Unashamed of Grace

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

H.A. Ironside on Romans 5:10

by H.A. Ironside

"For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." How blind are they who read into this verse a reference to the earthly life of our blessed Lord. That life- pure and holy as it was- could never have saved one poor sinner. It was by His death He made atonement for our sins. Even the love of God demonsrated so fully in the ways of Jesus only drew out the envenomed hate of the human heart. It is His death that destroys the enmity- when I realise He died for me I am reconciled to God. The hatred was all on my side- there was no need for God to be reconciled to me- but I needed reconciliation, and I have found it in Jesus' death. Now since it is already an accomplished fact I may know for a certainty I will be saved by His life. He said "Because I live, ye shall live also." (John 14:19). It is, of course, His resurrection life that is in view in Romans 5:10. "Wherefore he is able to save them (evermore) that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them" (Hebrews 7:25). A living Christ at God's right hand is my pledge of eternal redemption. He lives to plead our cause, to deliver through all the trials of the way, and to bring us safely home to the Father's house at last.

Romans, p.62

44 Comments:

The modernist view that collapsed Christianity into the example Jesus set for us~~Yuck!!

What insufferable legalism and rank unbelief.

It's now wonder everyone cleared out of their churches.

Great Post!

By Unknown, at Tuesday, April 25, 2006 5:22:00 PM
I like H.A. Ironside, the LORD used him early on in my life through my Dad's sermons; i.e. my dad relied heavily upon Ironside in his interpretations of scripture. Although I don't agree with his staunch dispensationalism (me being a Prog. Disp. and everything ;)--he is a blessing of the Lord. And represents a bit of a "comfort zone" theologically for me as well as culturally (i.e. my Fundy upbringing :)!

In Christ,
Bobby

By Anonymous, at Tuesday, April 25, 2006 9:09:00 PM
Jodie, indeed. Of course the Calvinists also fall into the same error when they identifie Christ's obediance to the law as the ground of a Christian's justification.

Bobby, thanks for visiting. I am glad you appreciate Ironside.

Every Blessing in Christ

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 12:44:00 AM
Thanks for the Ironside qoute Matthew!

Peace,

Nate

By Nate, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 4:46:00 AM
Matthew,

So what is/was the significance of Christ's obediance while He lived on earth? Or is there any?

In Christ,
Ten Cent

By Anonymous, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 5:30:00 AM
Once when I was 20 - having only been a Christian for 2 months, I was leaving work as a waitress at Big Boy. Some co-workers were smoking pot by my car and offered it to me. Having been very accustomed to this, I took it. (this was the last time I ever did this). I left there and was on my way to meet with my Christian mentor who had recently led me to Christ. While driving, I had this "great spiritual insight" that the blood sacrifice of Christ was not His bloody death, but His "putting on skin" - His incarnation. This was the real important sacrifice that He performed - just becoming one of us. I told these thoughts to my mentor when I got to him. He told me that this was an idea straight out of the pit of hell and that it was inspired by the devil - who had influenced my mind while smoking devil's weed.

For some reason, the idea of justification through Christ's "active obedience" reminded me of that story. Enough said - I don't want to be too controversial. ;~)

By Rose~, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 5:48:00 AM
There is so much you could do with that comment of mine...

By Rose~, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 8:24:00 AM
Ten Cent, Christ was a perfect sacrifice for our sin. Had He sinned (an impossibility anyway) He could never pay for our sins.

Rose~, the teaching of a soteriological incarnation does lead to heresy in many different shapes.

Still, it is true that Christ humbled Himself in the incarnation, taking the form of a servant. In His earthly sufferings, He identified with our sufferings under Adam, though these sufferings were certainly not vicarious.

Every Blessing in Christ

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 11:12:00 AM
Rose,

Are you sure you're saved??

By Unknown, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 1:04:00 PM
Just kidding :) ...but I'm surprised you said that right in front of Pastor Ironside :)

Pretty forthcoming!

By Unknown, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 1:05:00 PM
Matthew,

So Christ's earthly obedience made Him the perfect sacrifice, and what then is the ground of our justification?

By Unknown, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 1:12:00 PM
Firstly, our sins are dealt with by Christ on the cross. Secondly, we are risen with Him. That is we are idenfied with His resurrection and receive new life in Him.

We become the rigteousness of God in Christ, that is we are identified with His present heavenly righteousness.

Christ's righteousness is not imputed to us, but we are united to Him and through His we are dead to the law's power to condemn us.

Every Blessing in Christ

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 2:36:00 PM
Thanks, Matthew, that's very helpful.

Would you say justification is misunderstood as being a legal term?

Or is it the way we have become free from legal condemnation.

By Unknown, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 3:18:00 PM
Yes,
H.K I am sure that Christ's salvation can keep me and I was sure ... even though I smoked pot! ... and inhaled...
(I am a very forthcoming person - too much so, I think.)

Ironside is quoted a lot by the author that I have read more than anyone - McGee. He really appreciated Harry.

By Rose~, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 3:27:00 PM
I'm glad you're secure in Christ :)

And I love your McGee postings :)

By Unknown, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 4:18:00 PM
I'm a bit surprised Matthew on this one. Please forgive me for being ignorant. I've been working so much my brain is kind of slow.

Wow I thought most people believed in double imputation (imputation of sin and imputation of righteousness) is what most believers truly believed in.

Can you explain your understanding as well related to imputation and original sin as well as our sin's imputed to Christ as well as Adam and headship.

I spent alot of time on studying this last year in the bible. I went and poured through scripture after scripture (not a particular book)...... I thought this was generally believed by all evangelical believers. I found it to be a very helpful study in my life.

Anyone want to enlighten me? Is the concern the covenant theology connection. How are the verses interpreted that seem related to imputed righteousness. I've got to study dispensational thinking bit more to fully realize why imputed righteousness isn't biblical.

Most of the dispensationalists I know believe in imputed righteousness, though may not trace it back to covenant of Works like the covenant theologian.

By Shawn, at Wednesday, April 26, 2006 10:19:00 PM
Jodie, I would not deny that justification is a legal term, though it involves the Christian being brought into a righteous standing that is connected with God's intrinsic holiness, rather than the Mosaic law.

Shawn, I think it is inconsistent for Dispensationalists to hold to imputation of Christ's legal righteousness.

Every Blessing in Christ

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 12:01:00 AM
Matthew,
Can you explain more to Shawn why it would be inconsistent?

By Rose~, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 4:56:00 AM
Thanks Matthew.

I do think when the Mosaic Law is made to be overly central we can loose sight of the overall expectations of righteousness that God has for all of humanity. I hope that is something that will come out of the resurgence of Creationism, a greater awareness of why God is legitimate in expecting righteous behaviour from all of humanity.

I appreciate your informed thoughts on all this. I guess I get my Dispensationalism through moderate Calvinism :)

God bless :-)

Jodie

By Unknown, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 8:28:00 AM
Rose and Shawn, because it extends from the idea that the Mosaic Law offered eternal life for works (hypothetically, becuase nobody can keep the law). This is equivalent to the Covenant of Works idea, by which God is supposed to have offered life to Adam and Eve in exchange for obediance.

Dispensationalists rather see the Mosaic Law as dealing with sanctification and the administration of God's promises. Earthly life not eternal life.

Placing our justification on the ground of law also puts us on Jewish, legal and earthly ground, which is to ignore dispensational distinctions.

Jodie, interesting point about Creationism.

However, the Calvinists seem keen to be the major players in the Creationist movement. At least in the UK, Answers in Genesis are now selling the MacArthur Study Bible. Not a good sign.

Every Blessing in Christ

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 9:08:00 AM
I do not believe justification in the NT should be seen in juridical terms--but relational. I also believe the Mosaic Cov. is only provisional and prepatory for the substance of righteous found in Christ who is the "termination" of the Law Rom 10:4. I like Matthew, do not believe the Mosaic Cov. was intended in the OT to provide justification--but served as parameters under Yaheweh's theocracy to provide consecration unto Him in this era. Justification has always been based upon God's internal righteousness--see Gen 15:6.

By Anonymous, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 9:19:00 AM
Interesting, thoughts, Bobby.

I have a friend who is a full-time open air preacher. He keeps proclaiming in his preaching that 'Christianity is not religion, it is judicial'.

God Bless

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 10:05:00 AM
That's funny, because the saying I usually hear and which I like is: 'Christianity is not religion, it is a relationship'.

By Rose~, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 10:44:00 AM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Bhedr, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 1:04:00 PM
I actually had a discussion with that friend tonight.

He made a good case for Christianity being fundamentally judicial.

He said that for him the main strength of this view is in helping those who find that their conversion does not involve any emotional experience or high.

He also said that this approach was highly effective in his witness on the streets. People seemed to understand the concept of legal debt and judicial satisfaction to a surprising extent.

I also gave him a grilling about somethign I was unahppy about in his preaching.

Every Blessing in Christ

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 3:02:00 PM
Is it not BOTH? Judicial AND Relational?

By Nate, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 5:56:00 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Bhedr, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 6:20:00 PM
Wow thanks everyone.....Whenever I talk to you guys I realize how kinda dumb I feel in these types of things.

Bobby & Matthew & Brian,

Some good points to chew on.

Bless you all brothers!!! Is the issue of imputation an issue of thinking that CT people are thinking people are saved by works.

I don't know if I am Covenant theology or not.

I normally think of Christ's righteousness being credited to us as the scriptures seem to make that clear in our justication is based on alien righteousness alone. What is internal righteousness and how is that different from alien righteousness. Is it righteousness that actual displays of God's goodness in Christ's obedience in all things because He is God and good and perfect and holy, but not his obedience to the old testament law.

How do you interpret

Romans 3:22
Romans 3:24-25, 27-28
Romans 4:5-8 4:5
Romans 5:17-19
Romans 10:10
2 Timothy 3:5,7
2 Corinthians 5:19, 21
Ephesians 1:7
Jeremiah 23:6
1 Corinthians 1:30-31

Can't it both be judicial and relational, I see that as well in scripture. It has to be judicial because God has "been passing over of sins previously committed" We all know there is a serious problem in that God's justice is clearly needing to be dealt with in our justification and yet our faith in Christ we become the righteousness of God. How can that happen without actual righteousness being given/credited to us?

By Shawn, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 7:22:00 PM
I wrote an error.

I skipped ahead of my thought. I think my last statement didnt' make sense. We know that Christ's death is the issue of "been passing over of sins previously committed". Clearly it would be injustice in God as his passing over sins of sinners wouldn't be done without Christ's death.

By Shawn, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 7:27:00 PM
Brian,

I agree Christ as actually intrinsically righteous (He Is Righteous) and He is the epitome of Righteous, yet there is a clear understanding that he had to actually live out this obedience as well on our behalf.

(I'm surprised we never had big discussion on the impeccability of Christ at one point).

For example God is intrinisically good and forgiving, but God can't just pass over sins without the accomplished work on the cross. I too believe Christ lived out obedience on our behalf as well.

What does it mean that our righteousness must exceed that of the pharisee to be saved? This clearly means we must be IN Christ alone for our righteousness by faith.

To me this belief (I don't know if I am like Covenant theology) is receiving and resting is upon Christ and his righteousness alone and his work!!! I don't mean to harp on this to much, forgive me if I am misunderstanding, but this does lead to strong assurance putting our hope in Christ.

Our faith is not in ourselves, but in Christ and His Work on the Cross and His Life as well!!! We look to Christ's obedient life, but not as a way to an example of a way to be saved, but He did all things perfectly on our behalf. He fulfilled all things we are commanded to do. For example, Jesus tells the rich young man to follow the commands and sell all of his things and follow Christ. He did this to help him see his lost condition by using the Law, to show him his true condition.

I think imputed righteousness is helpful because our faith must always be an ARROW always pointing to Christ with an empty hand of faith.

Our faith should always be resting on Christ and in Christ and his work, life, righteousness, and death.

By Shawn, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 7:46:00 PM
Bobby/Matthew/Brian,

More random thoughts.....

For example, we are counted righteous in Christ because our faith in Christ, yet there are aspects where the justice of God is upheld. How can we stand
before God in our filthy rags and apart from Christ's righteousness.

The relational aspect of being in Christ (Genesis 15:6 and Romans 3:22). The fact is in Romans 3, Paul spends alot of time about the justice of God needing to be dealt with in the aspects of substitutionary atonement. So it is definitely judicial I believe if I am interpreting you correctly.

For example it is clear that in our justification both the righteousness of God and the justice of God are held together and "we uphold the law" Romans 3:31. We do this by the fact that our righteous requirements of the law are upheld by Christ, though the law itself can not save.

Therefore both the love of God and the justice of God is so clear in our justification. "It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

Should we go into 2 other forms of imputation and how others think of this. What do most of you think about imputation of sin with Adam and Christ.

By Shawn, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 7:49:00 PM
Let me nuance my point a little more sharply. My point is simply that the basis of Christ's righteousness is not His obedience to the Mosaic Covenant. But His divine character is the basis of the imputed righteousness.

Shawn brought up Rom. 5 and the Adam motif--I think this is a great passage to illustrate my point. Did the 1st Adam break the "Mosaic Law" when he sinned? I would say no, and so does Rom. 5. Did the 2nd Adam Jesus enforce or establish the Mosaic Law as the basis of man's reconciliation to Yahweh, I would say no, I believe Rom. 5 agrees with this conclusion. I'm not denying the fact that God's Holy Justice was displayed at the cross of Christ--I'm denying that the basis of Christ's righteousness is the active obedience of Christ to the Mosaic Covenant. The Mosaic Covenant was an intensifier of sin (Rom 7)--it was never intended to provide justification for the Jew in particular or Gentiles in general. The only thing the Mosaic Covenant was intended for was to condemn man in His sin--of which Jesus paid the ultimate penalty for at the cross (II Cor 5:20-21; Gal 3--4).

What is the basis and motivation for the righteousness of Christ? It is the intra-trinitarian love of a Holy God expressed in His bountiful overflow of self-giving concern for His Fallen Creation (Rom 5:6; 5:8; II Cor. 5:14; Jn 17; etc.). Also notice the inclusio that takes place between Rom. 5:5--Rom. 8:39. An inclusio is a literary device that serves as brackets of sorts or book-ends. The Love of God brackets the whole discussion on the point of the Mosaic Law that ensues in Rom. 5--8. This device should be seen by the reader as the emphasis and main point of this discussion. The point: The love of God, trinitarianly thinking, serves as the basis of Christ's imputed righteousness--not Christ's obedience to the Mosaic Covenant.

It would be creating a false dilemma to say that this view does not include God's justice--it just sees all of this discussion couched in the intra-trinitarian nature of our God. It is His Holy self-giving love that serves as the motivation and basis for any imputed righteousness. This undercuts the juridical/forensic idea of righteousness forwarded by typical Calvinist and Arminian understandings of Christ's righteousness.

By Anonymous, at Thursday, April 27, 2006 10:29:00 PM
Shawn,

Romans 3:22
The righteousness of God is the divine holiness of Christ which is quite different from His human obediance to the law.

v24-25
Deals with the propitiatory work of Christ.

Romans 4:5-8 4:5
The righteousness is without works. It is not the law. Note that Abraham was not born under the law.

Romans 5:17-19
The obediance of Christ is His obediance to death. When the NT speaks of Christ's obediance it is most often in connection with His death.

Romans 10:10
Through faith we receive the righteousness standing that comes from jusitifcation.

2 Corinthians 5:19, 21
Our sins are not imputed to us. The imputation to us is negative. However, through being in Christ we become the righteousness of God in Him. This is not exactly imputation but union with Christ.

Jeremiah 23:6
The Lord is indeed our righteousness. If we are in Him, we are declared righteous and made righteous.

The same may be said of 1 Cor 1:30.

Every Blessing in Christ

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Friday, April 28, 2006 12:31:00 AM
Thanks so much guys. I'll take these into consideration. I think the issue is does this alien righteousness deal directly with mosaic law or not. I believe that we all believe in alien righteousness in the way I think of it, but the issue is mosaic law or not.

I guess I don't normally really know, but have assumed the mosaic law is the codified expression of God's holy character.

You guys make some very very good points that I'll have to mull over a bit more.

By Shawn, at Friday, April 28, 2006 5:20:00 AM
What about Romans 2:6-11. I look 100% to Christ's works for this. It seems to keep coming back to alien righteousness that comes by faith alone and the works of Christ.

By Shawn, at Friday, April 28, 2006 2:39:00 PM
Shawn we have no righteousness of our own. We are saved only from being in Christ.

It is not really Scriptural to talk about Christ's rigteousness being imputed to us, however.

The works in Romans 2:6-11 are those for which believers receive rewards as opposed to punishment. Those that do evil face judgment.

Every Blessing in Christ

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Friday, April 28, 2006 2:44:00 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Bhedr, at Friday, April 28, 2006 4:08:00 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Bhedr, at Friday, April 28, 2006 4:17:00 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Bhedr, at Friday, April 28, 2006 4:28:00 PM
Matthew said,

-------------------------

“It is not really Scriptural to talk about Christ's rigteousness being imputed to us”

--------------------------

Here are some scriptures that say differently…

Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be IMPUTED unto them also:

Rom 4:6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God IMPUTED righteousness without works,

God Bless,

Doug

By Doug E., at Friday, April 28, 2006 6:30:00 PM
Brian,

I'm not enthralled with covenant theology either in many ways, however I wouldn't state that covenant theology places the glory on the Law above the glory of God's love. I think they are trying to see the glory of God's justice and love at the same time.

This is something we all struggle with as Christians is keeping the right biblical balance. This is true of all Christians. I want to see the Glory of God's love, but many times I'm concerned about the Glory of God in abscure ways rather than focused on the Glory of His Love. Other times we should know that God's Glory is displayed in all of Creation and we should look for it and seek it out.

I do however believe what I have stated hasn't put undue emphasis upon the law and gives the Glory to Christ rather than the law.

I do believe that the commands of God represent holy and perfect character and righteousness, however it can never and you are right take away from the glory of the gospel is in the Cross of Christ.

By Shawn, at Friday, April 28, 2006 7:20:00 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Bhedr, at Friday, April 28, 2006 7:29:00 PM
Doug, none of those verses speak about the persoanl righteousness of Christ being imputed to the believer. The believer receives a righteous standing before God through Christ, but this is not the same as the personal righteousness of Christ being imputed to the believer.

Rather it is God's righteousness revealed in Christ that the believer receivers.

'We are become the righteousness of God in Christ.'

God Bless

Matthew

By Matthew Celestine, at Saturday, April 29, 2006 3:27:00 AM
I have to agree that the imputation of Christ righteousness is critical but I see that in no way as being judicial. It is not an act of law but of nepotism in spite of the law and only because we are family by virtue of the spirit birth.

By Kc, at Saturday, April 29, 2006 6:50:00 AM