Aspects of Forgiveness: The Basis for Justification and its Modern Denial

By Philip Hale

This book is a study in the forgiveness of sins and how it relates to Christ's work, specifically His resurrection. This is often termed "objective justification," a hotly contested teaching within Lutheranism today. Using both historical sources and modern authors, this work probes and clarifies one of the most important and neglected doctrinal topics in Christianity and even conservative Lutheranism. It shows how errors and divergences in this doctrine affect preaching, teaching, and the definition of the Gospel itself.

"I attended Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne from 1979–1983, when the waters were being roiled by those denying the teaching of objective justification. Papers were written, pamphlets published, and even professors were accused and defended. It was all very painful. It’s still unpleasant, but it’s a necessary pain to bear as the very Gospel itself is at stake in the doctrine of objective justification. Rev. Hale’s book addresses this subject in a way and to a depth no other book I have read on the subject does. He answers the deniers, as well as asking and answering questions that reveal the many faceted aspects of this jewel of a doctrine. If you are going to read only one book on this subject, read this one. It reaches into the past history of this teaching in an extremely helpful way and looks at what the future holds for those who would handle the Word of God deceitfully by denying objective justification."
Rev. Paul R. Harris.
Trinity Lutheran Church, Austin, Texas

• Language: English
• Publisher: Philip Hale
• Release date: Jul 20, 2019
• ISBN: 9780997519785

Philip Hale

Pastor Philip Hale received his M.Div. in 2007 from Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne, Indiana. He then served the congregations of St. Paul Lutheran Church, Bancroft and St. John Lutheran Church, Lyons, Nebraska. He is currently associate pastor of Zion Lutheran Church, Omaha, Nebraska. He and his wife Aubri have 9 children.

Book preview

Philip Hale

Aspects of Forgiveness:

The Basis for Justification

and its Modern Denial

©2019 Philip Hale. All Rights Reserved

© 2019 Philip Hale

Published by Mercinator Press

[e-mail]

   14205 Ida St.

   Omaha NE 68142

Scripture quotations are from the ESV© Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version©), copyright 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Philip Hale.

   Aspects of Forgiveness

    The Basis for Justification and its Modern Denial

  Mercinator Press

   Includes bibliographical references and indexes.

   ISBN: 978-0-9975197-8-5

Contents

1 Introduction

2 The Dual Nature of Redemption Language

3 ‘‘Justification by Faith’’ is a Slogan

4 Limiting the Debate

5 Defining Forgiveness

6 A Modern Gospel in which Faith Replaces Christ

7 False Implications

8 The Resurrection Effect

9 The All-Encompassing Role of Faith

10 In Christ and Outside of Christ

11 Removing Christ: Deforming Objective Justification

12 Objective Justification: Law and Gospel Kiss in Christ

13 The Most Dangerous Doctrine

14 The One-Sided, Anachronistic Charge of Huberianism

15 Gospel Receptionism

16 Gospel Factualism

17 The Cause of our Absolution

18 Justified for the Sake of Faith, not Christ

19 Isaac Barrow: A Historical Witness

20 Confessional Evidence

21 Lutheran Dogmaticians

22 Practical Denials of Objective Justification

23 Conclusion

Selected References

Chapter 1

Introduction

The most recent official and public skirmish over justification among conservative Lutherans occurred between two small Lutheran synods in America. Pastor Paul Rydecki was removed from the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) roster for false doctrine with the charge of having ‘‘denied the truth and fallen into error,’’ because he redefined Christ’s righteousness which is imputed to sinners.¹ When he joined a very small church body, the Evangelical Lutheran Diocese of North America (ELDoNA), it followed Rydecki’s lead on justification, even though many of its pastors were educated in the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) and seemingly held to the teaching of objective justification, the issue of contention. This new public stance of ELDoNA—and a resulting set of theses on the matter²—led to broken fellowship ties with another small, no longer extant, body of former Evangelical Lutheran Synod (ELS) congregations. While this fight might seem quite insignificant, it has entangled most morally conservative Lutheran synods of America. Even more, this topic has divided Lutherans substantially for over 150 years. This has become the central debate of the modern era among biblically-minded Lutherans over the most important doctrine: justification.

Here are the details of the recent division, which occurred between two minor synods (ELDoNA and The Association of Confessional Lutheran Churches [ACLC³]—now defunct):

The Association of Confessional Lutheran Churches, and the Evangelical Lutheran Diocese of North America recognized fellowship with each other in 2010. At that time neither detected a substantive difference in teaching or practice that would have precluded such a recognition. In the beginning of 2013 the ACLC became aware that the ELDoNA was entertaining an application from Rev. Paul Rydecki for membership into their diocese. We also became aware that the ELDoNA was preparing a set of theses regarding the doctrine of Justification, specifically addressing its objective aspect. Rev. Rydecki had been very vocal about questioning the objective aspect of this chief article of the Christian faith, so we began to request open discussion of that doctrine with the ELDoNA. . . . 

As we moved toward recognition of fellowship with the ELDoNA, we did not realize that she was not grounded in what we all had been taught. We naively believed that Objective Justification, as taught in the synods of the old Synodical Conference (LCMS, WELS, and ELS), and confessed in documents such as the ‘‘Brief Statement,’’ is so fundamental, so pervasively taught, so clear, that it could not possibly be an issue with anyone coming out of any of those Lutheran bodies.⁴

This skirmish between minor synods might seem technical and abstract, or just an argument over words, but the condemnations of both sides say otherwise.

The declared public fellowship between these two church bodies was broken over this issue of justification:

We recognize, therefore, that the ELDoNA [by its public adoption of the 2013 ‘‘Theses on the Article of Justification’’] has placed the ACLC outside of the lines of her fellowship. The consequences of this are that the ELDoNA and the ACLC are no longer able to exchange pulpits and celebrate Holy Communion together.⁵

This is but a small and recent example of the divisive and explosive nature of this topic. It is one worthy of attention for those who claim to have a pure understanding of this chief article of the Christian religion: the article of justification.

While at first glance, this disagreement might seem like splitting hairs—a topic for theological experts—consider some of the serious charges made:

We [the ACLC] do, however, maintain that a significant roadblock to unity in this doctrine is an inability on the part of the ELDoNA to properly distinguish between Law and Gospel, or at a minimum, a failure to recognize the proper distinction between Law and Gospel in various statements made by others including the Fathers of Lutheran Orthodoxy.⁶

Rydecki made the charge, in reaction to his dismissal from WELS: ‘‘I am amazed that you have so directly condemned the Scriptural and Lutheran Gospel of justification by grace through faith and redefined the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to exclude faith from its proclamation. . . . your ‘gospel’ without faith is not the Gospel.’’⁷ Although some may not see a real issue in this teaching—just a slight nuance in terminology—these quotes show a more substantial disagreement lurking in the background.

But this debate is not even confined to North America. One Lutheran pastor can speak of the ‘‘modern (Scandinavian) debate about universal justification.’’⁸ ELDoNA and Rydecki state that the three major conservative Lutheran synods in the U.S. today (LCMS, WELS, ELS) have been wrong since their beginning. They not only claim all of these churches have been misled, but suggest that they have even invented this teaching.⁹

Why should one care? Because justification is the central teaching of the Lutheran church, without which there is no hope, forgiveness, or Christianity.

This article is in a sense the stronghold and the high fortress of all the doctrine and of the entire Christian religion; if it is obscured or adulterated or set aside, the purity of doctrine in other articles of faith cannot possibly be maintained. But if this article is kept pure, all idolatry, superstitions, and whatever corruptions there are in other articles of faith tumble down of their own weight.¹⁰

Deformities in this doctrine change the nature of faith, forgiveness, and the Gospel itself. God’s Word shows us the serious consequences of holding or tolerating another gospel:

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed (Gal. 1:6–9).

The main issue in justification today is the effect of Christ’s work and how the results of His atonement are applied to sinners. Since the Reformation, the main topic of contention has been justification, but the debate has moved backwards from the reception of forgiveness by one’s faith to its basis and foundation in Christ. The crux of justification, over the last 150 years and more, is the ground of forgiveness, which defines the Gospel and to whom it may be spoken. These are the main points of contention among Lutherans, not the righteousness of works versus faith in the classic, pharisaic sense used against Rome.

While this may appear to be a new debate, many still remember the fallout of the 1979 Kokomo affair¹¹ in WELS and the troubles with the same concern shortly thereafter in the LCMS at its Fort Wayne seminary. In actuality, this disagreement on the foundation and extent of justification is a long-standing controversy that has been simmering for over 150 years. It has not always been at the surface and forefront, but it has been the most divisive doctrinal issue among conservative-leaning Lutherans. The crucial teaching of the application and extent of salvation serves, in fact, as a summary and history of modern Lutheranism. As Walther pinpoints in his masterful 1872 Synodical Conference essay: ‘‘A main question in this whole topic is: What is the Gospel?’’¹² This is not merely an academic debate: it gets to the heart of Christianity and the bedrock of our hope in Christ. Therefore, it is necessary to get it right.

Chapter 2

The Dual Nature of Redemption Language

Scripture is God’s Word and the standard for all speaking about Christian doctrine. True theology follows the biblical pattern of teaching, even when disparate verses do not conform to our logical expectations. That is the root of this debate, which is not a new concern: What does Scripture say about justification before Christ’s righteousness is individually appropriated by faith? In other words: Is Christ’s redemptive work the direct cause, source, and origin of our justification, or does faith make the forgiveness of sins a reality, activating the payment Christ made, and thereby satisfying God, only when an individual sinner believes? These are significant questions that are not easily navigated. What Scripture says is clear, but it is easily twisted by sinners whose sinful nature cannot receive the truth without the Spirit.

To introduce the topic of justification, it is helpful to look at the duality of other scriptural words. Who is redeemed? All the world was redeemed by Christ’s action: ‘‘in [Christ] we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins’’ (Col. 1:14). Christ was the price with which all mankind’s sins were paid. ‘‘A death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant’’ (Heb. 9:15). Blood signifies His death and the sacrifice He made for our sins. ‘‘In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace’’ (Eph. 1:7). Believers partake of and possess this redemption and forgiveness in faith, but the sins of the whole world were atoned for in His death: ‘‘He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world’’ (1 Jn. 2:2).

Is Christ truly the Redeemer and Savior of all, even though not all actually believe the Gospel and achieve paradise? ‘‘For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe’’ (1 Tim. 4:10). Stated another way: Is Christ dependent on man to be the Savior of all? The difficulty starts in defining how the universal role of Christ as the Redeemer of the world applies to humanity. If Christ, the world’s redeemer, has already completed redemption for all, are all redeemed personally? No; that would be universalism, which is unbiblical. Unbelief condemns, and those outside of Christ have no share in His salvation: ‘‘Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned’’ (Mk. 16:16). Without the faith the Spirit works in each believer, the sinner is under God’s wrath and condemnation.

But Scripture still calls Christ ‘‘Redeemer,’’ despite the fact that not all are personally redeemed (Job 19:26; Is. 63:16). Jesus is rightly confessed to be ‘‘the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world’’ (Jn. 1:29). So the world’s sins are taken away (forgiven) in Christ, yet, for individual unbelievers, their sins and God’s wrath remains on them, condemning them. Christ completed redemption in His death and resurrection for all those under the law. ‘‘Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law’’ and ‘‘God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law’’ (Gal. 3:13; 4:4–5). This redemption is complete, from the vantage point of Christ’s work. Without faith, however, no one benefits from Christ’s universal redemption.

Both strands and emphases—the completeness of salvation from God’s side and the necessary beneficial reception from man’s side—must be upheld to give the full biblical picture of salvation. A one-sided emphasis cannot capture this full picture. In fact, isolating one facet as the only one leads to heresy. Although many verses do not, some Scripture passages do indicate the ‘‘universality of salvation.’’¹ But salvation is not an idea or axiom to make inferences from—it is truly an accomplished reality in Christ’s crucified body, which was resurrected for our justification. ‘‘[Christ] was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification’’ (Rom. 4:25). The critical question is not the context of this verse, but doctrinally who was Christ raised for, and what sort of justification applies to man as a result of Christ’s coming to life. All of Scripture, not human logic, must paint the correct picture of the scope and wholeness of salvation.

Here is a helpful description of the fluidity of salvation terms in the Bible:

Some terms that Scripture uses to describe facets of God’s plan of salvation are universal terms, and they are always universally applicable. Words like atonement, propitiation, expiation, and payment are applicable in Christ to the entire world. Lutherans would never use these terms in the exclusive sense to limit their effect only to believers. We always teach universal atonement, universal propitiation, etc. These words form the unshakable foundation for the conviction that sin has been completely removed for all people in Christ.

Other theological terms are only exclusive and can only be used as they apply to individual sinners. We can never use them in a universal way, as if they applied to the whole world. When they are used collectively, they refer to a specific subset of the world, namely to those who have faith in Jesus as their Savior. Regeneration can only describe the new birth that believers have experienced as they have been brought to life by the Holy Spirit. Imputation typically is the process of crediting something to someone. It is unclear to say that God has imputed Christ’s righteousness to everyone, when behind the idea of an imputation is the idea of a positive balance transfer. Fleshing out the metaphor, the world doesn’t have an account with God; an individual has an account. Adoption is the effect of God’s claim upon a believer as a new member of his family, the household of believers. God has not adopted the world. Sanctification we recognize as the work of the Holy Spirit and a fruit of faith. . . . A saint is someone who has been set apart as holy and devoted to the Lord God. Since the Holy Spirit has not worked faith in the heart of everyone in the world, nor has everyone been set apart as holy, we cannot use the word sanctification in a universal sense.

Some words are used in both a universal and an individual sense. They can refer both to the world in its totality and to particular sinners individually. Reconciliation is one such word that is used both ways.²

Redemption, salvation, and grace are for all. They are all universal, as they exist in Christ. Jn. 3:16 describes the love that motivated the Father to send the Son to atone for the sins of all: ‘‘For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.’’ As a result of Christ’s work, grace—God’s favor and acceptance—is available for all. Most Christians rightly hold the work of Christ—as described by words like atonement, propitiation, expiation, and payment—as universal.

But the reception of Christ’s work by the individual is only had by faith, the possession of the Holy Spirit. Sanctification, renewal, regeneration, adoption, and imputation describe the appropriation and reception of the fruit of Christ’s work. They all mark personal possession.

The results of Christ’s work can be differentiated from the work itself. The consequences of Christ’s atonement occupy that middle ground between the universal and the individual dimensions of salvation. In other words, they are both universal and personal.

There are two sides to every relationship: no one can have a relationship completely independent of another. If a debt must be paid, then there must be one to whom the debt is owed. Who accepted the payment of Christ’s work, the price of our redemption? The Father, who asserted the finality and completion of our redemption when He raised Jesus to life. Now God’s anger over sin and divine justice is appeased through Christ. This message of the finality of redemption in Christ is the Gospel.

Since there are two sides to every relationship, there are also two ways of describing the relation between God and man. Both forgiveness and reconciliation can be viewed from God’s side and from man’s side. From God’s side, justification and salvation are universal—they apply to the entire world. Christ’s payment and work is complete and final. From the vantage point of Christ’s work, there is nothing lacking. In this sense, ‘‘no sharp line is to be drawn between Reconciliation and Justification, . . . both terms refer to the same act of God in Christ.’’³ This meal is complete and stands ready for faith to eat in the Gospel. ‘‘And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh’’ (Jn. 6:51).

The victory of Christ is spoken of in both universal and personal terms. ‘‘Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out’’ (Jn. 12:31). Satan is judged, and sin and death are defeated. The victory becomes our victory in faith, as Christ’s salvation becomes ours; ‘‘For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith’’ (1 Jn. 5:4). Christ’s victory is entire and perfect in itself, and is for all people, yet only individuals born of faith possess it for themselves.

The tie between Christ’s work and man’s reception in faith is the righteousness that results from the accomplished work of Jesus. The Word of God is how that universal promise of redemption comes to us. In this middle ground between the universal and individual aspects of salvation we find the power of the Word, which delivers salvation to us. Though not all hear and believe, Jesus did not fail in His aim: ‘‘for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world’’ (Jn. 12:47). Thus, the world is saved.

Yet, Scripture states that faith saves. ‘‘And he said to the woman, ‘Your faith has saved you; go in peace’ ’’ (Lk. 7:50). But that is not the only way Scripture speaks. In fact, prior to saying faith has saved the sinful woman, Jesus declared to her: ‘‘Your sins are forgiven’’ (7:48). Faith is not something apart from Christ; it is this trust in His Word which incorporates us into Him.

It is clear that there is no absolute phrase describing the full picture of salvation. One aspect of the two-sided relationship can