shower rather than the Way itself. People have always had a tendency to focus on the dazzling preacher rather than the God that the preacher is pointing to!

The coming of the Light (1:9-13)

1:9 – Quakers have misinterpreted this text and then used their misinterpretation of it to promote the idea that every person has the “inner light” of Christ within them. The word “coming” (erchomenon) refers to Christ, the true Light; thus speaking to His incarnation. There is a sense in which Christ gives light to every man. This does not mean universal salvation or even inner illumination. Instead, it means that Christ as the Light shines (photizei) on each person either in salvation or in illuminating them with regard to their sin and coming judgment through direct exposure to the gospel or through creation and conscience (3:18-21; 9:39-41; cf. 16:8-11; Rom. 1:19-21; 2:14).

1:10 - The world (kosmos) means the world of men and human society, which is now in disobedience to God and under the rule of Satan (cf. 14:30). The logos came among people in the Incarnation, but mankind did not recognize its Maker (cf. Isa. 1:2). The failure to recognize (egno “know”) Him was not because God’s nature was somehow “hidden” in people, but because of human ignorance and blindness, caused by sin (John 12:37).

1:11 - This is one of the saddest verses in the Bible. The logos went to His own people but He got no welcome. Jesus went to His own people, Israel, but they as a whole rejected Him. In rejecting Him, they refused to accept Him as the Revelation sent by the Father and refused to obey His commands. Long before His birth, Isaiah predicted Israel’s unbelief in her Messiah right before he prophesied His substitutionary atonement: “Who has believed our message?” (Isa. 53:1)

1:12 – by God’s grace alone, that unbelief was not universal. Some received Jesus’ universal invitation. To all who accepted Him as the Revealer of the Father’s will and as the atonement for sin, He gave them the right to become children of God because that right was purchased by Jesus’ perfect and final Sacrifice (Hebrews 10:14).

1:13 - The new birth does not come by natural descent: “who were born, not of blood” (lit., “of bloods”), nor is it the result of a human decision: “nor of the will of the flesh,” i.e., a natural human desire, nor is it the result of a husband’s will (so NIV), “nor of the will of man” i.e., “a married male”. The birth of a child of God is not the result of a natural birth, but a supernatural one. It is a supernatural, monergistic work of God in regeneration (1 John 5:1). A person that embraces Jesus as Lord by responding in faith and obedience to Him does so by the prior, regenerating work of the Holy Spirit causing them to repent and believe (3:5-8; Ezek. 36:27).

The Incarnation and revelation (1:14-18)

1:14 - The Word (logos; cf. v. 1) became flesh. Christ, the eternal logos, who is God, came to earth as man. Yet in doing so, He did not merely “appear” like a man; He literally became one (cf. Phil. 2:5-9). He never lost His deity, but instead humanity was added to Christ’s deity. And yet in becoming “flesh,” Jesus did not change (Heb. 13:8). Thus, maybe the word “became” (egeneto) should be understood as “took to Himself” or “arrived on the scene as.”

“Flesh” in this verse means a human nature, not sinfulness or weakness. In the Greek, the words "dwelt among us" recall God’s dwelling with Israel in the Old Testament. The word “dwelt” is eskenosen from the verb skenoo (“to tabernacle”). Just as God’s presence was in the tabernacle in the Israelite’s wilderness wandering (Ex. 40:34), so Jesus dwelt among people.

Of course, such wording naturally implies that the author was an eyewitness, one of the twelve, namely, John the apostle. “His glory” refers to the unique splendor and honor seen in Jesus’ life, miracles, death, and resurrection. The only Son (monogenous; cf. John 1:18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9) means that Jesus is the Son of God in a sense totally different from a human who believes and becomes a child of God. Jesus’ Sonship is unique because He is the eternal Son of Man of Daniel 7:13-14 and is of the same essence as the Father. The glorious revelation of God displayed in the incarnate Word was full of grace and truth, meaning, that it was a gracious and truthful revelation (cf. John 1:17).

1:15 - John the Baptist gave a continuing testimony to Jesus. The present tense of the Greek verbs “testified” and “cried out” emphasizes this. Jesus was younger and began His ministry later than John, but because of His pre-existence, John said that Jesus “has become before me”.

1:16 - The Word made flesh is the source of grace (charin), which is the sum total of all the spiritual favors that God gives to people. The words “we have all received” refer to Christians and includes the author, the apostle John. Because of the fullness of His grace, we receive “grace upon grace” (charin anti charitos, lit., “grace in place of grace” or “grace piled upon grace”). In other words, one blessing after another comes to Christians just as waves continue to come to the shore one right after another. The Christian life is the constant reception of God’s grace, with one instance of grace coming right after another.

1:17 - The glory of the old covenant was the giving of the Law by God through His servant Moses (2 Cor. 3:7). No other nation has had such a privilege. But the glory of the church is the revelation of God’s “grace and truth . . . realized through Jesus Christ” (cf. v. 14).

1:18 - The statement “no one has seen God at any time” (cf. 1 John 4:12) may seem to be contradictory. Didn’t Isaiah say, “My eyes have seen the King, the LORD of Hosts”? (Isa. 6:5) God is invisible to us (1 Tim. 1:17). He is One “whom no man has seen or can see” (1 Tim. 6:16). But John 1:18 means, “no one has ever seen God’s essential nature.” In the OT, God was seen in a limited way in a physical manifestation or a vision of some sort (cf. Gen. 18-19; 32:24-30; Ex. 24:9-11; 33:11, 19-23; Isa. 6:1-11; Ezek. 1:26, 28; Dan. 7:9-14). However, His full essence or nature was disclosed to mortal men only in Jesus and cannot be fully experienced by men while living in their corruptible flesh (cf. Ex. 33:19-23).

God the only Son is literally “the unique God” or “the one and only God” (monogenes theos; cf. monogenous, “the one and only” in v. 14). John was probably ending his prologue by returning to the truth stated in verse one that the Word is God. Verse 18 is another statement affirming Christ’s deity: He is unique, the one and only God. The Son is at the Father’s side -“in the bosom of the Father”, thus revealing the intimacy of the Father and the Son (cf. the Word was “with God”, vv. 1-2). Furthermore, the Son “He has explained” the Father. “[E]xplained” is from exegesato, from which we get the English word exegesis. The Son is the “exegete” of the Father, and as a result of His work, the nature of the Father who is invisible to us (cf. 1 Tim. 1:17; 6:16) is displayed in the Son (cf. 6:46).

John’s first witness (1:19-28)

1:19 - As in the Synoptic Gospels, the ministry of John the Baptist was so influential that the authorities in Jerusalem decided to investigate him. “[T]he Jews” is the author’s title for the city’s leaders. The priests and Levites went to ask about his baptism and what he claimed for himself.

1:20-21 - John explicitly said, “I am not the Christ” (i.e., the Messiah). This was his confession, as stressed by the repetition of the verb (in Gr.) “confessed”. Interestingly in response to their questions, John’s answers were progressively shorter: “I am not the Christ” (v. 20); “I am not” (v. 21); “No” (v. 21b). Because his function was to point to Another, he did not want to talk about himself. John had an Elijah-type ministry; a ministry that would come in the “spirit and power of Elijah” (Luke 1:17). Such language denotes an uncompromising stand in preaching the word that God had given him, regardless of the consequences. The Baptist appeared on the scene suddenly and even dressed like Elijah. He sought to turn people back to God as Elijah did in his day. And Malachi had predicted that Elijah would return before Messiah’s coming (Mal. 4:5). Therefore many speculated that John was Elijah. The Prophet was expected because of Deuteronomy 18:15 (referring to Christ; cf. John 1:45). Some wrongly thought that the coming “prophet” was to be distinct from the Messiah (v. 24; 7:40-41).

1:22-23 - John replied that he was not any of the expected prophetic figures. He explained, however, that his ministry was described in the Old Testament and that He was pointing the way to the coming Messiah, whose Kingdom was “at hand” (Matt. 3:1). He was the voice (phone), while Jesus is the Word (logos) and John’s function was one of preparation, and it was carried on in the wilderness/desert regions.

1:24-25 - The Pharisees were an important sect of Judaism. They numbered about 6,000 and were most influential. They held a strict interpretation of the Law and embraced many oral traditions. The Pharisees were the only minor group to survive the Jewish war of A.D. 66-70, and their teachings formed the basis for Talmudic Judaism and they are the ancestors of modern orthodox and Hasidic Jews. Their question to the Baptizer was, in essence, “Since you have no official title, why are you baptizing?”

1:26-27 - John knew that his baptizing work was only anticipatory. He explained that another One was coming who was unknown to them. That coming One is so great that John said he was unworthy to do even the lowliest service for the Messiah such as untying the strap of His sandals.

1:28 - The site of Bethany on the other side of the Jordan River is now unknown. It is not to be confused with another Bethany, home of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, near Jerusalem. As early as A.D. 200, Origen could not find it when he visited Palestine. A probable site is opposite Jericho.

1:29 - John’s second witness started at the beginning of a series of days (cf. “the next day” in vv. 29, 35, 43; and “On the third day” in 2:1) when Jesus’ first disciples were called and came to faith. John identified Jesus as the Lamb of God (cf. 1:36; 1 Peter 1:19). The connection to the Old Testament sacrifices is general as the sin offering which bore the sins of the nation on the Day of Atonement was a goat (Lev. 16) and while daily offerings were normally lambs, they didn’t atone for sin. What John has in view are the Passover lamb (Ex. 12) and Isaiah’s mention of the Messiah’s likeness to a lamb (Isa. 53:7). By the Holy Spirit, John the Baptist saw Jesus as the sacrificial Victim prophesied in the OT who was to die for the sin of the world (cf. Isa. 53:12).

CONCLUSION: Behold the Lamb of God, who was and is God, who took away the sin of the world. The hands that made the world were unknown by most of the world’s inhabitants at the time that John wrote. Those who had the oracles of God (Jews) rejected Him. But by God’s grace, God’s sovereign grace, the few who were and are born of God receive(d) Jesus as Lord and Light because they know that its only in Him that they find true rest.

Labor of Love

This makes me choke up almost every time I hear it . . . or play it:

Is Facebook Keeping You From Prayer?

Introductory Note: Like many other things, Facebook has the potential to distract us from service to Christ and His saints. Having a Facebook account isn't sin per se; but I have noticed how much time some people spend on it; compulsively checking to see if they have a new message, comment, or photo from someone miles away while neglecting the very people sitting right in front of them. So, take heed brethren: if anything masters you, you must let it go of it if you can't master it.

If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire . . . (Mark 9:43 NAU)

If your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame, than, having your two feet, to be cast into hell . . . (Mark 9:45 NAU)

All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. (1 Cor. 6:12 NAU)

All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things edify. (1 Cor. 10:23 NAU)

HT: I'll Be Honest and Lake Road Chapel

Examining The Common Arguments Used to Prove the Imputation of the Active Obedience of Christ

Introduction: This will be the final post in which we discuss the imputation of the active obedience of Christ. Please note that we do not deny the active obedience of Christ. We only question whether the Bible actually teaches that Christ's active obedience is credited to us as part of our justification.

Stating the Question:

What must a person receive from the work of Jesus Christ in order to be accepted by the Father?

The Suggested Answers

• Covenant Theology (hereafter "CT") states that the perfect law keeping of Jesus along with the payment of sins on the cross must be placed, imputed/credited to the individual in order for him to be accepted or justified.

• My position is that the Bible teaches that the only thing that must be received from God by the individual in order for him to be accepted/justified is the perfect payment for sins that Jesus purchased on the cross (cf. Hebrews 10:14).

The Argument from CT: The Imputation of Christ's Active Obedience

The Covenant of Works

• In CT, the Covenant of Works (hereafter CoW) asserts that God made a covenant of works with Adam and all his descendants (cf. Genesis 2:15-17; Hosea 6:7).
• It should be noted that the mention of "Adam" in Hosea 6:7 most likely refers to a location where Israel rebelled against the Lord (cf. Joshua 3:16).
• According to CT, the CoW puts everyone under the obligation to obey God's law perfectly in order for them to be accepted or justified.
• It should be noted that there is no mention of a covenant in the context of Genesis 2:15-17.
• It should also be noted that there is no mention of a CoW in any other place of Scripture.
  

Positive Righteousness

• CT teaches that the forgiveness of sins only puts a man back to square one. In other words, according to this view, a believer needs to have a positive righteousness in order for man to be justified.
• It should be noted that this requirement for justification is nowhere mentioned in Scripture.
  

Proof Texts

Romans 5:19 - "For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous."

• The context of Romans 5:19 is a discussion of the method that God uses to justify or accept us. Paul uses the symmetry of the work of Adam with the work of Jesus Christ.
• Romans 5:19 says the same thing as Romans 5:18. The comparison of the one act of Adam does not refer to all of Adam's life, but his one sin. There the one act of obedience for Jesus was the cross and not His whole life of law keeping. Thus, the "obedience of the One" refers to the cross, not Jesus' entire life of law-keeping plus the cross.
  

Romans 8:3-4 - "For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."

• The righteous requirements of the law were fully met for us by the death of Jesus Christ on the cross.
• There is no mention in this context of the law keeping of Jesus. there is only the mention of the work of Jesus on the cross.
• Our payment for sins by Jesus on the cross removes all of our guilt and we are now perfect in God's sight and righteous and thus accepted or justified.
  

2 Corinthians 5:21 - "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."

• Again, the law-keeping of Jesus is not mentioned in this context. It is only the cross work of Christ that is mentioned.
• In this context, the "righteousness of God" is that standing of perfection that Jesus purchased for us by virtue of His paying for our sins on the cross.

Philippians 3:9 - "and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,"

• Once again, the context of this passage makes no mention of the law-keeping of Jesus.
• When you compare Scripture with Scripture, the other mention of righteousness by faith is found in Romans 3:21-31 and this passage only refers to the cross.

Arguments Against the Imputation of the Active Obedience of Christ

The Locus Classicus of Justification: Romans 3:21-31

But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. 31 Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law.

• The law-keeping of Jesus is not mentioned here, only His death on the cross.
• There would have to be a clear mention of the imputation of the law-keeping of Jesus in another context, but there is none.
• To read into a context the imputation of the law-keeping of Jesus when there is no precedent for doing so is to read into the text something that is not there (eisegesis) rather than pulling out of the text what the text says (exegesis).
• The NKJV and KJV reads at Romans 3:22, "even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. . . . (NKJV)" The bolded portion "and on all" is not found in the ESV, NAU, HCSB, NET, NIV, and most other modern translations because those translations are based upon the Critical Text (NA27, UBS4) version of the Greek New Testament rather than other printed editions that do have it such as the Textus Receptus (NKJV/KJV), the Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine Textform Majority Text, or the Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text by Hodges and Farstad.
  
• While I do favor the Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine Textform Majority Text, the inclusion "and on all" in Romans 3:22 does not teach or imply the imputation of Christ's active obedience. It simply elaborates on what was already said, namely, that the righteousness of God is manifested to all those who believe.

Scripture's Description of the Results of the Cross: Hebrews 10:14-18

For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying, 16 "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says, 17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE." 18 Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin.

• The phrase "He has perfected for all time" in the NASB95 applies to the forgiveness of sins that we receive as a result of the death of Jesus on the cross.
• The believer is viewed as though he has obeyed perfectly, when he has only received the forgiveness of sins.
• The forgiveness of sins gives the believer the standing with God as though he has perfectly obeyed the law of God.

Conclusion: Lessons to be Learned

System-Driven Conclusions: Beware of coming to a Biblical conclusion on the basis of the implications of a theological seystem rather than the results of Scripture in context.

Clear Context: Establish every point of your system with clear Scripture in context.

Reading into Scripture: Beware of reading into a text something that it does not say (eisegesis). Scripture interprets Scripture with the context being the final authority for what the text means.

HT: In-Depth Studies

More on the Imputation of Christ's Active Obedience

Note: What follows below is a continued e-mail discussion I'm having with a Christian friend about the imputation of the active obedience of Christ.

Hi XXXX,

I don't want to debate either brother. I'm just trying to help. This is what iron sharpening iron is all about (Pro. 27:17). Profitable give and take using the word of God to grow in your understanding can be a spiritually beneficial exercise that increases discernment. You asked a question about NCT and the active obedience of Christ in your initial e-mail and I simply tried to explain and clarify the two positions amongst NCT proponents, briefly review the controversy involved, explain where I stand on the issue, and why I take the position that I do. That's all. You asked a few questions in your last e-mail that I'm glad to try to answer:

Would it not be more consistent for NCT to drop the terms "active obedience" and "passive obedience"? These terms are not found in the Bible any more than the "Covenant of Works."

Not necessarily. The word "Trinity" is not in the Bible but it certainly is a Biblical concept based on the exegesis of clear Scriptural passages in context. NCTers don't have to necessarily reject non-Biblical terms just because they aren't in the Bible. Instead, we need to ask if the non-biblical terms are correctly summarizing Biblical teaching. If so, then I certainly don't have a problem using them, as long as a person defines what they mean when they are using those terms; especially when speaking to those who are unfamiliar with the discussion. The terms active and passive obedience are simply a helpful way of distinguishing between Jesus' perfect obedience to the Law of Moses versus His sacrifice on the cross.

3. Do these terms create an unnecessary dichotomy between Christ's obedience in life and in death?

To my knowledge, Christ's perfect life of Law-keeping is never conflated with His death on the cross in the Scriptures. Thus, using these terms may be a helpful way to remind theologians of that.

Does this cause problems in building our theology?

What causes problems is when we build our theology on speculation instead of clear exegesis based on Scripture in context.

Without these terms would it be necessary to find an explicit statement that Christ's obedience is imputed to us?

What is necessary is that we simply believe the word of God like little children trusting a loving father (Matthew 18:1-4).

Christ was obedient as our representative even to the point of death. His willingness to die was the climax of all His obedience.

Agreed, but again, what verse in context clearly teaches that Christ's perfect law-keeping is credited to believers as part of their justification before God?

4. Did Christ enter heaven as a man?

Yes. "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever." (Hebrews 13:8; see also Luke 24:37-53 and Acts 1:3-11)

Is He not redeemed man's representative there?

Yes and amen.

"For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1Timothy 2:5 NAU)

"Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them." (Heb 7:25 NAU)

Did He earn that position? It was His rightful position before, but did He earn it as the head of a redeemed race?

I'm not sure what you mean by "earn". If by "earn" you mean " to receive as return for effort and especially for work done or services rendered" in the sense that His death on the cross can be considered an "effort" that purchased or "earned" sinners, then yes (Revelation 5:9). Christ's perfect law-keeping demonstrated that he "knew no sin" (2 Cor. 5:21) and was the "unblemished and spotless lamb" (1 Peter 1:19), hence "the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). In other words, Christ was truly perfect and His perfect obedience to the Law not only fulfilled God's decree for His life and ministry, but it demonstrated that He was truly perfect. However, I see nowhere in Scripture where it is said that His obedience to the Mosaic Law is credited to a believer as part of their justification.

[Definition for "earn" taken from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/earn]

When I received Christ, I received a person. I have been joined to Christ. I am a beneficiary of His death which made it all possible. I am also a beneficiary of His obedient life which made His death acceptable to God.

Amen! His obedient life made His cross-work acceptable to God and this was proved by His resurrection (Rom. 4:25). You as a penitent sinner get what Jesus earned for you on the cross, which is forgiveness:

"By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, 13 waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET. 14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying, 16 "THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM," He then says, 17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE." 18 Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin." (Hebrews 10:10-18 NAU)

As a High Priest He is our representative in matters pertaining to God. He offers the sacrifice, and yet He is the sacrifice. Christ represented us in more than just His death. That was my previous point when I alluded to His baptism. He is a sympathetic High Priest who identified with us in His earthly sufferings.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Christ represented us in more than just His death." If you mean that He kept the Law that we couldn't keep; then that's true, but if you mean that He somehow earned a "positive righteousness" that Adam failed to earn because Adam broke the so-called "probationary period" associated with Covenant Theology's Covenant of Works, then (1) where is any of this contained in Scripture and (2) again, where does the Bible tell us that His perfect law-keeping is imputed to us in order to give us a "positive righteousness" that we supposedly must have to be justified before God? The idea of "positive righteousness" comes from the concept of the Covenant of Works. To my knowledge, Scripture never says that I have to have "positive righteousness" before God, it only says that I have to be forgiven of my sins:

"But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him." (Romans 5:8-9 NAU)

"For this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins." (Matthew 26:28 NAU)

"In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses . . ." (Ephesians 1:7 NAU)

"And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. 23 Therefore it was necessary for the copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself." (Heb 9:22-26 NAU)
The above verses are clear that the death (i.e., "blood") of Christ is grounds for our forgiveness. To my knowledge, there is nothing mentioned in Scripture of needing to have a "positive righteousness" before God in order to complete our justification.

Would you agree that Christ fulfilled both the positive and negative demands of the law? He took upon Himself the curse of the law but fulfilled the righteous requirements of the law.

Amen!

"Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. 3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit." (Romans 8:1-4 NAU)

The righteous requirements of the law were fully met for us by the death of Jesus Christ on the cross. There is no mention in this context of the law keeping of Jesus. There is only the mention of the work of Jesus on the cross. Our payment for sins by Jesus on the cross removes all of our guilt and we are now perfect in God’s sight and righteous and therefore accepted or justified.

"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us-- for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE " 14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." (Galatians 3:13-14 NAU)

"He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." (2 Cor. 5:21 NAU)

The Old Covenant can be set aside because all of the terms have been met. He was put under the scrutiny of the law and He was proved righteous. Is that not the same righteousness that was imputed to us?

No, according to Scripture, we get credited to us what Christ did on the cross, which is forgiveness. It is true that He was proved righteous by His perfect life, but that perfect life is not imputed to us in our justification. We get the benefits of His cross-work, which is forgiveness, not His righteous life. To conflate the two and say that it all is credited to us is to go beyond what is written (Proverbs 30:5-6; 1 Corinthians 4:6). Remember, that in the context of Romans 5:12-19 we have a discussion of the method that God uses to justify or accept us. Paul parallels the work of Adam with the work of Jesus Christ. Romans 5:19 parallels Romans 5:18. The comparison of the one act of Adam does not refer to all of Adam's life. There the one act of obedience for Jesus was the cross and not His whole life of law keeping.

Thus, Christ's cross-work is imputed to us, not His whole life of perfect law keeping. Such an understanding magnifies His cross work while avoiding speculation.

God bless!

Behold the Lamb - Part I

Introduction: In John chapter one, we have several amazing declarations about Jesus, two of which I will focus on here. The first will be that not only is Jesus the Son of God but is also God the Son, the very Creator of all things (1:1-3, 10). The second is that Jesus is not only God the Son, but that God the Son became a man and died for those whose names were written in the Lamb's book of life (Revelation 13:8). Jesus was the final sacrifice; a "sacrificial lamb" that would be the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but for those of the whole world (1 John 2:2).

I. God The Son

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. 6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. (John 1:1-9 NAU)

Going back to Genesis: John 1:1a reads "In the beginning . . ." (Gk: en arche). The phrase "In the beginning" is meant to direct your mind back to Genesis 1:1, where God (Elohim, Heb. plural word for "God"), created the heaven and the earth. Now this is an interesting verse, because Genesis 1:1 doesn't say that El (singular Heb. for "God") created the heavens and the earth, but that Elohim (plural Heb. word lit. translated "Gods") created the heavens and the earth. To be sure to avoid polytheism, the Spirit caused Moses to use the third person singular Hebrew word translated "created" in Genesis 1:1 to clearly indicate that only one entity created the universe; i.e., one God. However, the use of the plural Elohim (lit. Heb. "Gods") denotes that this one entity that created the universe was a composite unity! Thus, we have in the very first verse of the Bible a declaration of the uniplurality of God! (cf. Gen. 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; 18:1-2ff; 19:1ff; Joshua 24:19).

Jesus has always been: The English word "was" in John 1:1a's "In the beginning was the Word" is the Greek word en, which is a small but very important word. This word is an imperfect active third person singular verb. John's use of the imperfect tense here means that Jesus was already in existence when the universe began [Daniel Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996) 412-413]. Thus, the little word "was" points to the eternal existence of Jesus (cf. Micah 5:2).

Jesus has always been in relationship with the Father: John 1:1b reads "and the Word was with God" (Gk. kai ho logos en pros ton theon); meaning, "and the Word was toward/facing the God" [i.e., in a face-to-face relationship with God the Father]. The translator's note number 2 in the NET Bible says this:

The preposition pros . . . implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, "Pros . . . means more than meta, or para, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another" ("The Gospel of St. John," The Expositor's Greek Testament, 1:684). [NET, 1888. Bold mine for emphasis]

This intimate relationship was occurring within the Godhead before the world existed (John 17:5). Since the Father was greater than Jesus in His function within the Godhead (14:28), Jesus was sent by the Father (5:36-37; 6:44; 8:16, 18), always does the will of the Father (6:38), only speaks what He is taught by the Father (8:28; 12:49), and communes with the Father (Matthew 14:23; Luke 6:12; John 6:15; 17:1-26). Jesus is the quintessential example of having an intimate, personal relationship with the Father.

Jesus has always been God: The Son of God is God the Son. Though the Father is greater than Jesus as to His role and function (John 14:28), Jesus is the Creator of all things:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-- all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18 He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. 19 For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him (Colossians 1:15-19)

For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, 10 and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority; (Colossians 2:9-10)

And back to John 1:2-3. Notice that John 1:2 is like John 1:1b!

He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. (John 1:2-3)

There has never been a time when Christ was not because He is God. Truly, as John 1:1c states, "the word was God". See also Psalm 90:2; Isaiah 9:6; 41:4; 44:6; 48:12; Matthew 2:11; 14:33; 22:41-46; 28:17; Mark 14:60-64 cf. Daniel 7:13; John 5:18; 8:24; 8:58 cf. Isaiah 41:4; 43:10, 13; 48:12 [Exodus 3:14]; John 17:5; Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:1-13 cf. Psalm 102:25-26, 110:1 cf. Matthew 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42; Acts 2:34; 2 Peter 1:1; Revelation 1:8; 1:17-18; 22:13. All things have been created by Christ and "of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen." (Romans 11:36 NKJV)

Jesus is the Life and the Light: Naturally, the God that created the world possesses life in Himself and gives that spiritual life to all who believe:

In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. (John 1:4-5)

"[C]omprehend" (katalambano) in the context of verse 5 either means "to overpower, gain control over, take over" (so ESV, HCSB, NET, i.e., John 12:35); or if referring to the intellectual ability, it means "to find out about, to comprehend, to understand (so NAU, KJV, NKJV, NIV, i.e., John 12:46; 1 John 2:11; Romans 8:7-8; 1 Corinthians 2:14). Obviously, both views are taught by the apostle John, but I lean towards the first one since John uses the exact same Greek verb in John 12:35 in the context of speaking about "the Light",

So Jesus said to them, "For a little while longer the Light is among you. Walk while you have the Light, so that darkness will not overtake you; he who walks in the darkness does not know where he goes."

He says earlier about "the life":

For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself" (John 5:26)

Not only is Jesus "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), but the Father has given the Son the ability to have life in Himself, this life is what Jesus calls "the Light of life". Jesus calls Himself "the Light of the world" and the spiritual darkness of this world cannot overpower that Light!

Then Jesus again spoke to them, saying, "I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life." (John 8:12)

Those who have the "Light of Life" can say the following:

But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God's OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 for you once were NOT A PEOPLE, but now you are THE PEOPLE OF GOD; you had NOT RECEIVED MERCY, but now you have RECEIVED MERCY. (1 Peter 2:9-10)

Those who have the "Light of Life" will do the following:

"But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God." (John 3:21)

"I have come as Light into the world, so that everyone who believes in Me will not remain in darkness. (John 12:46)

". . . walk as children of Light 9 (for the fruit of the Light consists in all goodness and righteousness and truth) . . ." (Ephesians 5:8-9)

" . . . if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin." (1 John 1:7)

"On the other hand, I am writing a new commandment to you, which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true Light is already shining. 9 The one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now. 10 The one who loves his brother abides in the Light and there is no cause for stumbling in him. 11 But the one who hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his eyes." (1 John 2:8-11)

John the Baptist wasn't that Light, but testified about Him even unto death (Isaiah 40:3; Mark 6:14-29). John was the one preparing the way for the Light so that the world could be "enlightened".

There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. (John 1:6-9)

The Light of Christ is Christ. He illumines His people spiritually now, and will illumine them spiritually and physically in the New Jerusalem. In the New Jerusalem, we will be illuminated by the "lamp of the Lamb":

I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God has illumined it, and its lamp is the Lamb. 24 The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it. 25 In the daytime (for there will be no night there) its gates will never be closed; 26 and they will bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it; 27 and nothing unclean, and no one who practices abomination and lying, shall ever come into it, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life. (Revelation 21:22-27)

And there will no longer be any night; and they will not have need of the light of a lamp nor the light of the sun, because the Lord God will illumine them; and they will reign forever and ever. (Revelation 22:5)

IN CONCLUSION, the great God and Savior, Christ Jesus is, and was, and is to come, and will forever be the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. The Lamb created the universe and rules over it as sovereign (Colossians 1:15-17) . That may blow the minds of some, but it is an opportunity for all believers to say "Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!" (Rom 11:33) Indeed, may we truly, "Behold the Lamb!" (John 1:29)

Is Christ's Perfect Law-Keeping Credited to the Believer?

Introduction: I am interacting with a Christian friend about whether or not Scripture teaches that Christ's perfect keeping of Moses' Law (i.e., His active obedience) is credited to believers as part of their justification. He affirms that it does and I deny it. Our initial conversation started in the context of discussing New Covenant Theology, hence the use of the initials "NCT". See our friendly interaction below.

Interaction

Hey Dustin,

. . . . I've been looking at NCT to see if it is a theology which I can subscribe to. Most of it looks pretty solid but I guess that I have a few concerns. NCT does not believe in the "active obedience of Christ", but they believe in the "passive obedience to Christ." Do you hold to this position? Don't read any motives into my email; there are none. I'm just curious. I have always believed that Christ fulfilled the law in our behalf. I know that He identified Himself with humanity in His death but didn't He do the same in His life? He took our sins upon Himself and imputed His righteousness to us. He is able to make us righteous because of His deity; I agree with that. But wasn't He able to do that because He satisfied all of God's demands for righteousness?

Am I misunderstanding NCT's position?

Thanks,

XXXXX

My first response:

Hi XXXX,

Great to hear from you brother. . . .

Re: the active obedience of Christ, you have some great questions/concerns. No NCT proponent that I'm aware of denies the active obedience of Christ outright because such a view denies imputation in toto. Such a view would be rank heresy. All adherents to NCT believe in Christ's active obedience (i.e., that He had to keep the law perfectly) in order to qualify as the "lamb of God" who would die as an acceptable and perfect sacrifice for sinners. The actual issue that needs to be discussed is this question:

Was Christ's life of perfect law-keeping (i.e., His active obedience) credited to us as part of our justification or are we credited righteous by virtue of only his work on the cross (His passive obedience)?

Some NCT adherents deny that Christ's active obedience is credited to us as part of our justification because they don't believe that they can find a clear verse in context in their Bibles that teaches it. However, please hear me well: No NCT adherent denies imputation altogether nor do any of them deny the active obedience of Christ. I emphasize this because some of them have been accused of such even though it isn't true. Those folks who have been accused of such (i.e., the NCT guys at www.ids.org) have clearly put in print what they believe and why they believe it, but instead of their detractors answering their arguments from Scripture, they have engaged in name-calling. Such is not the Spirit of Christ. Again, all NCT proponents adhere at least to the imputation of Christ's passive obedience as grounds for a believer's justification before God. They would say that a denial of imputation in toto is heretical as much as any Calvinist would. Again, what some (but not all) NCT adherents are questioning is whether or not the Bible clearly teaches that Christ's life of perfect law-keeping is credited to believers as part of their justification. This is a debate amongst NCT adherents. However, this has also been a debate amongst some Calvinistic dispensationalists and early covenant theologians. A few of the framers of the Westminster Confession of Faith denied the imputation of Christ's active obedience to the believer as part of their justification but wholeheartedly affirmed the imputation of his passive obedience.

So, to recap, no NCT proponent denies the active obedience of Christ nor imputation altogether. What some of them are questioning is whether that active obedience is credited to us as part of our justification. After studying this issue from the original languages for about three months, I agree with those who deny that Christ's active obedience is credited to us as part of our justification. I too can't find it in my Bible, although I'm willing to listen to a brother who thinks he may have a text in context that proves me wrong. When I read Scripture, I see that Christ's passive obedience is what is credited to me as my justification before God (i.e., Hebrews 10:14, etc.). However, I am willing to listen to those who think otherwise, for indeed, "iron sharpens iron" (Pro. 27:17).

See attached .pdf document that goes through each verse that supposedly teaches the imputation of the active obedience of Christ. If you have any questions, feel free to call or e-mail me. It was great hearing from you brother!

My Christian Friend's First Response:

I'm planning on getting back with you but I am slammed right now. I tend to side with the old dead guys for now. I know that I am not going to tell you anything that you don't already know but here are my reasons:

We have the parallels between Adam and Christ; we die because of one and live due to the other one. Surely, if Christ is the second Adam, he represents us in life as well as death.

We are free from the law because Christ took upon Himself the curse of the law but also because He fulfilled every aspect of the law.

If we are free from the law it is only because He fulfilled it as our representative. If He is our representative, then we receive credit for what he accomplished.

Christ even submitted Himself to John's baptism to identify Himself with His people. He was free from sin as God but he became obedient as a man.

Piper argues that the exegetical evidence lies with Christ's "one act of obedience" that justifies us. He believes that His "one act" encompasses His life and death. I tend to agree based on the idea of representation, identification, and relationship.

It seems like a logical deduction to me but I don't claim to be the sharpest tool in the shed either.

Regards brother!

My Second Response:

Hi XXXX,

Great to hear from you again brother. Here are a few things that you can think about in response:

You said,

We have the parallels between Adam and Christ; we die because of one and live due to the other one.

There is no question about the above sentence. The question(s) should be "What are the specific parallels between Adam and Christ in Romans 5? In what specific way(s) are the parallels between them significant and in what way do those parallels affect my justification?" I believe the covenant theologian is reading something into the text that simply isn't there because of his view of the Covenant of Works (CoW) coloring the way he reads the rest of Scripture. See my short article on the CoW here.

Surely, if Christ is the second Adam, he represents us in life as well as death.

I think that what you mean to say if you are trying to support the imputation of Christ's active obedience is this: "Surely if Christ is the second Adam, His perfect law-keeping is credited to us as part of our justification and not just his sacrificial death on the cross." Am I correctly understanding you to be saying this? If so, then my question has been all along: where is the exegetical evidence from Scripture to prove this?

We are free from the law because Christ took upon Himself the curse of the law but also because He fulfilled every aspect of the law.

Indeed, we are free from the law by virtue of Christ's fulfillment of it in His life and culminating sacrifice; but where does the Bible clearly teach that His perfect law-keeping is credited to believers as part of their justification?

If we are free from the law it is only because He fulfilled it as our representative. If He is our representative, then we receive credit for what he accomplished.

I thank God that He was our representative, viz., that He kept the law perfectly, and fulfilled it. But again, where does the Bible clearly teach that His perfect law-keeping is credited to believers as part of their justification?

Christ even submitted Himself to John's baptism to identify Himself with His people. He was free from sin as God but he became obedient as a man.

Right, but how does this prove that His perfect law-keeping is credited to believers as part of their justification?

Piper argues that the exegetical evidence lies with Christ's "one act of obedience" that justifies us. He believes that His "one act" encompasses His life and death. I tend to agree based on the idea of representation, identification, and relationship.

I so appreciate and admire John Piper. Our church recommends many of his books and our congregation has benefited so much from his teaching. However, his interpretation of Rom. 5:18-19 equates the one sin of Adam with Jesus' entire life of perfect law-keeping that culminated in His death. My view is that this interpretation destroys the parallel that Paul has created. To be a true parallel, Piper's interpretation would need to teach (and prove from Scripture) that Adam's entire life leading up to his sin in the garden is credited to the unbeliever as part of their condemnation. However, no Reformed theologian that I know of teaches this nor does it jive with what Paul was teaching in Romans 5:18-19. Paul states, So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. 19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. (Rom 5:18-19 NAU)

Note that through Adam's one sin the entire human race is condemned. Note also that Paul makes an exact parallel by teaching that it is through Christ's one act of righteousness that "all men" are justified. This one act of righteousness is Christ's death on the cross counteracting the effects of Adam's one transgression, which was his sin in the garden. Obviously verse 18's reference to Adam isn't referring to his entire righteous life before his sin plus his sin in the garden. That would make no sense whatsoever given the context of Romans 5 or the rest of Scripture, but to maintain Piper's parallel, that would have to be the interpretation. Thus, it fits the context much better to see Adam's one sin in the garden as being countered by Christ's one act of righteousness, viz., His perfect sacrifice on the cross.

Here's a paper that explains in detail what I'm trying to say: Examining the Imputation of the Active Obedience of Christ

God bless you as you celebrate Christ's first advent!