| . |
Ángel
Manuel Rodríguez
1.
Legal universal justification separates God's justifying act from the
reception of the gift of the Spirit, or the new birth. Legal universal
justification is a totally objective act that does not make any difference
in the life of the individual until he or she is justified by faith, that
is to say, when the person decides not to reject the gift of justification
that is already his or hers. Therefore, those who have been legally justified,
the whole human race, have not been baptized by the sanctifying presence
of the Spirit in their lives; they know nothing about the new birth. In
the Bible the legal declaration of justification is followed by the reception
of the Spirit and the new birth. It is impossible to separate the two
even though we do not equate them. Legal universal justification does
not only separate them but in some cases the second event, the baptism
of the Spirit, never takes place because some reject the gift of legal
justification.
2.
Legal universal justification implies that all human beings come into
the world legally saved, pardoned, justified; from God's perspective they
are not lost. If it is true that every human being who has been and will
be born on this planet was present in Christ when he died and that they
all were legally justified, then those who are not yet born have already
been justified. The Bible makes clear that every one who is born into
this world of sin is in need of the Savior. We are by nature children
of wrath; we deserve to die (Eph 2:3). It is true that because of Christ
we do not have to die, but that does not mean that we were already legally
saved or justified before or when we were born.
3.
Legal universal justification is a threat to the biblical teaching of
the nature of humans. It teaches that we were all, the totality of the
human race, present in Adam when he sinned and because of that we sinned
when he sinned; his sin is our sin. This realist definition of our presence
in Adam comes dangerously close to Greek dualism (see article, "Comments
on the 'in Christ/in Adam' Motifs").
4.
Legal universal justification misunderstands and misuses the Pauline phrase
"in Christ." Nowhere in the NT does it refer to the totality of the human
race as being present in Christ at the cross. On the contrary, it is used
exclusively for those who by faith have been incorporated into Christ
and his body, the Church. It designates the most intimate fellowship between
believers and their Savior (see article, "Comments on the 'in Christ/in
Adam' Motifs").
5.
Legal universal justification creates serious theological problems through
its understanding of the "in Christ" formula. If we were "in Christ" as
we were "in Adam," then we make some type of contribution to our own salvation
(see article, "Comments on the 'in Christ/in Adam' Motifs").
6.
Legal universal justification undermines the biblical teaching that Christ
bore our sins and their penalty on the cross. If it is true that we were
all in Christ in some "mystical" or realist way, then, I was there at
the cross with Christ bearing my own sins and dying for them together
with Christ. Based on that understanding of the phrase "in Christ" there
is no need and no reason to teach what the Bible says, namely, that Christ
alone bore our sins on the cross. The clear implication is that there
was no transfer of sin to our Savior because we were in him with our own
sins!
7.
Universal legal justification introduces a non-biblical understanding
of Christ's substitutionary death. By Christ's substitutionary death it
is traditionally meant that Christ alone took our sin and its penalty
on him and died in our place in order for us to be saved (Mark 10:45).
Universal legal justification teaches what they call "shared substitution."
Does that mean that Christ became partially our substitute? Did he only
take a share of the load and penalty for our sin? Who took the other share?
Their definition of shared substitution is confusing, and lends itself
to serious misunderstandings and the threat of synergism, i.e. we make
some kind of contribution to our salvation by being in Christ.
8.
Universal legal justification tends to see faith as a threat to Christ's
objective work of salvation. Faith is almost perceived or viewed as a
meritorious act that has no role to play in God's legal justification
of the human race. That type of justification, it is argued, does not
come through faith but through grace alone. This is obviously based on
a misunderstanding of the meaning and function of faith. Faith and grace
are placed over against each other as if one, grace, would not allow for
the other, faith. Faith, it is said, has a role only in justification
by faith, that is to say, when the legal justification is made effective
in the life of the believer. Faith is basically considered a human work.
E. G. White wrote, "Through faith we receive the grace of God; but faith
is not our Saviour. It earns nothing. It is the hand by which we lay hold
upon Christ, and appropriate His merits, the remedy for sin."[1]
According to the Scripture, we receive justification only by faith. "The
New Testament does not teach the extremes of righteousness by works or
righteousness by fate, but righteousness by faith."[2]
______________
[1].
Desire
of Ages, p. 175.
[2]. Ivan
Blazen, "Salvation," in Roul Dederen, ed., Handbook of Seventh-day
Adventist Theology (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2000), p.
286.
|
. |