The Gospel, Our Mission, and the Crown Rights of Jesus

 In the Parable of the Great Banquet (Luke 14:12-24), we find this statement from the master of the house (representing Jesus): "Go out to the highways and hedges and compel people to come in, that my house may be filled" (verse 23). This is a paraphrase of the Great Commission: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19).

Where Jesus said in the Commission that we, His people, are to disciple the nations, He adds the explanation in Luke that the goal is to fill His house. This is very different from the Commission, as it is defined by dispensationalists, that we are to be a witness to the nations (a misuse of the Matthew 24:14), that is, a failed witness. That is why most English translations of the Commission change "disciple the nations" to "make disciples from all nations." The dispensationalist expects to fail, doing no more than cherry-picking a few individual converts here and there. Or to use Luke's language, the dispensationalist expects the house of the Lord to be nearly empty. 

That assumption is blatant disobedience. 

In Isaiah 56:6-7, Jehovah, i. e., the preincarnate Jesus, declares, "And the foreigners who join themselves to the Lord, to minister to Him, to love the name of the Lord, and to be His servants, everyone who keeps the Sabbath and does not profane it, and holds fast My covenant— these I will bring to My holy mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on My altar; for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples." "Peoples," not just "people." 

How could He claim this? Because it was the promise to Him in the intra-Trinitarian covenant: "Ask of Me, and I will make the nations Your heritage, and the ends of the earth Your possession" (Psalm 2:8).

Therefore, to deny that Jesus will return to a converted world (generally, not necessarily exhaustively) is to deny His word, His crown, and His right to what has been promised to Him. 

Jesus Had a Preexistence, Not Us

The Mormon organization claims that all men and women existed in prehistory in spiritual form: "We lived as spirit children of God in a premortal existence." Their Scripture says, "Even before they were born, they, with many others, received their first lessons in the world of spirits and were prepared to come forth in the due time of the Lord to labor in his vineyard for the salvation of the souls of men" (Doctrine and Covenants 138:56). 

While this is contrary to the doctrine of orthodox Christianity, it is actually similar to the theories of Plato, a parallel of which Mormons are proud: ""Several philosophers from Plato through Leibniz and Kant to twentieth-century Cambridge intellectuals, dozens of poets from antiquity to Robert Frost, and numerous religious thinkers throughout the Jewish and Christian traditions, propounded a pre-earthly realm peopled by the souls of men and women yet unborn. Pre-existence has been invoked to explain 'the better angels of our nature,' including the human yearning for transcendence and the sublime; it suggests a reason for the frequent sensation of alienation and the indelible sadness of human existence."

The Bible tells us otherwise. In it, Jesus tells us this: "He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all" (‭‭John‬ ‭3:31). Of whom was He speaking? "He said to them, 'You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world'" (‭‭John‬ ‭8:23‬). So, Jesus existed in Heaven before His birth, but His audience had not. 

The Mormon claim of the preexistence of all men in a spiritual state contradicts the words of Jesus. He alone, as God the Son, existed before He became a man (without ceasing to be God).

Justifying Faith Is Faith in Christ Alone

 "Faith - true faith - always has an object, and this object is the crucified and risen Christ, as revealed in the Gospel. Thus, as the embracing of Christ - in whom is forgiveness, righteousness, and adoption as children of God - is faith the source of justification." 

- David Engelsma, "Gospel Truth of Justification," p. 141 

It has become a reflex in American culture to respond to any sorrow or apprehension with an exhortation, "You just gotta have faith." And that is supposed to cover all of the bases, ranging from seeking a job to cancer to a severely-injured child. When it is said on TV, no definition of "faith" is ever given, nor a statement regarding faith in what or in whom. It is simply faith in faith itself. 

The faith that results in eternal life is not a faith in faith. As Reverend Engelsma says in the quote above, indeed, in the whole book, it isn't faith as a thing that justifies, but rather as faith with Jesus as its object that justifies. As he also says (on the same page), "Faith looks to Christ, trusts in Christ, and embraces Christ. From this Christ, faith receives Christ Himself as the believer's righteousness by imputation. Or to say it differently, from this Christ, to whom faith looks and on whom faith rests and whom faith embraces, the believer receives the righteousness of Christ as his own (by imputation)." 

This is why it is so important to share the Gospel with members of cults or false churches. They have a faith, but it is in a false object, and, therefore, cannot save them. Whether that faith is in the cultic organization, as with Jehovah's Witnesses, or is in the false Jesus created by the organization, as with Mormons, or in the false basis of justification created by the organization, as with Roman Catholics, it is a faith without a saving object, and, therefore, a faith that cannot justify. "We know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified" (Galatians 2:16).

A Simple Refutation of All Forms of Unitarianism

 

In their opposition to the doctrine of the Trinity, Arians and Modalists unite in denying the deity of the Son. Arians, represented primarily by the Jehovah's Witnesses, claim that Jesus was a fully-created being, whether  a mere human or an angel, but definitely not God. Modalists, represented primarily by Oneness Pentecostals, on the other hand, say that Jesus was God, but His deity was that of the Father, not the inherent deity of the Son.

Both are unbiblical. 

In I John 5:20, that Apostle tells us, "We know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life." Contrary to the claims of both Arians and Modalists, John tells us that the Son, named as such twice in that verse, is God. His statement precludes any claim that Jesus was merely a creature, or that the Son was merely a body inhabited by the deity of the Father.

 

The Sovereignty of God Leaves No Autonomy for Men

 Sometimes it is funny to talk to people not well-versed in sound biblical theology. When I ask them, "Do you believe in the sovereignty of God?," they always answer, "Of course!" Then, however, the footnotes start coming out, like the small print in a credit card commercial. "But He gives us free will, to choose to sin or not, to believe or not, to do good works or not." So, in reality, those people consider themselves to be sovereign, not God. That causes me to wonder if they have skipped over the large portions of Scripture that say otherwise. 

For example, in II Samuel 24:1, we read these words: "The anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and He incited David against them." The account in I Chronicles adds an additional detail: "Then Satan stood against Israel and incited David" (I Chronicles 21:1). So, we have two different writers in their respective books telling us that God had determined to punish Israel but inciting David to sin. God is sovereign over the sins of men. Furthermore, the two books tell us that God uses means to bring about that sin. II Samuel just tells us that David himself is the means. I Chronicles gives us the additional information that He used Satan to incite David. Thus we know that God is sovereign over not just the sins of men, but over the temptations of Satan, as well. 

The story continues: "So the Lord sent a pestilence on Israel from the morning until the appointed time. And there died of the people from Dan to Beersheba 70,000 men. And when the angel stretched out his hand toward Jerusalem to destroy it, the Lord relented from the calamity and said to the angel who was working destruction among the people, 'It is enough; now stay your hand.' And the angel of the Lord was by the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite. Then David spoke to the Lord when he saw the angel who was striking the people, and said, 'Behold, I have sinned, and I have done wickedly. But these sheep, what have they done?'..." (II Samuel 24:15-17). The parallel in I Chronicles 21:14-15 says, "So the Lord sent a pestilence on Israel, and 70,000 men of Israel fell. And God sent the angel to Jerusalem to destroy it." The important thing to see here is that God had sovereignly incited the sin, yet still punished Israel for it. Also, it was David's sin (as he acknowledges in II Samuel 24:17), but God punishes the entire nation. That is simply because David was the covenant head of the nation; therefore, his sin was imputed to all of those who were covenantally represented by him. We are also again told of God's use of means, this time an angel (probably a parallel to the curse on Egypt in (Exodus 12:23, "destroyer"). 

The issue is very simple: fallen man wants to keep some of the autonomy promised to him by Satan in the fall of Adam (Genesis 3:5). Even the professing Christian struggles to relinquish his false sense of self-ownership. yet, God claims absolute sovereignty, over man, over sin, over Satan, and even over salvation. We must come to see that God's worldview is God-centered, no matter how much we want Him to be us-centered.

Covenant Theology and the Imputation of Sin and Righteousness.

Paul gives us this description of the Gospel and man's need of it: "Just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the One who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one Man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one Man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one Man’s obedience the many will be made righteous" (Romans 5:12-19). 

This is covenant theology in one paragraph. Paul tells us that, in the sin of Adam, all of his posterity became sinners. That means every man, woman, and child, except Jesus, from conception to the end of his or her life, is a sinner. Theologians call this the Covenant of Works, because life and death, both physical and spiritual, were based on the perfect obedience of Adam. If he had remained faithful, his faithfulness would have been imputed to his posterity. However, since he fell, his sin was imputed to his posterity instead. 

Americans hate this biblical teaching, because it violates our cultural belief in the sovereignty of the individual. And I don't mean just atheists. Even professing Christians will hold to some form of individualistic religion, in which every person is responsible only for his own sin and for his own salvation. 

But let us continue with Paul in Romans. 

Paul also tells us that Jesus has a posterity, a posterity which, in Him, receives salvation because of His perfect sinlessness and substitutionary atoning act on the cross. Theologians call this the Covenant of Grace, exactly because it is graciously applied by imputation to all those who receive it by faith alone, which faith itself is a gracious gift of God. 

Strangely, this part of Paul's message is quite popular. Somehow, those individualists who object to sin by imputation don't see their personal sovereignty as violated by the imputation of righteousness! 

We can see the cultural role of this covenant headship in the history of Israel. In Second Samuel 24, the Bible gives us the story of David's census of the people of Israel, without God's command. In verse 1, we are told that it was because God planned judgment against Israel. However, in I Chronicles 21:1, we are told that Satan stirred up the idea in David's heart. Obviously, it was the purpose of God, which He worked through the means of Satan. 

The key verse, though, is II Samuel 24:16: "So the Lord sent a pestilence on Israel from the morning until the appointed time. And there died of the people from Dan to Beersheba 70,000 men." It was David who sinned, as he himself admits in verse 10, yet it was those 70,000 men who suffered the consequences. How can that be just? Well, if it is the individual who is primary, then it wasn't just. But that isn't the case. As king, David was the covenant head of the people of Israel, just as Adam and Jesus of their respective peoples. Therefore, when David sinned as king, the sin and its judgment fell on all who were in covenant with God through David. 

This covenant mentality is very different from our modern American culture. We cannot judge it according to our cultural values. Rather, we must understand and accept it on the basis of God's values. To reject the imputation of sin logically requires the equal rejection of the imputation of righteousness.

The Continuing Stand for Justification by Faith Alone

"Justification is a legal act of God. It is strictly a legal act of God. By the act of justification, God changes the sinner's standing, or legal position, before Himself as judge. Whereas the sinner is guilty, the act of justification renders him not guilty. Whereas the sinner stands before the divine bar of justice as one who has transgressed all the commandments of God, justification constitutes him innocent. Whereas the sinner appears in the divine courtroom as one who has not kept the law of God and is, therefore, worthy of damnation, justification gives him the state or status, that is, the legal standing, of one who has perfectly satisfied all the demands of the law, including its demand of the punishment of everlasting damnation, and is, therefore, deserving of eternal life." 

- Rev. David Engelsma, "Gospel Truth of Justification," p. 93 

The importance of the statement above can be seen in its historical significance. it was the grounds for Martin Luther's revolt against the corruptions of the Roman Catholic Church. He had discovered the truth of justification by faith alone in his personal study of the Bible: "The righteous shall live by his faith" (Habakkuk 2:4, and quoted by Paul in Romans 1:17 and Galatians 3:11). However, he saw that this simple but profound expression of the only way of salvation had been buried under the manmade doctrines and ceremonies of the Catholic Church. 

Rome responded by declaring a curse against biblical justification: "Canon 9.  If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema" (The Canons of the Council of Trent, still the official doctrine of the Roman Church). This assertion has never been repudiated by Rome, which is why any reunification between her and orthodox Protestants is still impossible. 

Rome has also caricatured the Reformers' doctrine is nothing more than a legal fiction. That accusation is false. It might have been true if God had merely cancelled our sin debt unpaid. Yet that is not what He has done. Rather, He has transferred that debt to a voluntary Surety, the Lord Jesus Christ. For those whom He undertook to redeem (John 6:37-39), Jesus the Sinless One stepped forward to pay a debt that He did not owe, that we may be freed from a debt that we could not pay. And a debt paid is a debt owed no more, in truth, not as a fiction.