Forgiving Sins and Priesthood Authority

I have been having discussions with Mormons recently on the place of "priests" in the Christian Church. They claim to have an exclusive "priesthood authority." According to the organization's website, that means "in mortality, priesthood is the authority that God gives to man to act in all things necessary for the salvation of God's children." What is that authority? From the organization's handbook: "The keys of the priesthood are the right to preside and direct the affairs of the Church within a jurisdiction. Jesus Christ holds all the keys of the priesthood pertaining to His Church. He has conferred upon each of His Apostles all the keys that pertain to the kingdom of God on earth. The senior living Apostle, the President of the Church, is the only person on earth authorized to exercise all priesthood keys." 

When I talk to Mormons, they claim that Jesus Himself created this authority in the church, when Peter first professed His Messianic office in  Matthew 16. Jesus said, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in Heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven" (Matthew 16:17-19). Mormons (and Catholics) claim that Peter and his successors received here from Jesus his imprimatur allowing them to forgive sins, and, thus, mediating salvation to everyone else. 

To my mind, that claim is blasphemous, a denial of the sufficiency of Christ for the salvation of His people. As the Scriptures say, "There is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all" (I Timothy 2:5-6). That is what is said about Him. 

But is there anything which Jesus Himself said that directly refutes this claim of priesthood? 

Yes, there is. In the story of the paralytic, Jesus says to the frowning scribes, "Which is easier, to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Rise and walk'? But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins - (He then turned to the paralytic) - Rise, pick up your bed and go home" (Matthew 19:5-6). In the parallel passage in Mark, we get an additional piece of information. That is that the scribes accused Him of blasphemy, because, "Who can forgive sins but God alone?" (Mark 2:7). And notice that Jesus does nothing to disabuse them of this opinion! They were correct that God alone can forgive sins. And in claiming that authority, Jesus blasphemed, in their view, because His claim was a claim to deity, equal to that of the Father! 

More to my point is that Jesus agreed that the authority belongs to God alone, and, therefore, cannot be held by any mere man, including Peter or anyone who claims to be his successor. Rather, as the representative of the only Head of the Church, Peter, the other apostles, and every true minister since their time has declared, not that they forgave sins, but rather that they brought the Gospel, the news that Jesus has purchased forgiveness of sins for everyone who believes (Acts 10:43). Jesus forgives, and the messenger announces. 

"With God are wisdom and might; He has counsel and understanding. If He tears down, none can rebuild; if He shuts a man in, none can open. If He withholds the waters, they dry up; if He sends them out, they overwhelm the land. With Him are strength and sound wisdom; the deceived and the deceiver are His. He leads counselors away stripped and overthrows the mighty. He deprives of speech those who are trusted and takes away the discernment of the elders" (Job 12:13-20). 

Judgment According to the Imputed Righteousness of Jesus

When I am dealing with members of Pelagian sects, such as Mormons and Catholics, on the issue of justification by faith alone, some of them think they are clever by citing, for example, Revelation 20:13: "The sea gave up the dead that were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done." Aha! the Pelagian proclaims. If we are judged according to our works, then we must be saved in part by our works, and not by faith alone! And taken in isolation, that verse may be taken that way. 

But the responsible Bible reader doesn't take individual verses in isolation. A doctrine must be built by comparing verse to verse to learn the overall teaching. 

For example, we have Romans 5:19: "As by one man's [i. e., Adam's] disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one Man's [i. e., Jesus's] obedience the many will be made righteous." Paul shows us the contrast between the two imputations, of sin to Adam's posterity (except Jesus), and of righteousness to the posterity of Jesus (i. e., believers). The Apostle makes the same point in II Corinthians 5:21: "For our sake, God made Him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God." 

The problem is that the Pelagian doesn't understand justification by faith as well as he thinks he does. Pelagianism misrepresents justification as merely the cancellation of the sin debt, returning the sinner to a neutral state. That is why the Pelagian also believes that a believer can lose salvation; after the cancellation of his previous debt, he sins more and incurs new debt. That view is false. Rather, as Paul says, there is the complementary imputation of Christ's righteousness. The new believer is not brought merely to a neutral state by faith. Rather, he also receives to his heavenly account, by means of that same faith, all of the righteousness of Jesus. 

In the eyes of God, the believer is never a person of neutral moral status. Rather, the believer stands before God as a sinless and righteous man or woman. Thus, there is no judgment which we must fear.

Everyone Whom God Calls Will Hear the Call

There is a common claim among some semi-Pelagian groups, namely Mormons, universalists, and professed unbelievers, that there is something unfair in God's judgment of all unbelievers to Hell, because such a large portion of the world's population has never had an opportunity to hear the Gospel. How can He justly condemn those who are ignorant of His existence and requirements? 

That the challenge comes from various varieties of Pelagians is a clue to the answer: They don't believe that men deserve to be judged for sin. Therefore, they object to the judgment of some, because they reject the biblical truth that all men deserve that judgment. "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). With all of the talk of equality in our modern culture, this is an equality that they want to deny. 

However, we have the hope given to us in the Gospel: "God shows His love for us in that, while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8). For us, these people say, but what about those who don't know about that? 

Not understanding the sovereignty of God, the Pelagian cannot rationally connect two ideas: If God's love and wisdom could create a way to save His people, then that same love and wisdom can find a way to bring His people to a time and place in which they can hear of it. To the Calvinist, that logic is obvious; to the Pelagian, that logic is impossible. 

We see God's inspired description of that plan in the words of Paul at the Areopagus in Acts 17:26-27: "He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and, perhaps, feel their way toward Him and find Him." If we understand that God has planned all of history (Isaiah 46:10), then it is easy to conceive that He has organized that history, in part, to the end that all those for whom Jesus died would unfailingly come into contact with the gospel and to be converted (John 6:37-39; Acts 13:48). 

So the answer to the challenge of Mormons, universalists, and unbelievers, when they ask, "What about those who haven't had a chance to hear?", is that there are no such people. 

The Marital Faithfulness of Jesus to His Church

"I will betroth you to Me forever. I will betroth you to Me in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love and in mercy. I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness. And you shall know the Lord." 

- Hosea 2:19-20 

This is a sweet promise. If you have read the rest of Hosea, then you know that much of it is about the unfaithfulness of Israel, the covenant community. Yet God takes it upon Himself to describe a time in which He will abolish the unfaithfulness of that community. 

First, I want to point to the last word in that passage: Lord. That English word is used as a gloss for the tetragrammaton, Yahweh, or Jehovah, the name used by by the preincarnate Christ whenever He acted in His mediatorial role. It is Jesus, His cross work, and His resurrection that have purchased the Church, faithful Israel in the Old Testament and the united Jews and Gentiles in the New Testament. His purchase, being effectual in all for whom it was intended (John 6:37-39), cannot fail to make every true believer, not just a believer, but a faithful servant. 

He uses marital imagery, a common theme in both testaments (such as Isaiah 54:5-6, Jeremiah 3:14, and Revelation 19:6-9). This is why our own marriage ceremony includes the vow to be faithful "until death do us part." Granted, that vow has become a mere anachronism among us, but it is not an anachronism to God. His vows are eternal and unfailing, even though we, who call ourselves by His name, are certainly not. "If we are faithless, He remains faithful - for He cannot deny Himself" (II Timothy 2:13).  

This is why I believe so passionately in the perseverance of the saints. I don't use the phrase "once saved always saved," because of its antinomian implications. Rather, God's faithfulness works in His blood-bought people by keeping them faithful, both in the sense of having faith and in the sense of faithful obedience to His word. 

The Imputation Alone of Righteousness Required by the Nature of Men

"To the one who does not work but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: 'Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.'" 

- Romans 4:5-8.

Referring to the passage above, Rev. Davis Engelsma wrote, "[T]his is truly the state of the justified sinner when God justifies him: he is only, wholly, and truly 'ungodly,' not only devoid of any working of faith,  of any works of faith, of any love of God and of the neighbor, but also guilty of unbelief, of the working of unbelief, of hatred of God, and of hatred of the neighbor. He is only, wholly, and truly 'ungodly' regarding the means of his justification and regarding his righteousness before God that is the content of his justification" ("Gospel Truth of Justification," p. 204).

The contrast in both Romans and in Engelsma's response is between the prior condition of the unbeliever which is changed upon true faith. Paul speaks negatively of lawless deeds forgiven and sins covered, to describe what is done by the imputation of righteousness. Engelsma describes the condition of the unbeliever for which he needs the imputation of righteousness. 

In theology, we call the unbeliever's condition "total depravity." "Total" here is used for extent not for depth. That, the unbeliever's condition is that sin has corrupted all of his faculties, spiritual, mental, emotional, rational, emotional, not that he is as wicked as is possible. Even an exemplar of evil such as Hitler could have done even more evil than he did. And since ever faculty has been corrupted by sin, there can be no contribution from the sinner to his own salvation. It is possible only by grace alone through faith alone in the person and work of Jesus Christ alone. 

Peace of Spirit Through Justification by Faith Alone

The primary issue of controversy between the Reformers of the Sixteenth Century and the Roman Catholic Church was the question of justification: What is its basis? Faith alone? Or faith and works? The Reformers held, and correctly so, that justification before God occurs by grace alone through faith alone, and is, therefore, instantaneous. In contrast, Rome mixed (and continues to mix) faith with works, such that justification is a process, one which may not even be completed in this life, but continue into Purgatory. 

Here is the Protestant definition: "Justification is the divine declaration, the judicial verdict, that instantaneously and perfectly acquits the sinner of guilt before the tribunal of God and constitutes him perfectly righteous. Upon the instantaneous verdict of justification, there is nothing imperfect about the justified sinner regarding righteousness with God, nothing to improve and nothing to increase. It is with the justified sinner as though he were as guiltless as the perfect Jesus Christ, as though he had fully atoned for all his sins and perfectly obeyed all the commandments of God, and as though he had completely satisfied the justice of God" (Rev. David Engelsma, "Gospel Truth of Justification," p. 225, emphasis added). Notice his use of words such as "perfect" and "instantaneous." Biblical justification is a legal verdict, and, just like a judge's declaration of "not guilty" in a human court, justification occurs at a point of time, fully, and can never be increased or decreased, or wait for some additional action. If the justified sinner were to die immediately after professing his faith, such as the thief on the cross (Luke 23:42-43), he would be transported to the presence of Jesus just as surely as the man of God who has been faithful for decades before his death. 

In contrast, Rome denies those qualities of justification, because she blends justification with sanctification. She holds that a person is justified by faith plus the works that come from it. Her foundation for that claim is a misreading of James 2:24: "You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." However, the context of that verse is not justification before God, but rather how that justification is demonstrated before men. Since no man can see the heart of another, he has no way to know whether his friend's profession of faith is real or false. How can he tell? By his friend's works or lack of them. 

One result of that difference is the assurance of salvation. The Protestant view of instantaneous justification apart from works enables the believer to know of his eternal welfare immediately and for the rest of his life, as the Apostle John told us: "This is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in His Son" (I John 5:11). Notice the present tense. He doesn't say "may have" or "could have" or someday could have." In contrast, Rome claims that it is arrogant to believe that one has eternal life now. In Rome's system, the believer can never know for sure his eternal status. He must continue to work, hoping that he has done enough, but unable to know. That is a system of bondage and fear, while the true Gospel brings peace: "Since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Romans 5:1).

The Parable of the Tenants and the Deity of Christ

"'Hear another parable. There was a master of a house who planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a winepress in it and built a tower and leased it to tenants, and went into another country. When the season for fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to get his fruit. And the tenants took his servants and beat one, killed another, and stoned another. Again he sent other servants, more than the first. And they did the same to them. Finally he sent his son to them, saying, They will respect my son. But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and have his inheritance. And they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?' They said to Him, 'He will put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.' Jesus said to them, 'Have you never read in the Scriptures:  The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes? Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.'"

- Matthew 21:33-44

This is the Parable of the Tenants, which Jesus told to the Pharisees. He borrowed some of the imagery from Isaiah 5:1-7, which is why His audience immediately understood the significance of the parable, and realized that He was speaking of them (Matthew 21:45). In it, in addition to His commentary on the rebellion of the Pharisees, Jesus also made some significant claims about Himself. The master of the house represents God the Father, the vineyard is the land of Israel, and the tenants are the Jews. The servants were the Old Testament prophets, which would include finally John the Baptist. Israel killed the prophets (Matthew 23:37), whom God had sent to recall her to her duty to Him. By silencing the prophets, the renegades of Israel believed that they could be free to live their dream of autonomy (Genesis 3:5). Finally, God ceased to send prophets, and sent His final message in His Son (Hebrews 1:1-2). There would be no further prophets. 

Israel would listen to Him (Matthew 17:5), or she would be judged. She chose to be judged (Matthew 27:25). But even as He warned His audience, Jesus was telling them who He was: the Son and Heir of the Father, offices which could be held by no one less than deity Himself.