Part 9 of Response to The Gospel as Center: Justification

Last updated on: April 29, 2012 at 12:51 pm by Roger E. Olson

Part 9 of Response to The Gospel as Center: Justification 2012-04-29T12:51:20-05:00 Roger E. Olson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Part 9 of Response to The Gospel as Center: Chapter 9, “Justification” by Philip Graham Ryken

After a brief hiatus I return to my promised series of responses to The Gospel Coalition’s book The Gospel as Center: Renewing Our Faith and Reforming Our Ministry Practices edited by D. A. Carson and Timothy Keller (Crossway, 2012).

Philip Graham Ryken, Presbyterian Church of America minister and president of Wheaton College writes about the doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone which he calls the “Chief Article.” He says “this doctrine holds a place near the center of the gospel.” (153)

Ryken bases most of his exposition of justification on passages from Romans, especially chapters 3 and 5. According to him, these Pauline passages and other passages of the New Testament, taken together, propound the truth that in salvation God “does not simply clear a sinner of all charges; he declares a sinner to be positively righteous. Justification is God’s legal declaration that, on the basis of the perfect life and the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ, received by faith, a sinner is as righteous as his own beloved Son.” (155-156)

This chapter is, for the most part, a straightforward account of the classical Lutheran-Reformed doctrine of justification as forensic imputation of righteousness. The emphasis is on legal metaphors, on declaration and imputation and not on personal relationship, reconciliation or transformation (of the person being saved). Salvation is primarily a change of legal status in relation to God’s judgment.

Ryken rejects any idea that justification is primarily forgiveness; it includes that but is much more. In fact, he says, to deny the “legal category of justification” (viz., alien righteousness imputed) “is to believe in a God of unjust love who forgives people without having any right to do so.” (156) In other words, I take it, he believes the very doctrine of God is at stake in his doctrine of justification. Anyone who thinks God can simply forgive a repentant sinner without imputing Christ’s righteousness to him or her (something else he makes clear in the chapter) is impugning the character of God. I don’t know any other way to interpret that strong statement.

The controversial core of the chapter is “The Righteousness of Justification: A Triple Imputation.” Ryken argues that Adam’s sin (meaning guilt) is imputed to everyone; our sin is imputed to Christ (on the cross) and Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us in salvation. The key verses he cites for this triple imputation are Romans 5:12-19 (imputation of Adam’s sin to us) and 2 Corinthians 5:21 (our sins imputed to Christ and his righteousness imputed to us).

Ryken confuses me, however, when he writes that “in repentance, a believer’s sin is imputed to Christ.” (162) I thought the classical Lutheran-Reformed doctrine of justification is that our sin is imputed to Christ on the cross, not when we repent. Our repentance is when his righteousness (according to Ryken, active and passive) is imputed to us with the result that we are justified, made right with God.

Then, immediately following that, Ryken says that “The imputation of justifying righteousness restores the righteousness that humanity lost through original sin.” (162) I thought justification was more than just a return to original righteousness which was simply lack of guilt. Surely Adam did not have Christ’s own active and passive obedience, righteousness, imputed to him by God.

Then, on page 163 (so, just a paragraph or two after those puzzling claims) Ryken has this paragraph: “Thus the justification of sinners is also the justification or vindication of God. In justification, God proves his justice by dealing justly as well as mercifully with sinners through the cross. A transaction has taken place: our sin was imputed to Christ, and he was condemned; his righteousness is imputed to us, and we are justified.” That makes it sound as if our sin (guilt) was imputed to Christ on the cross, not when we repent.

Perhaps this is simply quibbling, but I don’t think so. It seems to be a blatant contradiction in Ryken’s exposition of justification. I would like to know how he reconciles those two seemingly contradictory claims. (Viz., that our sin is imputed to Christ when we repent and that our sin was imputed to Christ on the cross.)

My basic response to this chapter is that 1) it does portray salvation in purely forensic terms even though Ryken says there is more to salvation than justification by faith. (153) The only hint of the “more” is union with Christ; 2) it seems to take the doctrine of justification further than anything Scripture explicitly says—especially the idea that Christ’s active and passive obedience are imputed to us by God in salvation. That’s a theological deduction from Scripture, which may be valid, but Scripture nowhere explicitly says that.

I think Ryken’s heavily forensic doctrine of justification runs ahead of Scripture. For example, on page 157 he discusses the all important passage Romans 3: 21-22. The issue is, of course, whether the righteousness imputed to us is God’s own righteousness (righteousness of God) or simply righteousness “from God.” Everything depends on how one interprets the Greek—as either a possessive genitive or a genitive of origin. Is the righteousness referred to God’s or “from God?” Ryken says both “certainly.” Really? Why “certainly?”

Of course, this is at the heart of the debate between N. T. Wright and certain Calvinist authors. But it is also at the heart of a debate in Lutheran circles between defenders of strict alien righteousness and strict imputation (forensic righteousness) and the Finnish School of Luther Research that emphasizes inward transformation as part and parcel of justification. (For a complete account of all major Christian views of justification see Justification: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby and Paul Rhodes Eddy [InterVarsity Press].)

As usual, my main qualm about this chapter (and most of the chapters) is that it seems to pack too much theology into “the gospel.” Surely the gospel is the good news that because of what Christ has done for us, and freely as a gift on account of faith only, God forgives those who repent and believe in Jesus Christ.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

April 28, 2012

Christless Christianity in Movies?

Next Post

May 1, 2012 Recent responses to Against Calvinism

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Against Liberal Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

In Revelation, what is the correct sequence of events in the End Times?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Dragon cast to earth, beast rises from sea, false prophet rises from earth, mark of the beast given False prophet rises, dragon cast to earth, beast rises from sea, mark of the beast given Mark of the beast given, dragon cast to earth, beast rises, false prophet rises Beast rises from sea, dragon cast to earth, mark of the beast given, false prophet rises