A recent article on the Aquila Report alleges that a number of scholars, including John Piper, Thomas Schreiner, and Greg Beale, propagate “an erroneous, heterox interpretation of justification/final judgment by faith and good works.” The article is really nothing more than a hit piece without any appeal to the thousands of pages these scholars have devoted to the subject of justification, a rhetorical bombshell bereft of any actual evidence that the doctrine of justification taught by Piper, Schreiner, and Beale is contrary to the witness of the Protestant Reformation. In a previous post, I looked at the work of John Calvin and tried to briefly show that Calvin, like Piper, taught that obedience is an inseparable concomitant of the faith alone which receives Christ’s righteousness unto justification. In this article, I’d like to briefly look at what professor Greg Beale has to say about the doctrine of justification in its specific relation to the future judgment.
I write this article, not because Dr. Beale somehow needs my assistance in defending his work. The many pages he’s written on this subject in his various books and commentaries are defense enough. Neither do I write this article because the piece on the Aquila Report is substantial enough to merit such a response. It isn’t. I write this article because my views on this particular subject were indelibly shaped by Dr. Beale when I was a student at Westminster Theological Seminary and I’d like to provide just a brief summary of what, for me, has proved immensely helpful and edifying. I write this article in the hopes that the reader might study Dr. Beale’s careful and rigorous exegesis of the biblical texts and be further equipped to defend the biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone. The following quotations are taken from Chapter 15 of Dr. Beale’s A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New. My summary of his views reflect my reading of this particular work along with my transcriptions of audio recordings taken of his class lectures.
What is justification? According to Beale’s own definition in a lecture given on the subject, “justification is a declaration of righteousness applied by grace and accomplished through redemption and propitiation in order to demonstrate God’s righteousness.”
In his A New Testament Biblical Theology, Beale defines justification using the words of WCF 11:1:
Those whom God effectually calleth, he also freely justifieth: not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone; not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness; but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them, they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness by faith; which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God.
After quoting the Confession, Beale seeks to provide a biblical-theological defense of the doctrine of justification by faith alone, viewed through the lenses of the “already and not yet” eschatology of the New Testament writers. The following is a brief summary of what Beale considers to be part and parcel of the New Testament doctrine of justification by faith.
First, Beale considers justification “as the attribution of the representative righteousness of Christ to believers.” Beale notes that the doctrine of imputation, specifically the imputation of Christ’s active obedience, has been the subject of fierce debate within the contemporary Reformed world for some time. After listing a number of texts traditionally employed to support the doctrine of positive imputation, Beale comes to the conclusion that the New Testament writers do indeed affirm this doctrine. Commenting on 1 Cor. 1:30, Beale argues that:
Believers’ identification and union with Christ means that ‘in him’ they are considered to have the same (perfect) wisdom, righteousness, holiness, and redemption that Christ had. This does not mean that believers possess these attributes in their personal existence on earth; rather, they are represented by Christ as having become these things for them because of their positional identification of unity with him (i.e. they ‘are in Christ’)…Therefore 1 Cor. 1:30 is best taken to be supportive of the notion that saints are represented by the perfect righteousness of Christ and are considered fully righteous as he is. This is the righteousness fit only for the eternal new creation of the end time.
Second, Beale discusses “the inaugurated eschatological nature of justification,” noting that the “cross of Christ begins the eschatalogical judgment.” Arguing from Romans 3:21-26, Beale argues that the final judgment has been “pushed back into history at the cross of Christ.” The sins which the Jews expected to be punished at the final judgment have been punished in the person of the Messiah. Thus, God is vindicated as the righteous judge of sin in the judgment of his Son on the cross. However, there is also a future dimension to the final judgment which will consummate the judgment begun in the cross of Christ: “The eschatological judgment has begun in Jesus, but it will be consummated in the judgment of unbelievers at the very end of the age, directly preceding the establishment of the new creation.”
Third, Beale argues that justification is a forensic or legal term rather than a transformative or renovative one. One of the key implications of this truth is that “those being justified contribute nothing to their justification, though they receive it passively through faith, which too is a gift. The cause of their justification is not from within themselves but rather is God’s ‘free grace.’ Christ’s penal death accounts believers not guilty and not worthy of condemnation, and they are credited with Christ’s righteousness.”
Fourth, Beale discusses the relationship between justification and resurrection, looking first at the nature of Christ’s justification/vindication through his resurrection from the dead:
Jesus’ own resurrection was an end-time event that ‘vindicated’ or ‘justified’ him from the wrong verdict pronounced on him by the world’s courts. The vindication of God’s people against the unjust verdicts of their accusers was to happen at the eschaton, but this has been pushed back to Christ’s resurrection and applied to him.
What does this mean for believers who are united to Christ? “All those who believe in Christ are identified with his resurrection that vindicated him to be completely righteous, and this identification vindicates and declares them to be completely righteous.” This truth is a key emphasis in Beale’s doctrine of justification, an emphasis which is also found in the work of scholars like Richard B. Gaffin, Sinclair Ferguson and Geerhardus Vos. The justification/vindication of Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 3:15) is the ground of the justification/vindication of those united to him by faith. This means that all that Christ accomplished for his people (justification, adoption, sanctification) is freely given to them in Spirit-wrought union with his person in their effectual calling. The justification/vindication of Christ as righteous is pronounced upon his people in their union with him. This vindication will be publicly demonstrated at the final judgment. Specifically, we find three particular aspects of this future, end-time justification/vindication in the NT writers:
1.) Public demonstration of justification/vindication through the final, bodily resurrection;
2.) Justification/vindication of the saints through public announcement before all the world;
3.) Public demonstration to the entire cosmos of believers’ justification/vindication through their good works.
Since the current debate is over the latter concept, I’ll briefly summarize what Beale has to say about the public demonstration to the entire cosmos of believers’ justification/vindication through good works.
Beale states that the justification/vindication of the believer is definitive, once for all, and irrevocable when the sinner receives Christ’s righteousness by faith alone:
[Justification] is definitive in the sense that saints are declared from God’s perspective not guilty because Christ suffered the penalty of their sin. And, just as definitively, they are also declared righteous because Christ achieved representative righteousness for them in his resurrected person and was completely vindicated from injustice (showing that he had been righteous all along), a vindication with which the saints are also identified. Consequently, they are declared to have the same righteousness (by imputation or attribution) that Christ possessed throughout his life and still possesses.
Nevertheless, there is a “not yet” aspect to justification, a sense in which justification/vindication is not completed because “the world does not recognize God’s vindication of his people.” Therefore, the final resurrection “will vindicate the truth of their faith and confirm that their obedience was a necessary outgrowth of this faith. That is, although they had been declared righteous in God’s sight when they believed, the world continued to declare them guilty. Their physical resurrection will be undeniable proof of the validity of their faith, which had already declared them righteous in their past life.” Beale distinguishes between an “invisible” (already) and “visible” (not yet) aspect of justification in which the forensic declaration of pardon and righteousness received by faith alone in the already, while definite, complete, and irrevocable, is not yet manifested or proved before the unbelieving world.
Beale speaks of good works as “part of this ‘final manifestive justification.’” Appealing to Rom. 2:13; 14:20, 12; 2 Cor. 5:10 and other texts, Beale shows that the New Testament writers speak of both judgment by works and justification by faith. How can the two be reconciled? Beale makes a distinction between a “necessary causal condition” of final justification/vindication which is Christ’s righteousness alone and a necessary “manifestive” condition which consists of Spirit-wrought works in the lives of believers. Good works are a “necessary” condition of this final justification/vindication in the sense that works provide the evidence that believers were justified by faith alone in Christ alone all along. Beale uses an analogy which helpfully illustrates the nature of this end-times “manifestive” justification:
A mundane illustration may help to clarify. In the United States, some large discount food stores require people to pay an annual fee to have the privilege of buying food at their store. Once this fee is paid, the member must present a card as evidence of having paid the fee. The card gets the members into the store, but it is not the ultimate reason that the person is granted access. The paid fee is the ultimate reason, the card being the evidence that the fee has been paid. We may refer to the paid fee as the “necessary causal condition” of store entrance and to the evidential card more simply as a “necessary condition.” The card is the external manifestation or proof that the price has been paid, so that both the money paid and the card issued are necessary for admittance, but they do not have the same conditional force for gaining entrance. We may call the paid fee a “first order” or “ultimate” condition and the card a “second order” condition. Likewise, Christ’s justification penal death is the price paid ‘once for all’ (Heb. 9:12; cf. 9:26-28) and the good works done within the context of Christian faith become the inevitable evidence of such faith at the final judicial evaluation.
Beale appeals to a distinction made by Jonathan Edwards between Christ’s work as constituting the “causal” ground of justification and believers’ works as providing the “manifestive” evidence of the once for all reality of the former. This “manifestive evidence” is a key part of the judicial process and will serve to vindicate the faith of believers on the day of judgment before an unbelieving world. This “manifestive” justification overturns the false judgment of the world and vindicates God’s people as righteous by faith alone in Christ.
Commenting on 2 Cor. 4:6-5:10, Beale argues that the future justification/vindication of believers is reflective of the justification/vindication that has already been accomplished in the past. There aren’t “two justifications” but one justification with two dimensions: the already and the not yet. The “not yet” justification serves to infallibly confirm the reality of the “already.” Using the words of Richard B. Gaffin, Beale writes that “the last judgment of believers, which is according to works, ‘is reflective of and further attesting their justification that has been openly manifested in their bodily resurrection.’” Furthermore, “as they appear before the judgment seat in their resurrected body, they are also now in the perfect image of the last Adam and in union with him, which further includes a testimony to their righteous, obedient character. Such righteous obedience begins during the interadvent age, which is actually a part of what it means to begin to be in Christ’s image during that age.”
Hence, Beale argues that 2 Cor. 5:10 refers not to a future reward according to works but to a “manifestive justification or vindication” through judgment. The same idea is found in 1 Cor. 3:13: “Each man’s work will become manifest [phaneros]; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work.” According to Beale, “this refers to some who are saved and others who will be judged at the eschaton.”
In the concluding section of his discussion of the relationship between justification, resurrection, and good works, Beale surveys various interpretations of how justification relates to a final judgment by works.
The first view states that “justification by faith and justification (or judgment) of the believer by works is hypothetical, especially in a text such as Rom. 2:13. That is, there are two ways to be justified, by faith or by works, the latter of which can be accomplished only by being perfect, and therefore sinful humanity can receive justification only by faith.” This is the view taken by scholars such as Frank Thielman.
The second view is that “justification or judgment by works must be appreciated through understanding Paul’s rhetorical purposes, which differ depending on the circumstances and audiences to which he is responding.”
The third view, commonly espoused in the contemporary Reformed world, is that “judgment according to works for saints occurs as a distribution of differing rewards for differing degrees of faithful service at the very end of time and, therefore, subsequent to their having been justified by faith.” This is the view taken by New Testament scholars such as George Eldon Ladd in his A Theology of the New Testament.
The fourth view is that “final justification and acquittal is based only on works.” This view is commonly associated with figures such as N.T. Wright who frequently argues for a final justification “based on the whole life lived.”
The fifth view which is the view defended by Beale is that “justification and judgment are grounded in the believers’ union with Christ, the former coming by faith, the latter being an evaluation of works that necessrily arise from the truth faith-union with Christ and by means of the Spirit’s empowerment.” Good works are not the ground or the cause of justification either in the already or the not yet, but they are the necessary evidence of the faith which receives it:
Justification and final judgment have their foundation in the believers’ union with Christ. Justification occurs by faith alone, and judgment happens on the basis of an examination of works, which are the fruit of the genuine faith-union with Christ and are empowered by the Spirit.
Beale concludes with a rigorous exegesis of various texts which speak of “judgment at the eschaton according to works for people already justified by faith alone” (emphasis mine).
What can we learn from Dr. Beale’s treatment of the doctrine of justification? First, we learn that Beale faithfully reflects the teaching of the Reformed tradition in his repeated claim that Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ alone is the “necessary-causal ground” of our justification and that the instrument whereby we receive Christ and his righteousness is faith alone, both in the “already” and in the “not yet.” As Beale argues in a lecture on the doctrine of justification (copied verbatim from an audio recording): “There is no other basis for final acquittal but Christ’s righteousness received by faith alone.” This reflects the teaching of the Westminster Larger Catechism Q & A 71 that justification is an act of God’s free grace “not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but only for the perfect obedience and full satisfaction of Christ, by God imputed to them, and received by faith alone.”
Second, we learn from Beale’s treatment that Scripture distinguishes between two aspects or dimensions of justification and not two distinct or different justifications. This is an important point to keep in mind in the present debate over the issue. According to Beale there isn’t an “initial” justification by faith and a “final” justification grounded in good works. Rather, when the Father, by the holy Spirit, effectually calls sinners unto himself and grants them the gift of justifying faith in union with Christ, they are as justified in Christ as they will ever be. The obedience of believers, while not serving as the ground of future vindication, nevertheless is necessary as the “manifestation” or “proof” of the definitive, irrevocable, and once for all justification received by faith alone in the past.
Which leads to the last point and that is that the recent article posted on the Aquila Report which accuses Dr. Beale and others of propogating “an erroneous, heterox interpretation of justification/final judgment by faith and good works” fails to interact with what these men and the Reformed tradition actually have to say about this issue. The idea of a future manifestive judgment according to works has a rich history within the Reformed tradition. One particular example of a view nearly identical to that of Dr. Beale’s is the view taken by Westminster Divine Thomas Manton. Manton’s defense of a double justification is nicely summarized in chapter 49 of Joel Beeke and Mark Jones’ A Puritan Theology. Manton argues that believers are under a double law- the law of nature and of grace. The covenant of works must be perfectly and perpetually fulfilled, a reality that has been accomplished by Christ. His righteousness is the exclusive ground of justification and is received by faith alone. The second covenant- the covenant of grace- demands faith and repentance and Christ will examine these graces at the final judgment in order to vindicate their genuine character. As Jones writes: “Thus two accusations may be brought against a man at the final judgment: first, that he has breached the covenant of works by his sinning, or that he was a spurious professor of Christ. Manton argues that to escape the first accusation we must be justified by faith alone (Rom. 3:24); to escape the second we must be justified by works.” Manton himself puts it like this:
To this double judgment there answereth a double justification: of a sinner, by virtue of the satisfaction of Christ, apprehended by faith, without the works of the law; of a believer, or one in the state of grace, so justified by works; for here it is not inquired whether he have satisfied the law, that he may have life by it, but whether, professing himself to be a Christian, he be a true believer- and that must be tried by his works; for as God in the covenant of grace giveth us two benefits, remission of sins and sanctification by the Spirit, so he requireth two duties from us- a thankful acceptance of his grace by faith, and also new obedience as the fruit of love.
Manton’s position is identical to that of Beale’s and both share the same interpretation of 2 Cor. 5:10- that Paul has in view a justification/vindication according to works which examines the faith of the believer and vindicates its authenticity. Beale’s “erroneous and heterox” understanding of the final judgment turns out to be the same view as one of the most significant 17th century Puritan theologians who also served as clerk to the Westminster Assembly. As we read Manton and others on this issue (as Jones argues, Manton was not the only Reformed theologian to argue for a double justification) it becomes evident that recent attacks upon the views of men like Beale, Piper, and Schreiner display an astonishing lack of familiarity with the Reformed tradition they’re purportedly defending. It turns out that the “Reformed” theology these critics are seeking to preserve- one which condemns any notion of a future judgment for believers according to works- isn’t very Reformed at all.
Rhetorical hit pieces and drive by theological treatises against godly Christian men may be easy to write. But the ignorance and absence of Christian love manifested in such hit pieces do nothing to advance an honest, patient and clearheaded exchange of ideas by brothers in Christ united to the same Savior and members of the same body. Remaining faithful to Scripture and remembering the Protestant Reformation means actually reading and understanding and taking the time to familiarize ourselves with the tradition we’re seeking to defend and the views of those we’re critiquing.
The Pastor's Pen 