By ABRAHAM BOOTH.
How shall sinful man be just with God? is a question of the most interesting nature to every child of Adam. A question which, notwithstanding its infinite importance, could never have been resolved by all the reason of men, nor by all the penetration of angels, if the Lord of heaven and earth had not exercised and manifested reigning grace, towards his disobedient and rebellious creatures. But, with the Bible in his hand, and the gospel in view, the mere infant in religious knowledge and in Christian experience is at no loss for an answer; for “the wayfaring man, though a fool, shall not err therein.” Nay, such is the pleasure of God, that he frequently reveals this truth in its glory, to those who are esteemed fools by the haughty sons of science, that no flesh might have the least ground of boasting.
Justification is a forensic term, and signifies the declaring, or the pronouncing a person righteous according to law. Justification is not making a person righteous, by a real, inherent change from sin to holiness, in which the nature of sanctification consists; but it is the act of a judge, pronouncing the party acquitted from all judicial charges. That the blessing of which we speak does not consist in a real change from sin to holiness, will further appear from considering, that justification is diametrically opposite to condemnation. Now the sentence of condemnation is never supposed to make the person criminal on whom it is pronounced. There is no infusion of evil qualities into the culprit’s mind; nor is he made guilty, either in the eye of the public, or in his own estimation. But being arraigned as a criminal, and proved guilty of a capital offence, according to the tenor of that law by which he is tried, he is esteemed worthy of death, and condemned accordingly. So, in justification; the subject of it is pronounced righteous in the eye of the law, is deemed worthy to live, and his right to life is declared. Hence that justification of which the Scripture speaks, is now the subject of our inquiry, is called the justification of life. That the words justify, justified, and justification are used by the sacred writers in a forensic sense, and as opposed to the words condemn, condemned, and condemnation, is manifest to every attentive reader.
To justify, is evidently a divine prerogative. “It is God that justifieth.” That Sovereign Being against whom we have so greatly offended, whose law we have broken by ten thousand acts of rebellion against him, has, in the way of his own appointment, the sole right of acquitting the guilty, and of pronouncing them righteous. Jehovah, whose judgment is always according to truth, is the Justifier of all that believe in Jesus. Here grace reigns. For the infinitely wise God appoints the way; the righteous and merciful God provides the means, and (let the sacred name be repeatedly mentioned with profound reverence) the God of all grace imputes the righteousness and pronounces the sinner acquitted, in perfect agreement with the demands of his violated law, and the right of his offended justice.
Superlatively great, glorious, and divine, is the blessing of justification. Most ardently to be sought, most thankfully to be enjoyed. Can any one, conscious of possessing it, cease to exalt in God his Justifier, who, by being so, is also the God of his praise? Or, who that is convinced of his guilty, condemned condition, can cease to pray and most earnestly to long for it? O, sinner! are you insensible to the worth of this blessing, and supinely negligent about it? Be assured, then, that you are in your sins, and under condemnation. The justification of which we treat is far from you. And what, if you should never be justified? What, if your affronted Sovereign should swear in his wrath, that he will never forgive, never accept you; but that you shall die under the curse already passed upon you? In such a case, though awful beyond conception, what could you have to object? You have trampled his authority under your feet, and cherished a spirit of the most malignant enmity against him. Your conscience testifies, that you have neither obeyed his law, nor loved his gospel; that you have had little concern whether he was pleased or offended, so that you could but gratify your impetuous lusts, and obtain your sordid purposes. You have, it may be, never considered the death of the Son of God as worthy of your serious notice; though it is the greatest and most wonderful event that ever took place in the universe, and the only thing that can save you from final condemnation. Remember, thoughtless reader! that you have a cause to be tried at the bar of God, and before Jehovah your Judge, which involves your all. An eternal hell to be suffered, or an eternal heaven to be enjoyed, will be the awful or the glorious consequence of being cast or acquitted in judgment. Can you rest, then, can you take any comfort, while entirely ignorant whether the Judge immortal will absolve or condemn you? Consider the ground on which you stand, and the reason of that hope which is in you. A mistake about the way of acceptance with God will be attended with the utmost danger; such danger that, where it is final, inevitable and eternal ruin must be the consequence. May the God of grace and the Father of lights awaken the sleepy consciences of the inconsiderate, into an earnest solicitude about it! and may he direct the steps of such as are anxiously inquiring, “How shall a man be just with God?”
The persons to whom the wonderful favour is granted, are sinners and ungodly. For thus runs the Divine declaration, “To him that worketh is the reward” of justification, and of eternal life as connected with it, “not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth—whom? the righteous? the holy? the eminently pious? Nay, verily, but the “UNGODLY”; “his faith,” or that in which he believes, “is counted unto him for righteousness.” From this remarkable text we learn, that the subjects of justification, considered in themselves, are not only destitute of a perfect righteousness, but have performed no good works at all. Nor are they only described as having performed no good works, but also as being destitute of every heavenly quality and righteous disposition. They are denominated and considered as ungodly when the blessing is bestowed upon them. The mere sinner, the ungodly person, he “that worketh not,” is the subject on whom grace is magnified; toward whom grace reigns in justification. Thus it is written in those sacred canons of our faith and practice which are unalterable.
That the mere sinner is the subject of justification, appears from hence. The Spirit of God speaking in the Scripture repeatedly declares, that we are justified by grace. But grace, as already observed, stands in direct opposition to works; all works and worthiness of every kind and of every degree. Whoever therefore is justified by grace, is considered as absolutely unworthy, in that very instant when the glorious blessing is vouchsafed to him. This momentous truth is yet more strongly expressed in the following emphatical words: “Being justified freely by his grace.” Freely by grace. If these words do not prove that justification is entirely free, without the least regard to any supposed holy qualities in the sinner, or any good works performed by him, antecedent to his being possessed of the unspeakable favour; I think it is impossible to express any such thing. The most fruitful invention would be at a loss to contrive a form of words better adapted to express the communication of any benefit in a way of mere favour. This text informs us that, in regard to God, justification is an act of pure, unmixed grace; exclusive of all good works, and absolutely independent on any such thing as human worthiness; and, in respect of us, that it is entirely without cause; for so the adverb in the original signifies. The word “freely,” does not so immediately respect, either the blessing itself, or the giver, as it does the state and character of the persons to whom the inestimable blessing is granted. It denotes that there is no cause in them, why they should be thus treated by a righteous God. In this sense the original word is used and translated in the following passage: They hated me without a cause (John 15:25). Was the holy Jesus hated, by the malevolent Jews, without the least cause in himself? Certainly: to assert the contrary would be a contradiction of the sacred text, and blasphemy against the Son of God. The person, therefore, that is justified freely by grace, is accepted without any cause in himself. Nothing in him, or about him, is considered by the sovereign Dispenser of every favour, when he bestows the blessing, as preparing or qualifying for it.
Hence it appears, that if we regarded the persons who are justified, and their state, prior to the enjoyment of this immensely glorious privilege; Divine grace appears and reigns in all its glory: there being no conditions, or pre-requisites, no terms to be fulfilled, or good qualities to be obtained, either with or without the Divine assistance, in order to a full discharge before the eternal Judge. Justification is a blessing of pure grace, as well as transcendently excellent. So the true believer esteems it, and as such rejoices in it. In this, as in every other part of his salvation, he is willing to be nothing, less than nothing; that grace may reign, that grace may be all in all.
Having considered the antecedent state of the person whom God justifies, and the freeness with which the important blessing is bestowed upon him; the way appointed in the eternal counsels and revealed in the everlasting gospel, in which the condemned criminal may be honourably acquitted before the Divine tribunal, and accepted as righteous, now demands our attentive regard. Here we behold immaculate holiness and strict justice harmonizing with tenderest mercy and freest favour. Nor can it be otherwise. The Judge of all the earth must do right. He can acquit none without a complete righteousness. For to justify a person, and judicially to pronounce him righteous, are the same thing. Were a person to be justified without a righteousness, the judgment would not be according to truth; it would be a false and unrighteous sentence.
That righteousness by which we are justified must be perfect; must be equal to the demands of that law, according to which the sovereign Judge proceeds in our justification. Every judge, it is evident, must have some rule by which to proceed in his judicial capacity. This rule is the law. To talk of passing judgment, without having any regard to law, is absurd, and involves a contradiction. For, to judge, is nothing else but to determine whether the object of judgment be according to rule. A judge first considers what is fact, and then, comparing the fact with the rule of action, he pronounces it right or wrong, and approves or condemns the performer of it.
Many persons talk of, I know not what, conditions of justification; some supposing one thing, and some another, to be the condition of it. But hence it appears, that the only condition of our acceptance with God, is a perfect righteousness. This the law requires; nor does the gospel substitute another. For as the Divine law can have no more, so it will admit of no less. Those persons, therefore, who think of any thing short of complete obedience being sufficient, let them call the supposed condition by what name they please, may do well to consider, how they can free themselves from the charge of Antinomianism. (The doctrine that faith renders the Christian free from obligation to the moral law.) For the gospel does not, in any degree, make void the law. So far from it, that the voice of the gospel and the death of Christ demonstrate Jehovah to be absolutely inflexible, as to all that his holy law requires or forbids. The way in which sinners are justified, does not in the least infringe on its rights. For, considered as moral, it is unalterable and eternal. Perfect obedience was demanded by it of man, while in a state of innocence, as the condition of life. Perfect obedience is still required of man, though in a state of apostasy. And perfect obedience it must have, either at our own, or a surety’s hand, or we must fall eternally under its curse.
Where then shall we find, or how shall we obtain a justifying righteousness? Shall we apply, with diligence and zeal, to the performance of duty, in order to attain the desired end? Such a procedure, though it might flatter our pride, would betray our ignorance, disappoint our hopes, and issue in eternal ruin. The apostle of the Gentiles, when professedly handling the doctrine of justification, positively affirms and strongly proves that there is no acceptance with God by the works of the law. Now, the works of the law are those duties of piety and of humanity which the law requires. Nor can any acceptable obedience be performed, which is not required by that law which demands perfect love to God, and perfect love to man. So that when the infallible teacher excludes the works of the law from having any concern in our justification, he entirely rejects all our works, all our duties of every kind. But let us hear his words and consider their import.
By the deeds of the law, by our own obedience to it, however sincere, shall no flesh be justified, accepted of God, and pronounced righteous in his sight. The reason is evident; for by the law is the knowledge of sin, as an opposition to the Divine revealed will, and as deserving an everlasting curse. But if so, it is absolutely impossible that we should be justified by it; for a law which proves us guilty, is far from pronouncing us righteous in the eye of the lawgiver. “The law entered,” was promulgated at Sinai, “that the offence might abound,” that the abundance of our iniquities might be manifested, and their exceeding sinfulness appear. “The law worketh wrath.” It reveals the wrath of God against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. It fastens a charge of guilt on the criminal, and works a sense of deserved wrath in his conscience. Far from justifying any offender, it denounces utter destruction against him, and unsheathes the sword of vengeance. “As many as are of the works of the law”; who do their best endeavours to keep it, and are looking for justification by it; are—what? In a promising way to obtain acceptance with God, and to be rewarded with life eternal? quite the reverse. They are under a dreadful curse. “For it is written” by the pen of infallibility, and is awfully expressive of Jehovah’s unchangeable purpose: “Cursed is every one,” without any respect of persons, without any regard to please, “that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” From this alarming text we learn that there never was, nor can be any acceptance with God, without a perfect obedience—an obedience, perfect in its principle, complete in all its parts, and without the least interruption in thought, word and deed. For he who fails in one point, breaks the law, is guilty before God, and exposed to ruin.
The apostle argues in proof of his point, from the opposition there is between living by faith, and living by the works of the law. These are his words: “That no man,” however excellent his moral character, however righteous in his own esteem, “is justified by” his own obedience to “the law in the sight of God, it is evident: For the just,” the truly righteous and justified person, “shall live by faith. And,” that he does not obtain the character, or enjoy the blessedness connected with it, in virtue of his own obedience, appears from hence; “the law is not of faith”; it makes no mention of a Redeemer, or of believing in him. “But,” its uniform language is, “the man that doeth them”; that punctually performs the duties enjoined, and entirely avoids the things prohibited; he, and he only, “shall live in them”; shall find acceptance and enjoy peace.
The inspired penman, ever jealous of his Master’s honour, ever concerned for the glory of Divine grace, argues from an absurdity; an absurdity, obvious to the meanest capacity, and shocking to every mind that has the least esteem for the Lord Redeemer. “If righteousness come by the law”; if men either were or could be justified by their own duties and endeavours, “then” it would inevitably follow that “Christ is dead in vain”; all his obedience and all his sufferings were useless things; there was no occasion for them. Again, “If they which are of the law be heirs”; if they who rely on their own legal performances be accepted of God, and entitled to the heavenly inheritance; “faith” in a dying Redeemer “is made” entirely “void, and the promise” of life by him is “made of none effect.”
Nor are the works of the law, which Paul so expressly and repeatedly excludes from having any concern in our justification, to be understood only of an obedience to those positive institutions of Jehovah, which, being of a temporary kind, were abrogated by the death of Christ. His design was to set aside all our obedience to every law; all our works and duties of every kind. That this was his intention, appears from the following considerations. The apostle excludes “all works” in general. “God imputeth righteousness without works—By grace ye are saved—not of works—If by grace, then it is no more of works. Not by works of righteousness which we have done—Who hath saved us—not according to our works.” He does not only say, that we are not justified by the works of the law; but also, that we are not justified by works, performances, duties, obedience, in general, what rule soever may be their object, or however they may be denominated. He does not give the least hint, as if he meant only to exclude the works of some particular law or duties of some particular kind, in contradiction to others. And when the Spirit of God declares, without limiting the phrase to any particular kind of duties, that we are not justified by works; what authority have we to restrain the sense to this or that sort of works, to the exclusion of others? For as all duties performed in obedience to a law are works, whether the law be considered as moral or ceremonial, old or new; so all works, whatever they be, are here excluded without any exception.
Nor is faith itself our righteousness, or that for the sake of which are justified. For though believers are said to be justified by faith, yet not for faith, That faith is not our righteousness, is evident from the following considerations. No man’s faith is perfect; and if it were, it would not be equal to the demands of the Divine law. It could not, therefore, without an error in judgment, be accounted a complete righteousness. But the judgment of God, as before proved, is according to truth, and according to the rights of his law. That obedience by which a sinner is justified, is called “the righteousness of faith; righteousness by faith”; and is represented as “revealed to faith”; consequently, it cannot be faith itself. Faith, in the business of justification, stands opposed to all works. “To him that worketh not, but believeth.” Now if it were our justifying righteousness, to consider it in such a light would be highly improper. For, in such a connection, it falls under the consideration of a work, a condition, on the performance of which our acceptance with God is manifestly suspended. If faith itself be that on account of which we are accepted, then some believers are justified by a more, and some by a less perfect righteousness, in exact proportion to the strength or weakness of their faith. “He was strong in faith—O ye of little faith.” Consequently, either more of justice and less of grace must appear in the justification of some, than in that of others; or else it must be concluded that some are more fully justified than others; each of which is absurd. That which is “the end of the law,” is our righteousness; which, certainly, is not faith, but the obedience of our exalted Substitute. “Christ is the end of the law, for righteousness, to every one that believeth.” That righteousness by which many are justified, is the obedience of ONE. The believer, therefore, is not justified for the sake of his own faith; for then there must be as many distinct righteousnesses, as there are justified persons. Were faith itself our justifying righteousness, we might, without either pride or folly, depend upon it, plead it before God, and rejoice in it. For whatever the Most High is pleased to accept as our justifying righteousness, may be pleaded before him as such. Whatever may be so pleaded must be esteemed a proper ground of our confidence—may be used as an argument in prayer at the throne of grace, and as the foundation of our expecting final happiness; and whatever is the ground of our confidence, must be the source of our spiritual joy. So that, according to this hypothesis, not Christ, but faith, is the capital thing; the object to which we must look. The glorious Redeemer and his undertaking are only considered as auxiliaries in the affair of justification; while faith is the grand requisite, as it renders Immanuel’s work effectual, and crowns the whole. To understand those words, “Faith was imputed to him for righteousness,” in the Arminian sense, is to contradict the whole scope and design of the apostle’s argumentation, when treating about the justification of sinners. For his main design is to prove, that the eternal Sovereign justifies freely; without any cause in the creature. But, according to this hypothesis, faith is the condition; is the cause; is that on account of which we are accepted as righteous. For it is considered under the formal notion of righteousness. Hence it appears, that it is not faith itself, but its glorious Object, which Paul intends, when he speaks of faith being imputed for righteousness.
If then the subject of justification be, in himself, ungodly; if the Supreme Governor of the world neither will nor can justify any without a perfect righteousness; and if such a righteousness cannot possibly be found in our own performances, nor in faith itself, nor in any of the graces or fruits of the Holy Spirit; it is absolutely necessary that righteousness, wrought out by a substitute, should be imputed to us, or placed to our account.
That we are not justified by a personal, but by an imputed righteousness appears from the Scripture with superior evidence. There the doctrine is taught in the plainest terms; there the important truth is set in the strongest light. It was in this way that Jehovah justified Abraham, the Father of the faithful; to the consideration of which notable example of Divine grace and free acceptance Paul referred his Jewish brethren for their conviction, and for the instruction of all who should at any time inquire after the methods of grace. Abraham was the renowned progenitor of the Israelitish nation; and he was honoured with that exalted character, “the friend of God.” His resignation and faith, his obedience, and piety, stand on everlasting record. Few, among all the saints, ever manifested so cheerful a submission to the Divine will, or so unreserved a confidence in the Divine promise. No sooner did the true God signify his will to Abraham, that he should leave his native country and his father’s house, that he “obeyed; and went out, not knowing whither he went.” No sooner did the Great Possessor of heaven and earth intimate his sovereign pleasure, than he should sacrifice his only son, his Isaac, whom he loved, that he readily submitted; though the heavenly mandate was quite unprecedented, and the thought of performing it enough, one would think, to astonish and confound him. Yet these acts of obedience, though highly pleasing to God, and such as will be had in everlasting remembrance, were neither the cause, nor the condition, of his justification. They, indeed, afforded the noblest testimony that his faith was genuine, and his piety real; and, in that sense, he was “justified,” or declared righteous, “by his works.” But they were far from being placed to his account in the article of Divine acceptance. “For if Abraham was justified by” his own “works,” though amazingly great, and in one instance quite unparalleled; “he hath whereof to glory,” in comparison with others, who come far short of that elevated pitch of obedience to which he arrived. “But” though he might, on that supposition, have gloried before his fellow-creatures, yet “not before God. For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed” the promise of “God,” concerning the Messiah and the work to be accomplished by him, “and it was counted unto him for righteousness.” Nor was the method of Divine proceeding, in the justification of this illustrious patriarch, any way singular. In this respect he had no exclusive privilege. For it is added, “Now it was not written,” in the ancient Scriptures, “for his sake alone, that it,” the work of a dying and rising Redeemer, “was imputed to him; but for us also,” Whether Jews or Gentiles, “to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on Him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead.” For “they which be of faith, are blessed with faithful Abraham.” Now if a person of such victorious faith, exalted piety, and amazing obedience as he was, did not obtain acceptance with God on account of his own duties, but by an imputed righteousness; who shall pretend to an interest in the heavenly blessing, in virtue of his own sincere endeavours, or pious performances?—performances not fit to be named, in comparison with those that adorned the conduct and character of “Jehovah’s Friend.”
The apostle having shown in what way the Father of the chosen tribes was justified before the King immortal; and having intimated, that the patriarch was considered as an “ungodly” person, as one who had “no good works,” when the Lord imputed righteousness to him, in order to his final acceptance; to illustrate and confirm the momentous truth, he presents his reader with a description that David gives of the truly blessed man. And how does the royal psalmist describe him? To what does he attribute his acceptance with God? To an inherent, or to an imputed righteousness? Does he represent him as attaining the happy state, and as enjoying the precious privilege, in consequence of performing sincere obedience, and of keeping the law to the best of his power? No such thing. His words are, “Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.” The blessed man is here described as one who is, in himself, a polluted creature, and a guilty criminal. As one who, before grace made the difference, was on a level with the rest of mankind; equally unworthy, and equally wretched; and the sacred penman informs us, that all his blessedness arises from an imputed righteousness. For what else can be intended by those remarkable words, with which he introduces the evangelical declaration? “Even as David describeth the blessedness of the man”—what man? Why, “he to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works.” The righteousness here intended, cannot be understood of a person’s own obedience; because it is expressly said to be “without works.” His own virtues and duties, however excellent, contribute nothing toward it. No; it is perfect in itself, and entirely detached from every thing which he either has done, or can do. The phraseology of the inspired writer is very remarkable. He does not only speak of blessedness, as the result of an imputed righteousness; but he describes the obedience which is thus applied to the sinner, as being without works. This he does, more strongly to assert the truth he defends, and more effectually to secure the honour of grace. Righteousness imputed; righteousness without the law: righteousness without works. Such was the language of Paul; such was the doctrine that he preached; and such was the faith of the primitive church. Now, alas, the phrases are cashiered as obsolete, and are become offensive; so offensive that their frequent use is considered by the generality of those who call themselves Christians, as a certain indication of an enthusiastic turn of mind. And as the language is disapproved by multitudes in the present age; so the sentiment expressed by it is discarded with contempt, as offering an insult to common sense. But however much the doctrine of imputed righteousness may be despised as absurd or abhorred as licentious, by any of our modern professors, it is evident that the great apostle considered it as intimately connected with the happiness of mankind, and esteemed the blessing as the only solid basis of all our hope, and of all our comfort.
(To be continued.)