Eternal justification

Justification from Eternity & Imputation in Eternity

To reiterate, I want the audience to be aware that I truly believe the main misunderstanding concerning the timing of justification is a failure on both sides of the issue (Wimer & Price) to see imputation as an immanent act of God. It is absolutely crucial that men come to an understanding of what imputation is and where it occurs before we can even think about these other ramifications.

John Gill wrote in his body of doctrinal divinity:
Now, as before observed, as God’s will to elect, is the election of his people, so his will to justify them, is the justification of them; as it is an immanent act in God, it is an act of his grace towards them, is wholly without them, entirely resides in the divine mind, and lies in his estimating, accounting, and constituting them righteous, through the righteousness of his Son; and, as such, did not first commence in time, but from eternity. (John Gill, Body of Doctrinal Divinity, Book II, Chapter V, section II.)

So as much as I respect John Gill, and his doctrine of The word “from” seems to be ignored so from now on I will try to convey to individuals the fact that imputation took place in eternity with the physical work of making an individual “right” before the sight of God occurring in time. The work of justification occurred in time and imputation of righteousness is the eternal and immanent act of God. Let us strive to come to a better understanding of these concepts as I believe they are of the utmost importance!

Click to expand...

Objections Answered


While I was at the conference I had an opportunity to meet with Steve Baloga in person and have a good long discussion with him. He has openly written against Justification from Eternity on the web, and has also written to me privately by e-mail. Because of his public attack on the doctrine of Justification from Eternity, I will also answer him publicly. This answer is not intended to be disrespectful or controversial as I am only interested in presenting what I believe is the truth for the benefit of the elect. In an e-mail to me in October of 2004, Steve wrote the following:
I would be disingenuous if I did not exhort you to reconsider your view of eternal justification. Gill had not one legitimate verse of Scripture to support his humanly contrived view. This is akin to mysticism and not objective revelation. Not only were the elect not justified in eternity (meaning before time), the clear revelation of Scripture is that the elect were in fact under the sentence of condemnation after the fall of Adam (Rom 5:12, ff). God did not issue a veiled threat, but the elect were under a real or actual sentence of condemnation until Christ came and removed them from under this sentence. To say the elect were justified from eternity is to say God sentenced them to condemnation while yet justified. This is to impugn the all wise God with confusion. But the confusion lies with us, not God. Regrettably, there are supposed sovereign grace preachers who continue to propagate this blasphemy. I say blasphemy because ANY teaching that competes with justification completely and solely finished at the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ is just that — blasphemy. I hold this heresy to be in the same category as the Reformed heresy of justification by “faith”. Both are attempts to pervert the gospel and call attention away from the very heart of the gospel — justification at the cross of Jesus Christ by sin imputed to His account and His righteousness imputed to the elects’ accounts resulting in full justification (Rom 4:25). That is the only justification there is in Scripture. It is the very heart and center of true gospel preaching. It is the very glory of Jesus Christ. Before justification could be declared by God, a real Body had to establish righteousness under the law and real blood had to be shed. The righteous attribute of God the Son is not and never shall be the righteousness of the saints. It is the righteousness of God that had to be earned in time by Christ that was in turn imputed in time to the saints (Rom 3:21 - note the adverb in the original is in its prolonged form meaning “just now”, i.e., after the cross; the righteousness of God “just now” manifested being (formerly) witnessed to by the law and the prophets). This was God’s wise design and I cannot go along with those who walk contrary to the this most vital of all gospel truth. (Steve Baloga, e-mail, October 2004.)
Now in the style of the internet discussion, I will break Steve’s argument up line by line and deal with it as I believe it is deserving of a reply.
Not only were the elect not justified in eternity (meaning before time), the clear revelation of Scripture is that the elect were in fact under the sentence of condemnation after the fall of Adam (Rom 5:12, ff). God did not issue a veiled threat, but the elect were under a real or actual sentence of condemnation until Christ came and removed them from under this sentence.
Immediately Steve strikes out on his understanding of Gill’s doctrine. Gill did not believe or teach that the work of justification took place in eternity; but he believed and taught that it took place from eternity. Gill never taught that Christ’s obedience was wrought out in eternity, but that it was wrought out in time. Gill taught that imputation was an immanent act of God and that it resided solely within the mind of God.


Further, Steve’s quotation of Rom. 5:12 is a typical verse that is quoted against this doctrine.
Rom 5:12, (KJV), Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
This condemnation that fell upon Adam and his elect posterity was not a condemnation to hell. But it was a spiritual condemnation. God’s elect are fashioned in iniquity and have no knowledge of God when they are born. Indeed they are totally depraved and have no desire of the things of God. They are born spiritually dead. But that does not mean that God views them as those that are on their way to hell. Steve’s thinking is typical of low grace theologians where they see the cross as God’s intervention and something which God must necessarily perform because sin exists. It is true that the cross came about in order to redeem men from sin, but the sinfulness and spiritual death of man was purposed so that Christ would save His people from it. There was never any danger of God’s people falling into hell, even before the cross because the very possibility did not even exist. God Himself did not view His people as headed for hell because He indeed purposed that they would not! The hatred of God has never rested upon His elect whether it was before the cross or after it. And besides, after all in this review which has been taught concerning eternity, we should now believe that God views all at once, and we must comprehend things from God’s view of the end instead of the beginning. God sees all of His saints as justified and even glorified (Rom. 8:30) because He sees everything at once and He has already accomplished it.

To say the elect were justified from eternity is to say God sentenced them to condemnation while yet justified.

The denial of justification from eternity stems from infralapsarian thinking which in my opinion stems from a misunderstanding of what eternity actually is as well as a misunderstanding of who God is. The distinctions between supralapsarian and infralapsarian thinking are much more important than what most theologians would have us to believe. And while some men may hold to supralapsarian tendencies, they still might hold to an infralapsarian thought process as demonstrated here by Baloga. Even John Gill had his inconsistencies, and I have even met men who seem to understand justification from eternity, yet hold to an infralapsarian view of the scriptures, thus convoluting and polluting this important doctrine.
Regrettably, there are supposed sovereign grace preachers who continue to propagate this blasphemy. I say blasphemy because ANY teaching that competes with justification completely and solely finished at the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ is just that — blasphemy.
Again, this statement is based on a misunderstanding of the doctrine. In my impromptu follow-up conversation with Steve in Albany I deliberately went out of my way to explain that I agree with his premise. Any teaching that competed with justification finished completely in the work of Christ is blasphemy. To state that justification is based upon anything but Christ and His accomplished work is to rob God of His glory which was purposed in the everlasting covenant of grace. Steve agreed with me that Justification was purposed from eternity, but he in my opinion could not successfully defend how a denial of God’s eternal view of the elect as righteous does not destroy the concept of an immutable God.

I walked away from my conversation with Steve thinking that there was a misunderstanding of justification from eternity on his part, and that is why he condemned it. I explained to him my position, and he seemed a bit more comfortable with me. I have hope that we can continue to discuss this peacefully and that the truth would be magnified.

I will reiterate that time itself is inherited from eternity. Eternity is not at all affected by what happens in time as God Himself iseternity. Eternity is not an extension of time, or even measured in time. To suggest that time is a starting place for anything in eternity will enable those who are opposed to the Gospel of Sovereign Grace to dream up all kinds of strange ideas such as the well-meant offer, common grace, and old-fashioned fullerism because those ideas are based on the idea of there being “multiple wills” of God. The two-will theory basically teaches there is an eternal timeless will and there is a timely will of desire. It leads to the dangerous errors of Spurgeonesque preaching where men are enabled to stand in the pulpit and declare that God desires all men to be saved. But if God is seen as something that does not change and as a Person who has defined all the events of time simultaneously, these things are incomprehensible. The doctrine of eternity unfortunately has been neglected and an erroneous understanding has been taught for far too long. Let us throw off this old baggage and come to know more of the infinite riches of God!

Click to expand...

JM said:

AV1611/RJS, how many different names do you have on this forum? Is Iosias you as well?

Click to expand...

mlqurgw said:

Just FYI AV1611/ Iosias has gone Roman Catholic.

Click to expand...

mlqurgw said:

Just FYI AV1611/ Iosias has gone Roman Catholic.

Click to expand...

JM said:

DD2008, any thoughts on justification from eternity?

Click to expand...

DD2008 said:

I lean more toward the Supralapsarian view. I believe we were chosen to be in Christ before the foundation of the world.

However, I believe we were regenerated when the time on earth had come by the work of the Holy Spirit in accordance with God's plan.

Ephesians 1:3-5 ESV
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined usfor adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,

Click to expand...

JM said:

If a King gives a condemned man a pardon but the pardon doesn't reach the condemned man for a few days, or even months, when does the pardon actually take place? Does the pardon depend on the decree from the King to pardon or the condemned man's apprehension of it? Just a thought.

"There is no succession in the knowledge of God. The variety of successions and changes in the world make not succession, or new objects in the Divine mind; for all things are present to him from eternity in regard of his knowledge, though they are not actually present in the world, in regard of their existence. He doth not know one thing now, and another anon; he sees all things at once; "Known unto God are all things from the beginning of the world" (Acts 15:18); but in their true order of succession, as they lie in the eternal council of God, to be brought forth in time. Though there be a succession and order of things as they are wrought, there is yet no succession in God in regard of his knowledge of them. God knows the things that shall be wrought, and the order of them in their being brought upon the stage of the world; yet both the things and the order he knows by one act. Though all things be present with God, yet they are present to him in the order of their appearance in the world, and not so present with him as if they should be wrought at once. The death of Christ was to precede his resurrection in order of time; there is a succession in this; both at once are known by God; yet the act of his knowledge is not exercised about Christ as dying and rising at the same time; so that there is succession in things when there is no succession in God's knowledge of them. Since God knows time, he knows all things as they are in time; he doth not know all things to be at once, though he knows at once what is, has been, and will be. All things are past, present, and to come, in regard of their existence; but there is not past, present, and to come, in regard of God's knowledge of them, because he sees and knows not by any other, but by himself; he is his own light by which he sees, his own glass wherein he sees; beholding himself, he beholds all things."
​

Stephen Charnock

jm

Click to expand...

Iosias said:

Do you hold to this doctrine?

Click to expand...