The Error of Eternal Justification

The Baptist Confession of Faith 1689 say this concerning Justification:

“God did from all eternity decree to justify all the elect, and Christ did in the fullness of time die for their sins, and rise again for their justification; nevertheless, they are not justified personally, until the Holy Spirit doth in time actually apply Christ unto them."

And they give these verses as proof:

( Galatians 3:8; 1 Peter 1:2; 1 Timothy 2:6; Romans 4:25; Colossians 1:21,22; Titus 3:4-7 )

The question at hand is - when were the Elect justified? In answer to this question there are three views.

1) In eternity past, when God decreed or determined to justify certain persons, such as those denominated by the terms "elect" or "believer." This is the view commonly called the Hyper Calvinistic view, and was taught and believed by such great Baptist Calvinists as Samuel Richardson (signatory to the 1644 London Confession), John Gill and John Brine (two giants among the 18th century Particular Baptists), and many today among the "Primitive Baptists."

2) At the Cross when Christ died and paid the penalty for those he represented. The resurrection of Christ being the proof that such a justification took place upon his sacrificial death.

3) At the time when a sinner first believes in Christ and is converted.

Many have written on this subject and anyone who wants to study it thoroughly will want to read from those who defend each of the three views. The debate over this question has produced voluminous writings on the topic. My job in this series of postings on the question will be to give a concise summation of each point of view, striving as much as possible towards brevity and against verbosity.

Though I have studied this issue in depth over the years, at various times, I was led to review it once again as a result of reading Hardshell David Pyles' writing on the subject titled "Justification in Baptist History and Scripture (First Revision)." It can be found HERE. It is rather a lengthy writing and he gives a lot of citations from Baptists of former times who taught that the elect were justified in eternity past, such as from the men I have already mentioned as holding that view. Pyles accepts that view and he seems to speak for his Hardshell brothers.

He admits that the view expressed in the 1689 London Confession is against eternal justification and rather upholds the view that sinners are not justified until they are united to Christ by faith. This is the confession that the Hardshells endorsed in the Fulton Convention of Primitive Baptists in 1900 as being the confession of their forefathers who began the denomination in the 1830s. So, the view that was once "primitive" or "original" Baptist doctrine was not the eternal justification view of Pyles and today's Hardshells. They can hardly claim therefore to be primitive or original on this issue. Further, Pyles does not state this fact; not only did his Baptist forefathers of the 17th century reject both views, either that the elect were justified in eternity past or at the cross, but that most of his forefathers in the 1830s also rejected it and believed what the London Confession stated on the issue.

The point is simply this: the view of Pyles, though held to by some Baptist scholars, such as Richardson, Gill, and Brine, it has nevertheless only been accepted by but a few, nor has it ever been made into an official article in any Baptist or Protestant confession of faith. The accepted creedal majority position of Baptists, Particular or General, has been to affirm just what the Confession cited at the outset affirms. No one is justified until he believes and this is what is meant in scripture as being "justified by faith."

One must ask why Pyles and today's Hardshells want to grab hold of the idea of eternal justification? Having been a Hardshell I can tell you why. It is because they are firmly intent on divorcing faith from having anything to do with being eternally saved in heaven. They are resolved to uphold the late 19th century statement of Elder Waters who said - "Every regenerate child of Adam is saved eternally, faith or no faith." Of course, anyone who seeks to defend that idea, as Pyles, will want to deny that sinners are actually justified when they believe. But, the effort to prove that faith is not essential to actual justification is an impossible task. Pyles does not add anything to the argumentation already given in favor of eternal justification by such men as Gill. Neither does he refute the arguments made against it and in favor of justification at the point of faith. I recently wrote on how the Hardshells of today decry the importance and necessity of faith for salvation and Pyles simply reinforces that accusation.

In Pyle's writing he is willing to accept the view that the elect were justified on the cross, a view that some of his brethren accept. He is willing to accept either the eternal justification view or the justification at the cross view, but not the justification upon faith view. And why? Because the first two views do not require faith for justification! So, either one of those two views are acceptable. What he cannot tolerate is any view that makes faith in Christ essential for justification or for eternal salvation. He and his Hardshell brethren are so dedicated to the idea that many unbelievers will be saved that they will fight the idea that actual justification occurs through the instrumentality of faith. That is sad indeed.

In closing this introductory chapter on this topic I want to add this observation on men like Richardson, Gill, and Brine, men who held to the view that the elect were justified in eternity past when God purposed or decreed their justification. Though these men erred on this topic, yet they can hardly be seen as upholding the Hardshell notion that gospel or evangelical faith was not required to be saved in heaven. All these men believed that faith was necessary to be saved in heaven and that all who die without such faith in Christ, via the gospel, would be eternally lost.

In the next several postings we will give reasons why the view that justification has occurred either in eternity past or at the cross is false and show why the traditional teaching of Baptists and of the Protestant reformers concerning "justification by faith" is correct.