By Angus Harley

Over the centuries, Romans 4 has been locked-down as to its interpretation in regard to justification by faith. It teaches we are justified by faith alone- sola fide– not by works. This is the Reformed doctrine of justification by faith. It is the same doctrine that Evangelicalism in general has adopted for its duration.

The dilemma of Romans 4

Yet, there is an issue with the traditional reading of Romans 4. The problem is not with sola fide itself, but with another factor or question that arises from Romans 4 and its teaching on justification by faith. The standard, typical, Reformed statement of justification by faith is that the sinner is justified once-for-all when he comes to faith in Christ for the first time. The second he believes in Christ he is justified. This justification never happens again. It is one-and-done. It therefore happens at the very onset of Christian faith, and does not happen afterwards, not even one second afterward. The question before us is, how does this teaching square with Romans 4? In Romans 4, Abraham is the main character. Paul promotes his doctrine of justification by faith based on Abraham’s life given to us in the OT. It is evident that Abraham was already a believer when it was said of him, ” “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness” ” (Rom.4:3; Gen.15:6). Moreover, Abraham’s life of faith as a believer is also spoken of in Romans 4. Similarly, the only other OT character mentioned in Romans 4 as to justification, David, is cited in vv6-8, which is itself a quote from Psalm 32:1-2, a psalm that reflects upon David’s confession of sin as a believer. So, how were David and Abraham justified as Christians, long after they first believed in God? According to the traditional reading, we were justified as sinners when we first believed, and only then. How does this work?

Why this discussion matters

Bible-based

As bible-believing Christians, we cannot just dismiss questions and issues that come from the text because they don’t fit our theological paradigm. There is nothing won or lost by asking questions of the text. Yet, why is the Evangelical, bible-based community, in regard to Romans 4 and its references to justification, silent on the question of Abraham and David already being believers when it is said to them that they were reckoned as righteous? The answer is surely due to the fact that we have as that community locked-in the entire meaning of Romans 4.

Scholarship’s demands

It is rather striking that in older and modern theological studies, and in technical commentaries, ‘no stone is left unturned’ in trying to determine the meaning of a text. Yet, in many commentaries and theologies, old and new, the above question is not even broached. ‘There’s nothing going on here’, we might say. It is not asked whether Abraham’s or David’s status as a believer might have a bearing on when he was justified.

Yet, the text of Romans 4 does present to us, as Protestants, somewhat of a dilemma, or, at least, it poses a question for us to answer. Why is this question rarely raised by Protestant scholarship? It is because, as stated already, the meaning of Romans 4 is locked-in.

Reformed theology

This question also matters in regard to what is called ‘Reformed theology’. Because the meaning of Romans 4 is locked-in, and captured in the Reformed tradition, there is no mention of the issue of Abraham and David being believers when it is said they were justified. It will be a shock to many Reformed folks that both Luther and Calvin did address this question, for both theologians considered that there was a sense in which justification by faith was ongoing, and went beyond the initial act of coming to faith in Jesus. Let me spell this out: the two heads of the Reformed tradition- Luther (Lutheranism) and Calvin (Calvinism)- both did consider the teaching of Romans 4 to reflect a genuine doctrine of a progressive form of justification by faith. (I will come back to the evidence for their views.)

Why, then, does the Reformed tradition not at least acknowledge that these two fathers held these views? Why are their interpretations rarely reflected in subsequent Reformed studies? The answer, again, is that the meaning of Romans 4 is locked-in, so much so that even Luther and Calvin play second fiddle!

Aberrant theologies

Another reason why the question of progressive justification matters is because that general concept is used and abused by Roman Catholicism and other aberrant theologies. They go to Romans 4 to argue that because justification is ongoing, it is united with the faith-works of the Christian-walk to justify the sinner on the Day of Judgement. They mix in Romans 2:12-16 and James 2 with Romans 4 to corroborate this reading.

The majority of Evangelicals are unaware of this abuse of Romans 4 by Roman Catholicism. Why? Partly because, as before, the issue of the progressive nature of justification by faith is not a thing to conservative Evangelicalism. Perhaps, also, this lack of concern was due to the progressive nature of justification being considered too Catholic, and was redolent of justification by faith plus works. It follows, then, that until the general Evangelical community at least addresses this particular reading of Romans 4 by the Roman Catholics (and others) it will never provide a full answer to them as to that text.

Modern Evangelicalism

Some modern Evangelical readings of Romans 4 promote interpretations that at points undermine aspects of sola fide. One prominent example of this is the view that gives to faith itself the status of righteousness, so that faith in and of itself is the basis for God’s justification of the sinner. Another version states that because Abraham and David were believers, then although they were initially justified by baptism into Christ, through faith, this covenant relationship of justification is then, by a combo of faith and works, worked out and maintained. Now, to be fair to conservative Evangelicalism, many things have been said in criticism of the above interpretation (and those like it). Yet, the question of David and Abraham being believers is not given due attention. In this absence, as with the response to Catholicism, the opportunity to provide a stronger counter-argument against these Protestant/Evangelical misreadings is lost.

Luther and Calvin

Let us now look at the evidence that Luther and Calvin both believed that there was a sense in which justification by faith was ongoing.

Luther: justification by faith is definitive, one-and-done. This justification is then worked out in us in the form of daily justification/forgiveness of sins.

Calvin: justification is imputed to us by faith. Initially we received this justification when we were ungodly, and subsequently, that same justification covers us throughout our Christian life. We are not justified daily; but our permanent justification is at work daily.

Luther

Luther believed that the believer is justified once-for-all when he comes to faith in Christ Jesus, for he implies a form of complete justification that happens at, and in, our baptism into Christ, “forgiveness of sins is not a matter of a passing work or action, but comes from baptism which is of perpetual duration, until we arise from the dead.”[1] See how this one baptism effects forgiveness of sins throughout the Christian’s life. To Luther, this daily forgiveness of sins, which issues from our baptism-justification that covers our entire Christian-walk, is itself a form of justification.  He writes, “For inasmuch as the saints are always aware of their sin and implore for the merciful gift of His righteousness, they are for that very reason always reckoned righteous by God.”[2] Luther explicitly states, “Daily we sin, daily we are continually justified, just as a doctor is forced to heal sickness day by day until it is cured.”[3]

It would seem, then, that in Luther there is an early version of what we would call the ‘definitive’ and the ‘continuous’ aspects of salvation that later Reformed Theology of the Biblical Theology type drew upon. For the believer is definitively justified, that is, once-for-all justified, in his baptism, by faith in Jesus’ death. Yet, the believer as a sinner must constantly by faith apply to God, to this baptismal-justification, to be daily forgiven, and, therefore, daily justified. It is the one justification with two aspects: the definitive that is final and complete, covering the entire Christian-walk; and it is continuous, for it is being worked out and applied daily.

Calvin

Calvin had a very similar, yet different, perspective to Luther. He, too, believed in the progressive nature of justification by faith. In explaining justification by faith, Calvin in his Institutes 3.14 dedicates part of the chapter to proving the manner in which justification is progressive. The full title runs, “The beginning of justification. In what sense progressive.” Calvin, too, believed that we were once-for-all justified when we were united to Christ by faith. However, our justification is progressive to Calvin. He explains how in Institutes 3.14.11:

“The Lord, on the contrary, declares, that he imputed Abraham’s faith for righteousness (Rom. 4:3), not at the time when he was still a worshipper of idols, but after he had been many years distinguished for holiness. Abraham had long served God with a pure heart, and performed that obedience of the Law which a mortal man is able to perform: yet his righteousness still consisted in faith. Hence we infer, according to the reasoning of Paul, that it was not of works. In like manners when the prophet says, “The just shall live by his faith,”(Hab. 2:4), he is not speaking of the wicked and profane, whom the Lord justifies by converting them to the faith: his discourse is directed to believers, and life is promised to them by faith. Paul also removes every doubt, when in confirmation of this sentiment he quotes the words of David, “Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered,” (Ps. 32:1). It is certain that David is not speaking of the ungodly but of believers such as he himself was, because he was giving utterance to the feelings of his own mind.

“Therefore we must have this blessedness not once only, but must hold it fast during our whole lives. Moreover, the message of free reconciliation with God is not promulgated for one or two days, but is declared to be perpetual in the Church (2 Cor. 5:18, 19). Hence believers have not even to the end of life any other righteousness than that which is there described. Christ ever remains a Mediator to reconcile the Father to us, and there is a perpetual efficacy in his death–viz. ablution, satisfaction, expiation; in short, perfect obedience, by which all our iniquities are covered. In the Epistle to the Ephesians, Paul says not that the beginning of salvation is of grace, but “by grace are ye saved,” “not of works, lest any man should boast,” (Eph. 2:8, 9).”

In sum, Calvin draws attention to the following features:

·         Abraham and David were already believers when it was said of them that they were justified by faith;

·         Habakkuk 2:4 is interpreted in the same light (see Rom.1:17);

·         it is Christological: justification is found in Jesus’ death;

·        it is progressive: the value and efficacy of his death are taken with him into heaven and applied throughout the Christian’s life. It is not enough that the righteousness of faith is initially at work, for it is constantly so in the life of the believer.

Calvin and Luther contrasted

Although Luther and Calvin did hold to the progressive nature of justification by faith, Calvin does not, as Luther, commit to the view that we are continuously justified as such:

“…the free goodness with which the Father embraces us in Christ when he clothes us with the innocence of Christ, and accepts it as ours, so that in consideration of it he regards us as holy, pure, and innocent. For the righteousness of Christ (as it alone is perfect, so it alone can stand the scrutiny of God) must be sisted for us, and as a surety represent us judicially. Provided with this righteousness, we constantly obtain the remission of sins through faith. Our imperfection and impurity, covered with this purity, are not imputed but are as it were buried, so as not to come under judgment until the hour arrive when the old man being destroyed, and plainly extinguished in us, the divine goodness shall receive us into beatific peace with the new Adam, there to await the day of the Lord, on which, being clothed with incorruptible bodies, we shall be translated to the glory of the heavenly kingdom.”[4]

As before, Calvin’s view is rooted in Christ himself, unlike Luther’s position that is more concerned with baptism and faith itself. Luther’s mind is operating, to some extent, on a different level, appealing more to the believer’s experience. Perhaps that is why he, most unfortunately, considers that the Christian’s faith is a form of righteousness by which one is justified.[5] To Calvin, our justification is living, and is accessed constantly by faith, applied incessantly to the faithful, to receive constantly the blessings that issue from justification, such as the Father’s judicial approbation and the forgiveness of sins.

Or, we might put the difference between Luther and Calvin this way. To Luther, Abraham was justified definitively and then daily justified (which is the working out of the definitive act). To Calvin, Abraham’s justification that he entered into by faith was forever with him and at work in him. So, in Genesis 15:6, when it says Abraham was reckoned as righteous the meaning is that Abraham’s justification, which covered the whole of his life, was manifested before all by his faith. Calvin says this of Genesis 15:6:

“If any one object, that Abram previously believed God, when he followed Him at His call, and committed himself to His direction and guardianship, the solution is ready; that we are not here told when Abram first began to be justified, or to believe in God; but that in this one place it is declared, or related, how he had been justified through his whole life. For if Moses had spoken thus immediately on Abram’s first vocation, the cavil of which I have spoken would have been more specious; namely, that the righteousness of faith was only initial (so to speak) and not perpetual. But now since after such great progress, he is still said to be justified by faith, it thence easily appears that the saints are justified freely even unto death.”[6]

I wish to follow through on Calvin’s reference to the initial act of justification. Calvin is adamant that initial justification as a stand-alone concept is completely counter-productive. He writes:

“Thus fully refuted also is the romance of those who dream, that the righteousness of faith is but initial, and that the faithful afterwards retain by works the possession of that righteousness which they had first attained by no merits.”

Even though Calvin is responding to Roman Catholicism here, and although he does believe that our justification is one-and-done when we come to faith in Christ for the first time, he nevertheless is strongly asserting that one cannot lock justification down to the initial act of faith itself. That being said, he goes on to acknowledge that there is a huge difference, admittedly, between when the ungodly person comes to faith in Christ to receive justification, and justification’s subsequent work on believers (as in the cases of Abraham and David). Even so, it is still the same justification at work.[7]  

Ordo salutis

A traditional ordo salutis (the technical term used by theologians to refer to the ‘order of salvation’) tells us that justification is one-and-done, and that after it comes sanctification. In one sense, both Luther and Calvin would agree with this. On the other hand, they would strongly disagree with such a system, as it ties down our justification and its influence to one mere point in our faith. Both Calvin and Luther note how justification by faith is constantly at work in our lives, so that it extends in its influence way beyond that initial moment of faith.

Many will reply that in practical terms all Evangelicals acknowledge the blessing of the ongoing efficacy of our justification in Jesus Christ. We are justified! This is true. Yet, in theological and exegetical terms, we are yet to ‘join the dots together’ between the text of Romans 4 and this experience. This means, too, that we have to reassess the ordo salutis model in itself, for patently, as much as it is helpful in giving an order, it does not reflect the priorities of the NT itself, as it is more concerned with the Christian’s walk and the value of justification by faith to it.

Remember: one-and-done!

As Reformed and Evangelical readers look at these things, their minds will be asking whether both Calvin and Luther did believe in justification by faith as one-and-done. Let me categorically state that they most certainly did! To Calvin, one could not be re-justified over and over. To Luther, the one-and-done justification of our baptism was worked out in the form of daily justification-forgiveness. I think Calvin’s version is more accurate to Paul’s theology.

We come now to the textual assessment of this issue of progressive justification. Romans 3:21-26 is foundational to Romans 4, nor can we understand the latter’s language of justification by faith without the prior knowledge given in Romans 3.

The heart of it all: 3:21-26

Romans 3:21-26 states:

“21 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.”

Salvific

The righteousness of God here is salvific. It is not the mere revelation of his divine attribute in action. We know this because it is Christ-righteousness. That is, it is embodied in the crucified Christ; Jesus is the embodiment of God’s righteousness. His death is the manifestation of God’s righteousness.

This Messianic blood-righteousness is external to faith; it is not found in faith itself, therefore. To posit that faith is righteousness misses the point entirely. God’s righteousness is ‘in’ a person and his sacrifice: the crucified one, Christ Jesus.

Event

As an event, Jesus’ death was deliberately a public demonstration of God’s righteousness: 1) to vindicate him as just; 2) as the ground for reckoning those of faith to be justified. God had to publicly demonstrate his own righteous and just dealings with those of faith by removing their sin (cf., Rom.3:9-20). This was accomplished in the redemption in Jesus’ blood. Those of faith in Jesus and his blood thereby came to be recognized as righteous by God. Not because of some innate righteousness: the only righteousness in context is found in the death of the historical Christ.  Nor, for the same reason, is faith considered righteousness.

The effect of this public demonstration, the righteousness-event of Jesus’ death, is to underscore Jesus’ death as historical, but also to prove to one-and-all that God’s righteousness is found only, and exclusively, in the death of Christ, the shedding of his blood. Any attempt to pin our righteousness unto justification on some other factor is therefore wrong. It is only in his blood that we are justified. Also, as this event was one-and-done, it necessarily follows that when the believer receives this justification, its victory is complete and it is applied in full when one comes to faith. There is no need, therefore, for multiple justifications. Indeed, the concept of multiple justifications undermines the nature of the public demonstration of God’s righteousness in Jesus’ death.

Messianic/Mediatorial

The Messianic blood of Christ as righteousness represents the divine side of the Father, and the human side of believers. It’s a Mediatorial righteousness: nothing less, nothing more. So, when someone believes in Jesus, one is believing in God’s righteousness as revealed in his Messianic Son, in his blood. That one, this believer, is, in God’s just reckoning, considered to be a righteous one, justified, for his faith rests in God’s own righteousness in his crucified Son.

Relationship of faith and righteousness

Although faith and God’s righteousness are distinct entities, it is impossible to separate them for the believer. This is because, as stated throughout, God’s righteousness is not a mere attribute, or that attribute in action; it is, rather, the revelation of his salvific uprightness, of his Messianic ‘rightness’ in dealing with sin and bringing sinners to himself. One (God’s righteousness) does not exist without the other (faith), for the whole point of the revelation of this righteousness was to save through his Son’s blood by faith.

Romans 4

In looking at Romans 4, the main figure is Abraham. However, for the sake of continuity with Romans 3, we will concentrate first on Paul’s use of David in 4:6-8.

David’s confession

Due to his confession, we can automatically dismiss any view that says that faith is righteousness, or that combines faith with works. This is because in vv6-8, David does not mention faith or believing as such, nor works. Which confirms what we found in Romans 3: God’s righteousness is external to faith. David’s confession is that of an OT believer, so, he is relying on the language of the OT sacrificial system to depict the greater, spiritual blessing of forgiveness of sins. From Paul’s NT perspective, this blessing of forgiveness is found only in the Son and his propitiatory death.

Does forgiveness equal God’s justification?

In Luther’s mind, it was thought that if God’s active forgiveness of believers was itself justification, it followed that each time we were forgiven, we were justified. I said that this view was wrong, and that Calvin’s model was more likely. For, God’s righteousness in his Son secured forgiveness for his people once-for-all in his death. The blessings of his justifying righteousness are constantly covering his people from point A to point Z of their Christian-walk. This is the value of the Romans 4’s record of Abraham’s walk of faith. The forgiveness of God that is in his righteousness in Christ Jesus is applied each time the Christian comes to God in spiritual contrition. Every time we apply to the mercy of God for forgiveness, his provision of forgiveness in our justification in his Son kicks in. Our justification in Christ never sits still, is always at work, is ‘live’ and powerful, revealing itself every time we are forgiven. Not that we are constantly justified, but that this once-for-all justification is constantly manifesting itself; or, to be more precise, God is constantly applying it.

The role of faith and confession in confirming

That is why confession of sin is crucial in Paul’s teaching, for God’s justification of sinners in Christ is manifested in them through confession and faith. What does a righteous man look like? He’s a man of confession, a man of trust in the crucified Christ. Always marked out as justified when living by his confessing spirit. Every time that David the believer relied on God’s mercy for forgiveness, this trust and confession were applying constantly to God’s once-for-all righteousness (to come in the Seed). Thus, God himself took great delight in marking out, and reckoning, David the confessor as a justified one.

The example of Abraham

Abraham found that his flesh produced no righteousness (v1). This thought is pursued throughout Romans 4. Vv1-8 is the general principle that the flesh gives rise to sin. Vv9-12 dismisses the view that there was righteousness in the ‘advantage’ of circumcision (see 3:1-2). Vv13-17 reject that the Law produces righteousness. Don’t forget that the Law was part of the covenant of the flesh, the Mosaic Covenant (see 2 Cor.3), a covenant that was external, of stone, and could not produce life. Vv18-24 reveal that Abraham and Sarah’s bodies, their flesh, could not even produce fleshly life. God had to miraculously, according to his promise, provide a son. 

When we look at this failure of Abraham’s flesh as a whole, we realize that Abraham’s obedience offered in the flesh, including, if we must, the offering up of his Son (Gen.22), could not produce God’s justifying righteousness, nor was it a form of his justifying righteousness. It did not matter that circumcision was crucial to both the Abrahamic Covenant and Mosaic Covenant, and that not to be circumcised cut that person out of God’s covenant community. Nor did it matter that circumcision was a sign of the Abrahamic Covenant, and the circumcision was even called the covenant in the flesh (Gen.17). None of this religious and spiritual observance, even as a believer, counted as justifying righteousness; nor did these religious acts and works count toward justifying righteousness.

External righteousness

The point of Genesis 15:6 and of Genesis 17, the reason for citing David as an example, is to demonstrate that God’s righteousness is external to man, is not part of him, is outside of him, for it is found and embodied in his Son alone, in his death only. Faith was the act of taking hold of God’s external righteousness in his Son’s death, trusting in the Father’s provision of his righteousness in Jesus Christ’s blood. Therefore, the entire Abrahamic content of Romans 4 demonstrates one thing: that in the flesh, by any kind of works, no man, no flesh is justified; only by faith, through it, does one take hold of, and rely on, God’s once-for-all justification in Christ Jesus that protects them for all time through faith. Just like David, Abraham’s faith was constantly taking hold of God and his righteousness in his Son. God’s righteousness (to come) in Christ Jesus covered Abraham throughout his walk. Abraham was not therefore constantly justified; rather, the justification of God in Christ was constantly at work to cover him.

Logidzomai

To nail this point concerning righteousness’ externality, I wish to look at Paul’s use of logidzomai in Romans 4 in particular. It is variously translated as ‘impute’, ‘reckon’, ‘consider’, ‘credit’, and other options. The reason why Paul uses this term is to circumscribe faith as the only proof of someone who is justified, one who is the ‘righteous walking’. Abraham’s faith, because it was a form of trust in God’s promise concerning his Seed, was the ‘marker’ of God’s righteousness in his Son that all could see and recognize. Paul nowhere ‘reckons’ works as a part of our justification in Christ. In this way, logidzomai also serves as a buffer, a reminder, that our righteousness is external to us, for our faith is ‘considered’ or ‘reckoned’ by God to be the feature, or marker, of a justified man, one who is justified because of an external righteousness.

Although I understand Reformed Theology’s logic, we, nevertheless, do not need to load into the term ‘reckon’ anything more than the above observations. For example, we don’t need to say that the term by itself means that Jesus died as our substitute, or that we exchanged our sin for his righteousness. Although these things are theologically true and are implied in Romans 4, they do not enter into logidzomai’s definition. Its meaning in context is rather straightforward: to reckon, or consider, or weigh up, or the like. Its purpose is likewise simple, for it is used to denote: 1) the externality of God’s righteousness in Jesus’ blood; 2) that this righteousness is highlighted in the man of faith.

Romans 5

The other side of Romans 4 is Romans 5. In addition to continuing the argument that justification in Paul has an ongoing dynamic, there are a few themes in Romans 5 I wish to pursue now that I did not cover when looking at Romans 3 and 4.

Romans 5:1, 9

In 5:1, we are told that our justification is in the past, “having been justified” (5:1). Our justification in Christ is, indeed, one-and-done. However, there is a somewhat odd construction in v9, “Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.” The relevant phrase is “having now been justified”. Our justification in the past (v1) is considered a “now” justification (v9). Some theologians have taken this to imply that justification comes in two stages: we are justified by faith when we first believe; and then, on Judgment Day, we are justified again and delivered from God’s wrath. The majority view is far more accurate: v9 conveys that our justification in the past is still relevant in the present. Yet, does the common perception catch Paul’s whole point?

There is evidence to think that perhaps it doesn’t. The “now” Paul is referring to is the period of redemptive history that takes us up unto the Second Coming of our Lord; that is why in the second part of v9 we read, “we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him”. This highlights, once again, the progressive nature of justification. Not that we are constantly justified, nor that justification is in two stages. Rather, our one-and-done justification is constantly accompanying us, working to protect us, as we progress along God’s path of faith and obedience. It is, therefore, a ‘now’ justification, for it covers the entire period of redemptive history. In other words, our justification does not merely have a present value, for this thinking renders our justification in Christ a passive concept. Our justification in Christ is anything but passive- which is Calvin’s entire point- for it is constantly at work within this period of redemptive history. See how in v2, justification by faith gives us access to all of God’s grace; for, our justification by faith protects us in the present so that we can constantly receive that grace up until the coming of the Lord.

Corporate nature

The modern Reformed and Evangelical position on justification by faith is to think of God’s righteousness as individually distributed to each believer. This is true and accurate, for each of us by faith was justified.

On another level, if we keep things locked into that individualistic definition, we bypass a fundamental element of justification: its corporate nature. What do I mean? We come back again to justification’s Christological core, for Jesus himself is the head of the new humanity (see ahead), the head of his assembly. He represents them. The victory of his righteousness (which is God’s) is taken with him into heaven for the sake of the assembly as the assembly, as a body, and not merely for the sake of individuals who access it by faith. His righteousness covers the assembly throughout the entirety of its existence in redemptive time. Individual Christians by faith gain access into that corporate justification, but they do so as members of the corporate body. Their individualism is not a thing in itself, unto itself; rather, it exists only as they are considered parts of the whole, as members of the body. For Christ is not only ‘my’ head, he is, properly speaking, our head, the head of the assembly.

This corporate dimension is present in Romans 3. There it referred to Jews and Gentiles as corporate bodies (3:1-9), and from that point Paul spoke of individuals (3:10-18), presumably from those two groups, to conclude that the “whole world” was under sin (3:19-21). Romans 4, too, assumes Abraham as a representative of the new humanity of believers: Abraham “our father”, “father of us all”, etc.. One should not forget that David was king of Israel, the nation. But there in Romans 4 he is considered, as Abraham, as a representative father of all those of faith. In Romans 5:12-21, the corporate dimension is crystal clear, for Adam as the head of the old humanity is contrasted to Christ as the head of the new, justified, humanity. Just as the sin of Adam came to all in history (Jew and Gentile), so the justification of God in Christ Jesus comes to all of the new creation (whether Jew or Gentile).

Christological and heavenly nature

Let us not forget that behind the corporate and the individualistic aspects of justification by faith lies the righteousness of God embodied in Christ. This is to say that our justification is ‘Christ-shaped’. His righteousness is our righteousness. Specifically, as far as Romans 3-4 is concerned, God’s righteousness is revealed in his Son’s death or blood. Nothing is said about Jesus’ life of obedience as such, even if it is implied as some think. This blood-theology is most certainly behind Romans 5:19 and its two references to Jesus’ obedience.

Having said this, our justification was not properly secured until Jesus was raised from the dead and exalted to the Father’s right hand as both Lord and Christ. Thus, in Romans 5:1 we read, “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ”. It is in his capacity as Lord Jesus Christ (which is now a title), that the Son applies the righteousness of his blood to those of faith. This implies that the victory of Jesus’ death and its righteousness was brought with him into heaven itself, to be victoriously applied by him to all of faith. Righteousness could not be applied, nor justification effected, without his exaltation as Lord and Christ (Rom.4:25).

Other examples from Romans

To demonstrate that this theology of a progressive (I prefer ‘continuous’) element to justification by faith, I will give other examples from Romans.

Romans 1:17

Calvin cited Habakkuk 2:4, which itself is taken up in Romans 1:17, as a form of the same teaching of the progressive nature of justification by faith. Paul writes there, “For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “But the righteous man shall live by faith.” ” The ‘righteous man’ here is not equivalent to, ‘the holy man’. Nor is Paul arguing that one’s faith is righteousness. Just as God’s righteousness is found in his Son and his death alone, it is captured and proclaimed in the Gospel alone, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” The externality of God’s righteousness is matched by the externality of its preaching. This righteousness, this Gospel, is not our doing; it is outside of us, and found in Christ alone.

Due to this separation of the Gospel/righteousness from us, even from our faith, Paul refers to the righteous living by faith. Faith is the evidence, in Paul, of a righteousness that is external to us, a righteousness that is ours because it is in Christ Jesus and we trust in him alone. We are ‘righteous’ because we are justified ones, and this is marked out day-by-day by our constant reliance on God by faith. Faith is God’s condescending grace to Christians that gives to one-and-all an irrefutable proof that a sinner is justified in Christ, and that one is forever covered by that justification and its lively effects. This ‘proof’ is not found in the flesh, in circumcision, therefore; for such was the way of the Old Covenant and its ‘fleshly’ measurements of righteousness. The new measurement and proof, in the Gospel era, is faith. Period!

Romans 8:1

“1 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.”

Here we have a clear instance of the constant and powerful work of God’s righteousness in Christ Jesus at work, because all those who are currently in Christ Jesus are not now under condemnation. This is the same “now” we saw before in Romans 5:9, in which the believer’s justification is currently at work. Here it is at work to constantly shield against condemnation. As before, too, this shielding work will persist until the end, even the Last Day. Once again, there is no need to posit a different or distinct form of protection from condemnation on Judgment Day, for the one righteousness of Jesus Christ that covers believers now will not suddenly and mysteriously lose its vitality and efficacy on Judgment Day.

Romans 8:31-34

The text states:

“31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? 32 He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? 33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; 34 who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.”

Do not forget, Paul is speaking about believers. See how Satan and his minions are accusing God’s elect of being guilty. Paul’s counter to these demonic accusations has two facets: the justification of God is found in his Son’s death; and, its application is through the same Christ who was raised from the dead to intercede for us. God’s answer to Satan’s accusation is God’s own righteousness in his Son, a righteousness, or justification, still covering God’s elect, even now. Because the Son is alive, so is his justifying righteousness. Hallelujah! 

Romans 10:1-13

“1 Brethren, my heart’s desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation. 2 For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3 For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. 5 For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is based on law shall live by that righteousness. 6 But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down), 7 or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).” 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; 13 for “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.” “

In this particular example, we read of God’s righteousness extended to those who believe, whether Jew or Gentile. The believer’s righteousness is not founded upon works of the Law, works that must be kept up from point A to Z. The Law was restricted to the Jews. By contrast, the faith of the Jew or Gentile takes hold of Christ who is Lord, and who, as such, was raised from the dead. See, here, how Paul speaks of a constant and living righteousness that is in heaven, in Jesus the Lord, and which must be accessed by faith. It is therefore Christological and heavenly righteousness. Notice, too, how this righteousness is contrasted to that of the Law. It is not said to be a form of the same righteousness. Law-righteousness is not God’s, is not Christ’s. Law-righteousness is diametrically opposed to Christ-righteousness. A final observation is that, here, Paul’s emphasis on Christ’s resurrection and exaltation is very strong, with his death not as strongly stated. For the righteousness of God in his Son’s blood, in his death, is utterly ineffective and useless without the Lordship of the risen Christ Jesus in heaven to implement this righteousness for the sake of believers. We must take this a step further: Paul’s understanding of righteousness is now categorized from the perspective of Jesus Christ’s Lordship in heaven. This is to say that, the righteousness of Christ’s cross that is brought with him into heaven is the warp and woof, the salvific raison d’etre, of Christ’s heavenly Lordship. The effect of this is to effectively make Jesus’ death and exaltation one ‘righteousness event’, for the salvific nature of the cross is intimately bound with its application “now” by the exalted Lord.

Conclusion

So, were Calvin and Luther correct in their assumption of a progressive aspect to justification by faith? I think they were, and that Romans 4 clearly teaches a continuous dimension to justification by faith. I do not ascribe to Luther’s version, as it argues for daily justification in the form of the forgiveness of sins. Calvin is more accurate, it seems to me, capturing David’s confessional theology, in which he relies on God’s justification in the blood sacrifice to receive the forgiveness of sins. Abraham’s walk of faith, not of the flesh, was one in which he was covered from point A of his faith to point Z by this righteousness of God. For Jesus brought the victory of his blood-righteousness into heaven with him to protect and cover all his people to the end, even on Judgment Day itself. There has been only ever one righteousness, by one sacrifice, covering the entirety of the walk of faith of all believers.

[1] Martin Luther, Luther’s Works 34, editor: L. W. Spitz, (Philadelphia, Muhlenberg Press, 1960), 164.

[2] Luther’s Works 34, 192.

[3] Luther’s Works 34, 192.

[4] Calvin Institutes 3.14.12.

[5] Martin Luther, Luther’s Works 25, editor: H. C. Oswald, (St Louis, Concordia Publishing House, 1972), 36; Luther’s Works 3, editor: Jaroslav Pelikan, (St. Louis, Concordia Publishing House, 1961), 20, 24.

[6] Calvin, comm. on Genesis, Genesis 15:6.

[7] Calvin, commentary on Romans, Romans 4:6.