Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 21/1-2 (2010):166-183.

Article copyright © 2010 by Erwin R. Gane.

The Forensic and Transformational Aspects

of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright
and John Piper1

Erwin R. Gane
Retired Editor
Adventist Adult Sabbath School Bible Study Guide

Introduction: N. T. Wright Versus John Piper on Justification

The noted British New Testament scholar Bishop N. T. Wright
rejects the idea that justification includes spiritual transformation of the
believer.2 Emphasizing the covenant and law-court motif, Wright argues

1
Unless otherwise stated, the Bible passages quoted are taken from the New Revised
Standard Version.
2
“The point is that the word ‘justification’ does not itself denote the process whereby,
or the event in which, a person is brought by grace from unbelief, idolatry and sin into faith,
true worship and renewal of life. Paul, clearly, and unambiguously, uses a different word for
that, the word ‘call’. The word ‘justification’, despite centuries of Christian misuse, is used
by Paul to denote that which happens immediately after the ‘call’: ‘those God called, he also
justified’ (Romans 8:30). In other words, those who hear the gospel and respond to it in faith
are then declared by God to be his people, his elect, ‘the circumcision’, ‘the Jews’, ‘the
Israel of God’. They are given the status dikaios, ‘righteous’, ‘within the covenant’.
But the word ‘call’ itself, and the fact that ‘justification’ is not about ‘how I get saved’ but
‘how I am declared to be a member of God’s people’, must always have an eye to the larger
purposes of the covenant” (N. T. Wright, Paul in Fresh Perspective [Minneapolis: Fortress,
2005], 121, 122).
“The doctrine of justification by faith, from Galatians through Philippians to Romans, was
never about how people were to be converted, how someone might become a Christian, but
about how one could tell, in the present, who God’s true people were–and hence who one’s
family were, who were the people with whom one should, as a matter of family love and
loyalty, sit down and eat. This question was central to much of Judaism of the time, with
different groups defining themselves this way and that, in particular by various
interpretations of the Torah” (Ibid., 159).
“It is ironic that some within the ‘old perspective’ on Paul, by continuing to promote the
wrong view of justification as conversion, as the moment of personal salvation and coming
166
 GANE: ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION
that justification is a change of status, by which the believer is now
declared to be a true member of God’s covenant family.3 The covenant
was and is God’s “single-plan-through-Israel-for-the world,” the
Abrahamic covenant that meets its fulfillment in Christ, the faithful Jew
who brought the hopes of the Jewish nation to fruition.4 Wright rejects as
nonsense the idea that the judge in a law court could transfer moral
uprightness to a defendant. “When the judge in the law court justifies
someone, he does not give that person his own particular ‘righteousness.’
He creates the status the vindicated defendant now possesses, by an act
of declaration, a ‘speech-act’ in our contemporary jargon.”5
Following to some extent the so-called new perspective on Paul,
without agreeing with all its defenders,6 Wright rejects the view that Paul
was reacting to the works-righteousness of contemporary Judaism.
Rather, Paul was attempting to correct the exclusivist attitudes of the
Jews, by which they denied to Gentiles inclusion in the covenant family.
“God’s purpose in calling Abraham was to bless the whole world, to call
out a people from Gentiles as well as Jews. This purpose has now been
accomplished through the faithfulness of the Messiah, and all who
believe in him constitute this fulfilled-family-of-Abraham.”7
Wright writes eloquently of the transforming work of the Holy
Spirit.8 But he separates justification from the work of the Spirit, who
enables believers to obey God’s law. In his view, the Holy Spirit has
nothing to do with justification. The latter is a change of status for the
believer; the work of the Spirit is a separate transforming work.
Without in any way detracting from the enormous importance of the
everlasting covenant experience for the believer, and without
depreciating the work of the Spirit as described by Wright, I wish to
demonstrate that his definition of justification does not adequately do
justice to Paul’s meaning. Despite Wright’s rejection of the basic

to faith rather than God’s declaration about faith, have reinforced as well a polarization
between Jesus and Paul which a more historically grounded and theologically astute reading
can and must avoid” (Ibid, 159, 160).
3
N. T. Wright, Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity, 2009), 90, 91.
4
Ibid., 95-99.
5
Ibid., 69.
6
Ibid., 28.
7
Ibid., 118.
8
Ibid., 107; cf. Paul in Fresh Perspective, 97-101.
167
 JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
understanding of Luther and Calvin that justification includes both a
legal transaction and also an aspect of spiritual transformation in the
sense of God-given reorientation that makes sanctification possible, it is
my contention that their understanding of justification was thoroughly
biblical.
Before presenting my own interpretation, it is helpful to briefly
consider John Piper’s critique of Wright. In his work, The Future of
Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright, Piper debates with Wright by
presenting the traditional Protestant view of imputed righteousness,
which counts the believer to be morally righteous even though, in fact,
he is not. Piper writes:

The omniscient Judge does not merely show clemency or forgiveness

and assign us a status of ‘righteous’; he finds in our favor precisely
because he counts us as having the moral righteousness that we in fact
do not have in ourselves. When the charge against us is read (‘You do
not have moral righteousness’) and the verdict of the Judge is rendered
(‘I declare you are not guilty as charged but do indeed have moral
righteousness’), the righteousness in view in this declaration is real
moral righteousness. I will argue later that this is the righteousness of
Christ imputed to the guilty through faith alone. The declaration of
justification in the law-court of God is not merely forgiveness; it is not
merely the status of acquitted; it is counting the defendant as morally
righteous though in himself he is not.”9

Piper’s definition of justification (imputation) seems to be no more

satisfactory than Wright’s view of justification as merely a change in
legal status. Ultimately, Piper’s view also boils down to justification
merely as a legal change in status, a forensic declaration without any real
moral transformation. Believers are counted to be that which they are
really not. In an effort to avoid the Roman Catholic doctrine of infused
righteousness, traditional Protestants such as Piper have denied the

9
John Piper, The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright (Wheaton, IL:
Crossway Books, 2007), 78; cf. Guy Prentiss Waters, Justification and the New Perspectives
on Paul (Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P & R. Publishing, 2004), 178, 179. On the question of
imputation, Waters agrees with Piper.
168
 GANE: ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION
spiritually transformative reality of “Christ in you, the hope of glory”
(Col. 1:27).10
In the following sections of this paper, I will identify four
overlapping aspects of spiritual transformation in Paul’s delineation of
justification as (1) forgiveness, (2) imputation of righteousness, (3) the
“new birth,” and (4) union with Christ. Then I will briefly show how
Luther and Calvin departed from Catholic theology to agree with Paul.

Forgiveness
Paul speaks of justification as forgiveness in Acts 13:38-39, a literal
translation of which reads as follows: “Therefore let it be known to you,
men, brethren, that through this man to you forgiveness of sins is being
proclaimed; from all things from which you were not able by the law of
Moses to be justified, by this man all who believe are justified.”11
Similarly, in Romans 4:1-8, Paul equates justification with imputation of
righteousness and identifies it as forgiveness, as shown by the way he
quotes Psalm 32:1, 2: “David also speaks of the blessing upon the man to
whom God reckons righteousness apart from works: ‘Blessed are those
whose lawless deeds have been forgiven’” (vv. 6, 7).
There is an important legal aspect to forgiveness: Sinners are
acquitted when they seek God’s forgiveness by virtue of the fact that
Christ suffered the punishment for their sins. But forgiveness is not only
a forensic matter. Paul specifically refers to forgiveness as spiritual
transformation: “And when you were dead in trespasses and the
uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive together with him,
when he forgave us all our trespasses” (Col. 2:13; NRSV). Thus the
NRSV translates the aorist, middle participle ÷áñéóÜìåíïò as a temporal,
adverbial participle. Just as legitimately, it may be regarded as a causal
participle to be translated: “because (or since) he forgave us all our

10
Speaking of the distinctive positions of Lutheran and Reformed Orthodoxy on
justification, Alister McGrath writes: “Both confessions understand justification to be the
forensic declaratory act of God . . . subsequent to vocation and prior to sanctification.” He
speaks of “a corresponding weakness” in both systems “with justification tending to be
treated as a legal fiction. . . . Justification is thus conceived analogically, as the remission
of sins and imputation of righteousness by a purely verbal decree in foro divino, without any
change in the sinner having taken place with reference to which this verdict could be
supported” (Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification (Cambridge
University Press, 1986), 2:44, 45. On the Tridentine view of justification, including the
doctrine of infused righteousness, see McGrath, ibid., 68-86.
11
My translation.
169
 JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
trespasses.”12 Either way the force of the passage is that God’s
forgiveness made the Colossians alive with Christ from spiritual death.13
Not only did this forgiveness forensically erase the record of sin with its
legal demands for punishment (v. 14); it also gave new life when the
believer was spiritually circumcised “by putting off the body of the flesh
in the circumcision of Christ” (v. 11), buried with him in baptism, and
raised to new life with him “through faith in the power of God, who
raised him from the dead” (v. 12; NRSV). This new life initially received
from Christ at the time of conversion is not only new in the sense of
forensic freedom from condemnation, as shown by the preceding
context: In verses 6-7, Paul exhorts: “As you therefore have received
Christ Jesus the Lord, continue to live your lives in him, rooted and built
up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding
in thanksgiving” (NRSV). Spiritual transformation of life established by
initially receiving Christ, when the experience of forgiveness occurred
(v. 13), is to continue in spiritual life.
The use of –nåóéò in the New Testament underlines the concept that
forgiveness involves spiritual transformation. According to Arndt and
Gingrich, the word means “release from captivity” as well as “pardon,
cancellation of an obligation, a punishment, or guilt. . . . The Forgiveness
of Sins. . . . Forgiveness and Reconciliation.14 Significantly, the word
–nåóéò is used twice in Luke 4:18: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent

12
H. E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey refer to “The Causal Participle. The participle may
denote that which is the ground of the action of the main verb. Here it functions in the same
general relation as a causal clause introduced by because or since.” They cite as examples
the Greek of John 4:45, Matt. 3:6, and 1 Tim. 4:8 (A Manual Grammar of the Greek New
Testament [New York: Macmillan, 1927, 1960], 227).
13
The context of Col 2:13 supports this conclusion. The Colossians “were circumcised
with a spiritual circumcision, by putting off the body of the flesh in the circumcision of
Christ” (v. 11). They were “buried with him in baptism” and “raised with him through faith
in the power of God” (v. 12). This spiritual resurrection happened “when or because he
forgave us all our trespasses.” The main verb in verse 13 is “made alive” (óõíåæùïðïßçóåí).
The participle ÷áñéóÜìåíïò, “when he forgave,” provides the ground of the action of the
main verb. Christ made this transformation by forgiveness possible by “erasing the record”
of our guilt, “nailing it to the cross” (v. 14). We were not forgiven at the cross, but when we
accepted Christ as Savior. At the cross, Christ rendered possible the transformation of
forgiveness by “erasing the record that stood against us with its legal demands” (v. 14).
14
William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Cambridge: University Press, 1957, 1967),
124.
170
 GANE: ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION
me to proclaim release [–nåóéí] to the captives and recovery of sight to
the blind, to let the oppressed go free” [. . . •ðïóôåÃëáé ôåèñáõóìÝíïõò
¦í •nÝóåé: literally, “to send forth the oppressed in release”]. Jesus did
not go around liberating people from literal jails. Rather, he provided
spiritual release, i.e., forgiveness, and freedom to people held captive and
oppressed by sin and Satan (cf. Acts 10:38). This freedom is associated
with “recovery of sight,” so Christ provided not only legal freedom from
guilt, but also a change of spiritual perspective.
Paul was reiterating the teaching of the Old Testament. The Psalmist
wrote of God, “who forgives all your iniquity, who heals all your
diseases, who redeems your life from the Pit” (Ps. 103:3, 4; ). That this
forgiveness, healing, and redemption involves spiritual transformation is
suggested by the following words: “. . . who crowns you with steadfast
love and mercy, who satisfies you with good as long as you live so that
your youth is renewed like the eagle’s.” (vv. 4, 5).
When David sought forgiveness for his sin with Bathsheba he asked
for spiritual cleansing: “Blot out my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly
from my iniquity, cleanse me from my sin. . . . Purge me with hyssop,
and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. . . .
Create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit within
me” (Ps. 51:1, 2, 7, 10).15
God’s legal act of abolishing the repentant sinner’s guilt involves the
gift of spiritual cleansing that transforms the human attitude and
relationship to him. Christ’s forgiveness brings us into loving fellowship
with him that replaces guilt and condemnation, making long-term
spiritual renewal possible.16

15
Ellen White expressed it in harmony with the biblical evidence: “God’s forgiveness
is not merely a judicial act by which He sets us free from condemnation. It is not only
forgiveness for sin, but reclaiming from sin. It is the outflow of redeeming love that
transforms the heart. David had the true conception of forgiveness when he prayed, ‘Create
in me a clean heart, O God: and renew a right spirit within me’ (Psalm 51:10).” (Thoughts
From The Mount of Blessing (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1896, 1956), 114.
16
In the light of this discussion, the use of êá in 1 John 1:9 may be regarded as
epexegetical or an example of hendiadys, so that the verse may be translated: “If we confess
our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins that is to say to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness.” On the New Testament uses of êáÂ, see F. Blass and A. Debrunner (transl.
Robert W. Funk), A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian
Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 227-229.
171
 JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
Forgiveness is justification; forgiveness is both a forensic and a
transforming divine act; therefore justification is both forensic and
transformational.

Imputation of Righteousness
John Piper states the traditional post-Reformation view of imputation
when he asserts that God “counts us as having the moral righteousness
that we in fact do not have in ourselves.”17 It is my view that this
conclusion is unwarranted by the biblical facts. Rather the evidence
points to the conclusion that God’s imputation of righteousness to
believers is a legal declaration of a simultaneous change of status and a
change of spiritual orientation resulting from bestowal of righteousness
upon them by the gift of the Holy Spirit.
To demonstrate that Abraham was justified by faith, not by works,
Paul quotes Genesis 15:6. “For what does the Scripture say? ‘And
Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness’”
(Rom. 4:3). Abraham’s believing (Hebrew Hiph. of ïîà) was
reckoned/counted/imputed (Qal of ávç; LXX and NT ëïãßæïìáé) to him
as righteousness, which meant that through belief he gained possession
of it as a gift. Samson Raphael Hirsch explains the verb ïîà, “believe”:
“To respond to a spoken sentence with ’aman does not only mean to
declare it to be true, but to give yourself up to the truth expressed in the
sentence, to make it your own, and to vow to allow yourself to be guided
by it.”18
In the Old Testament, belief in God involves not merely acceptance
of ideas, doctrines, or propositions, but acceptance of God into the life,
resulting in practical commitment to a lifestyle that is stipulated by
Yahweh as appropriate to the everlasting covenant relationship (cf. Ps.
31:23; 78:7, 8; Isa. 1:21, 26). Speaking of Abraham, Nehemiah wrote:
“You found his heart faithful before you, and made with him a covenant
to give to his descendants the land of the Canaanite” (Neh. 9:8). Faith is
related to righteousness, obedience, and ethical goodness. We might say
that belief (faith) is union with God that affects all of a person’s attitudes
and actions. No wonder God considered (counted/reckoned/imputed)
Abraham righteous (Gen. 15:6). He considered it so because, in view of

17
John Piper, The Future of Justification; A Response to N. T. Wright, 78.
18
Samson Raphael Hirsch, The Pentateuch (London: Isaac Levy, 1959, 1963), 1: 273,
274.
172
 GANE: ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION
Abraham’s faith, the patriarch shared the righteousness of God. His
righteousness was God’s righteousness, but because of his faith union
with God it was also his. Abraham experienced righteousness by faith
and, insofar as he retained his faith union with God, his life demonstrated
genuine faithfulness.
This interpretation of Abraham’s experience is supported by
examination of the semantic range of the verb ávç in the Hebrew Old
Testament, which is followed by that of ëïãßæïìáé, its Greek equivalent
in the Septuagint. These words cover a wide semantic range, depending
on the contexts in which they occur:
1. At times they refer to things or persons that are regarded as what
they are not. Rachel and Leah complained that Laban regarded (ávç >
ëïãßæïìáé) them as foreigners (Gen. 31:15), although they were not.
Judah thought (ávç) Tamar to be a harlot even though she was not (Gen.
38:15). Leviticus 25:31 legislates: “But the houses of the villages which
have no wall around them shall be reckoned (ávç) with [i.e., regarded as
if they were, although they are really not] the fields of the country; they
may be redeemed, and they shall be released in the jubilee.” Eli supposed
(ávç) that Hannah was drunk, but she was sober (1 Sam. 1:13). Job
thought (ávç) God counted him as his enemy, but he did not (Job 13:24;
19:11).
2. On the other hand, the verb ávç can refer to people or things being
regarded as what they in fact are. The Emim were regarded (ávç >
ëïãßæïìáé) as giants because of their great size (Deut. 2:11, 20). Job
regarded (ávç) his comforters as stupid because they were (Job 18:3).
Phinehas was counted (ávç) as righteous because his actions revealed
that he was (Ps. 106:30, 31; cf. Num 25:10-13). Nehemiah’s treasurers
were “counted (ávç) faithful” because they were (Neh. 13:13). Joshua
13:3 mentions land “reckoned (ávç) as Canaanite” because the
Canaanites possessed it at the time.
Second Samuel 4:2 refers to the fact that the village of Beeroth was
“reckoned (ávç) to Benjamin,” i.e., owned by Benjamin, the tribe to
which it had been deeded in the distribution of the Promised Land at the
time of Joshua (Josh. 9:17; 18:21-25). So in this context, ávç refers to the
actual result of a transfer that was a gift from God. This real ownership
was, of course, under God’s overall ownership of the land (Lev. 25).
Therefore, it was conditional on maintenance of the covenant. If the
people broke the covenant, they would lose the land and go into exile
(Lev. 26). So, by analogy, the fact that we have the real gift of
173
 JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
justification doesn’t remove its conditionality. It’s not once-saved-
always-saved.
The legislation of Numbers 18:26-31 establishes an actual transfer of
agricultural tithes that were to be “imputed” (ávç) to the Levites. The
tithes constituted a tangible gift that was actually possessed by the
Levites, as shown by the fact that they and members of their households
were to eat of this food (v. 31).
The traditional post-Reformation understanding of imputation in
Romans 4 acknowledges only one of the Old Testament connotations of
ávç and ëïãßæïìáé. Imputation of righteousness is said to be only God
legally counting that which is not actually so in the lives of believers.
But Paul’s use of ëïãßæïìáé draws on another part of its semantic range.
In Romans 4:4 he notes, “Now to one who works, wages are not
reckoned [ëïãßæåôáé] as a gift but as something due.” Here a worker’s
wages are reckoned as what they actually are: something due. Paul goes
on to say: “But to the one who without works trusts Him who justifies
the ungodly, such faith is reckoned [ëïãßæåôáé] as righteousness” (v. 5).
The contrast in this passage is between one who works and one who does
not work. In both cases, a transfer is reckoned/imputed: wages to a
worker and righteousness to a believer. There is no indication that there
is another contrast here between regarding something that actually
belongs to a person (“wages”; v. 4; meaning 2. of ávç > ëïãßæïìáé,
above), and that which does not (“righteousness”; v. 5; meaning 1.,
above). Like payment of wages, the gift of righteousness is not only a
legal accounting; it is an actual transfer. The difference is that
righteousness is a gift; it is not earned.
Abraham received the gift of righteousness before he was given the
“sign of circumcision” (Rom 4:10). Circumcision was “a seal of the
righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised”
(Rom. 4:11)19 Paul doesn’t say that the righteousness Abraham had by
faith was only a legal declaration. Following his use of ëïãßæïìáé in
verses 4 and 5, the conclusion is warranted that God declared that which
he simultaneously bestowed upon Abraham: the gift of His

19
All translations fill in the ellipsis with the verb “to have.” For a discussion of ellipsis
in the Greek NT, see Blass and Debrunner, A Greek Grammar, 253-255.
174
 GANE: ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION
righteousness. According to Paul, this same gift may belong to all
believers (Rom. 4:22-25). 20

The New Birth

Titus 3:5-7 literally reads:
Not by works in righteousness which we did but according to His
mercy He saved us, by the washing of rebirth [ðáëéããåíåóßáò] and
renewing of the Holy Spirit, which He poured out [¦îÝ÷ååí] upon us
richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that having been justified
[äéêáéùèÝíôåò] by His grace we might be heirs according to the hope of
eternal life.

Here God saved us through the new birth experience by pouring his
Spirit upon us (cf. Acts 2:17, 18, 33). In Titus 3:5-7, we are heirs as a
result (Ëíá) of God’s saving (§óùóåí), washing (ëïõôñïØ), pouring
(¦îÝ÷ååí), justifying (äéêáéùèÝíôåò) act. Elsewhere, Paul emphasizes that
it is justification, the gift of righteousness, that makes us heirs (Rom.
4:13, 14; Gal. 3:29; 4:1, 6, 7). According to Romans 8:13-17, it is the
Holy Spirit who conveys this heirship to us.
In Titus 3:7, the action of the first aorist, passive participle precedes
the action of the main verb in the sentence. The main verb is ãåíçèäìåí,
“we might become.” We were justified prior to becoming heirs, so that
we might become heirs. God’s saving act in this passage is identified
with his justifying act, and the result is that we are heirs. Since he saved
us by pouring the Holy Spirit upon us, this is how he justified us. The
wording of the passage supports the conclusion that salvation is

20
Ellen White emphasized the two biblical concepts: “If you give yourself to Him
[Christ], and accept Him as Your Savior, then, sinful as your life may have been, for His
sake you are accounted righteous. Christ’s character stands in place of your character, and
you are accepted before God just as if you had not sinned.
More than this, Christ changes the heart. He abides in your heart by faith,” Steps to
Christ (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1956), 62.
“Through faith in His name He imputes unto us His righteousness, and it becomes a
living principle in our life,” That I May Know Him (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald,
1964), 302.
“Having made us righteous through the imputed righteousness of Christ, God
pronounces us just, and treats us as just,” Selected Messages (Washington, D.C.: Review and
Herald, 1958), 1: 394.
“Let perfect obedience be rendered to God through the imputed righteousness of Christ,
and we shall reveal to the world the fact that God loves us as he loves Jesus” (Signs of the
Times, May 28, 1896).
175
 JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
justification, and that God accomplishes this for us by the washing of
rebirth and the renewing by the Holy Spirit.
A similar emphasis appears in Galatians 2. Believers are justified by
“faith in Christ Jesus,” “not by the works of the law” (v. 16). Paul “died
to the law” that he “might live to God” (v.19). He has been “crucified
with Christ” so that now Christ lives in Him (v. 20). Paul is talking about
justification. He also asks the Galatians: “Did you receive the Spirit by
the works of the law, or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish?
Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?”
They began with justification (Gal. 2:16) and they began by the Spirit.
This correlation indicates that the work of the Spirit is an essential aspect
of justification. Paul again quotes Genesis 15:6 (Gal. 3:6) and speaks of
the Gentiles being justified by faith (v. 7-9). He concludes by
announcing that Christ died “in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of
Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the
promise of the Spirit through faith” (v. 14). Abraham’s blessing was
justification by faith. It is ours when “we receive the promise of the
Spirit through faith.” So justification is a transforming work of the Spirit.
Galatians teaches the same message as Titus 3:5-7: Justification includes
the new birth experience.

Union with Christ Through the Holy Spirit

Righteousness is revealed by the Holy Spirit. Paul teaches that the
power in the gospel for believers in Christ results from “the
righteousness of God” being “revealed” (•ðïêáëýðôåôáé) to them (Rom.
1:16-17). Elsewhere Paul uses the verb áðïêáëýðôù to refer to the
revelation of God’s gifts to believers by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 2:9-16).
In Romans 1:16, 17, the revelation of the righteousness of God by the
Spirit results in the believer becoming righteous. “The righteous person
shall live by faith” (v. 17, my translation).
Justification by grace is the gift of spiritual power (righteousness) to
the believer. In Romans 3, “the righteousness of God” is “through faith
in Jesus Christ for all who believe” (v. 22) Justification is “by grace as a
gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (v. 24). In the
writings of Paul, grace is the gift of unmerited spiritual power (1 Cor.
1:4-9; 15:10; 2 Cor. 9:8, 14; 2 Tim. 2:1). As in Ephesians 1:7, 8 Paul
identifies forgiveness with redemption and the gift of grace, so here in
Romans 3:24 he identifies justification as redemption and the gift of
grace. What this gift entails, Paul proceeds to explain: 1. Christ’s atoning

176
 GANE: ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION
sacrifice, “effective through faith” (v. 25); 2. “to show his righteousness,
because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously
committed” (v. 25, i.e. forgiveness for the believer); 3. “to show his
righteousness (äéêáéïóýíçò) at the present time, so that he might be
righteous (äßêáéïí) and the one who “righteouses” (äéêáéïØíôá, declares
and makes righteous) the one by faith in Jesus” (v. 26, my translation).
Justification “by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in
Christ Jesus” (v. 24) involves these three elements: his sacrifice and his
forgiveness, which is his transforming gift of righteousness to the
believer.
Justification involves peace through Christ and the Holy Spirit.
Romans 5 tells us that “since we are justified by faith, we have peace
with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (v. 1), because “God’s love has
been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given
to us” (v. 5).
Justification is death to sin and new life in Christ. Romans 6:7
translates literally: “For he who has died has been justified from sin.” By
justification, the “old man” (v. 6), the old manner of life, the old life of
habitual sinning has died (cf. Eph. 4:22; Col. 3:3), and the new life in
Christ has begun (cf. Rom. 6:4; Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:1). Paul adds: “So you
also must consider [ëïãßæåóèå] yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in
Christ Jesus” (Rom 6:11). Once again, Paul uses ëïãßæïìáé. Believers are
to regard themselves dead to sin but alive to God. They are not merely
recipients of a legal declaration; this transformation is a reality.
Justification results in sanctification (holiness). The Christian
believers Paul was addressing had “once been slaves of sin” (Rom. 6:17).
But when they responded to the gospel message they were “set free from
sin” and had “become slaves of righteousness” (v. 18). This
transformation occurred when they were justified. In the book of
Romans, Paul speaks of justification as the gift of the righteousness of
God (1:16, 17; 3:21-24; 4:22-25). For these believers the old life of sin
had been crucified (6:6). They had died to sin when they were justified.
“For he who has died has been justified from sin” (v. 7; my translation).
Before they were justified, they presented their members “as slaves to
impurity and to greater and greater iniquity” (v. 19). Now Paul urges
that, since they have become willing slaves of righteousness (in
justification), they should present their members “as slaves to
righteousness for sanctification” (åÆò ãéáóüí, v. 19; emphasis supplied).
Paul adds, “Now that you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God

177
 JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
[in justification], the advantage you get is sanctification” (v. 22). Here
the gift of Christ’s righteousness in justification is the divine act that
makes the believer holy or sanctified. So justification results in
sanctification.
The Greek word for “sanctification” (ãéáóìüò) used in Romans
6:19, 22 means “holiness.” The consistent teaching of Scripture is that
the Holy Spirit makes us holy (1 Peter 1:2; 2 Thess. 2:13; Rom. 15:16).
Never does the Bible say that we sanctify ourselves or that our works
make us holy. The gift of righteousness in justification sanctifies us or
makes us holy because in justification the Holy Spirit is poured into our
hearts (Titus 3:5-7; Rom. 5:1, 2, 5; 8:9, 10; Gal. 3:3-14). This is why
justification and sanctification are inseparable. Christ’s gift of himself to
us by the Holy Spirit in justification makes us holy or sanctified.
Justification is Christ bestowed; sanctification is Christ possessed.
Justification is Christ coming into believers’ hearts every day as they
surrender to him; sanctification is Christ dwelling in their hearts every
day. They have the possession because they have received the bestowal.
Sanctification is often spoken of in Scripture as present holiness in
Christ. Paul was sent to the Gentiles “so that they may receive
forgiveness of sins [justification] and a place among those who have
been sanctified [ôïÃò ºãéáóìÝíïéò] by faith in me” (Acts 26:17, 18).21
Paul speaks of himself as “a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles . . .
so that the offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable, having been
sanctified [ºãéáóìÝíç] by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 15:16).22 To the
Corinthian believers, Paul wrote: “You were washed, you were
sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in
the Spirit of our God.” (1 Cor. 6:11). They had received the cleansing
involved in the inseparable experiences of justification and
sanctification, and Paul wanted them to retain the blessing.

21
My translation. ÇãéáóìÝíïéò is the perfect, passive participle of ãéÜæù (the verb “to
sanctify”). ÔïÃò ºãéáóìÝíïéò means “those who have been sanctified.” “The significance of
the perfect tense in presenting action as having reached its termination and existing in its
finished results lies at the basis of its uses. Emphasis, as indicated by the context or the
meaning of the verb root, may be on either the completion of the action or on its finished
results.”— Dana and Mantey, A Manual Grammar, 201.
22
My translation. The Greek reads ºãéáóìÝíç ¦í ðíåýìáôé ãßå, having been sanctified
(or “made holy”) by the Holy Spirit.” ÇãéáóìÝíç is the perfect passive participle of ãéÜæù.

178
 GANE: ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION
Paul also spoke of sanctification as progressive growth in holiness.
“All of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord as though
reflected in a mirror are being transformed into the same image from one
degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit” (2
Cor. 3:18). The daily experience of justification (receiving Christ into
the heart by the gift of the Holy Spirit) results in progressive growth in
holiness. Paul emphasized this as a more-and-more experience in his first
epistle to the Thessalonians. “And may the Lord make you increase and
abound in love for one another and for all, just as we abound in love for
you. And may he so strengthen your hearts in holiness that you may be
blameless. . . .” He urged them “to live and to please God . . . more and
more. . . . For this is the will of God, your sanctification.” (1 Thess.
3:12-4:3).
Notice that the evidence presented above shows that both
justification and sanctification involve the work of God both for and in
the believer. The commonly cited distinction that “justification is what
God does for you and sanctification is what God does in you” is a false
dichotomy that fails to accurately reflect biblical teaching.
Justification involves the bestowal of the Holy Spirit upon the heart
of the believer, providing union with Christ. Romans 7 emphasizes that
justified believers enjoy “the new life of the Spirit” (v. 6). Romans 8:9,
10 further stresses the point: “But you are not in the flesh,” i.e., you are
not unjustified, “You are in the Spirit, since the Spirit of God dwells in
you.” That is, you are justified believers. “Anyone who does not have the
Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.” So if justification does not
involve the transforming work of the Spirit, so-called justified believers
would not belong to Christ. “But if Christ is in you, though the body is
dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness.”
Therefore, union with Christ by the transforming work of the Holy Spirit
is the justifying gift of righteousness.

179
 JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
Luther and Calvin23
The standard view in the Middle Ages was that, when God justifies a
believer, the Holy Spirit injects into the soul a habitus or quality that
makes the soul intrinsically righteous, having the capacity to perform
works capable of earning merit with God.24 Influenced by Aristotle’s
matter-form analysis, Thomas Aquinas (ca. 1225-74) defined
justification (salvation) as infusion of grace that repairs (re-forms, re-
makes) the soul of man so that now it has the power to do meritorious
works.25
The Tridentine definition of justification closely followed that of
Thomas Aquinas.26 The fathers of the Council of Trent (1545-63) taught
that the sinner’s own will, cooperating with grace, projects him toward
justification.27 Like Aquinas, Trent defined justification as an inner
renewal of the soul.28 The justified person has the ability to do works that
are meritorious in the sight of God and that will improve upon his level
of justification.29
The Roman Catholic position on justification, as defined by Aquinas
and Trent, involved transformation, re-creation, re-forming of the
immortal soul within man. This was not a reiteration of Jesus’ teaching
of the new birth. Righteousness within, for Aquinas and Trent is a
habitus or quality injected or infused into the souls of believers so that
they are intrinsically or inherently righteous. Righteousness within is not
Christ within by the presence of the Holy Spirit. The soul which is now
righteous in nature has the capacity to perform works that are meritorious
in God’s sight.

23
What follows is a brief summary of my paper, “The Roman Catholic and
Reformation Concepts of Justification.” An abbreviated version of this paper titled
“Justification: Historic Journey from the Middle Ages through Now” was published in
Ministry (December, 2009), 16-21.
24
See Alister E. McGrath, Iustitia Dei, 1:40-51.
25
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, vol. 20: Great Books of Our Western World
(Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc, 1952), part I of second part, question 110, articles
2 and 4. Ibid., part I of second part, question 113, article 3. Cf. Alister E. McGrath, Iustitia
Dei, 1:44-47, 63-65, 81, 82, 85-87.
26
McGrath, Iustitia Dei, 2: 64; Reinhold Seeburg, The History of Doctrines (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1977, 1898), 2:433.
27
Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1877,
1919), 2:93.
28
Ibid., 94-99.
29
Ibid., 99-101, 107-109.
180
 GANE: ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION
Martin Luther (1483-1546) and John Calvin (1509-64), by contrast
with Aquinas and Trent, saw justification as involving two simultaneous,
inseparable aspects: (1) The legal or forensic aspect involving God’s
forgiveness of the believers’ sins and his crediting Christ’s righteousness
to their account, and (2) a transformational aspect involving Christ’s gift
of his righteousness to believers by the Holy Spirit. The soul is not re-
formed or re-created so that it becomes inherently righteous. The
transformation is Christ, by the Holy Spirit, coming to dwell in the
human heart, so that his righteousness becomes the believer’s
righteousness by his righteous presence. Believers remain fallen, sinful
human beings, but their fallen natures are now under the control and
direction of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
Paul Althaus establishes that Luther understood justification in the
two senses described above,30 and Alister E. McGrath has underlined the
point.31 Study of Luther’s works supports their interpretation. Luther
often emphasized the legal aspect in justification.32 On the other hand, he
often emphasized the transformational aspect in justification.33 He
regarded justification as involving the transforming work of the Holy
Spirit in the life of the believer. For example, he wrote: “Then what does
justify? Hearing the voice of the Bridegroom, hearing the proclamation
of faith–when this is heard it justifies. Why? Because it brings the Holy
Spirit who justifies.”34 In his lengthy comments on Galatians 2:16,
contained in his 1535 Lectures on Galatians, Luther repeatedly presents
justification as Christ bestowed upon the heart of the believer.35
McGrath points out that, although John Calvin gave greater emphasis
to the legal (forensic) aspect in justification than did Luther,36 “he
nevertheless preserves an important aspect of Luther’s understanding of
justification which Melanchthon abandoned–the personal union of Christ
and the believer in justification. Calvin speaks of the believer being

30
Paul Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther, transl. Robert C. Schultz
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1966), 226, 234, 235.
31
Alister E. McGrath, Iustitia Dei, 2:14, 126.
32
Luther’s Works, ed. Helmut T. Lehmann, 55 vols. (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1960),
34:152, 153.
33
Ibid., 34:177, 178; 22:275; 25:104.
34
Ibid., 26:208.
35
Ibid., 26:130, 132, 137. Cf. Luther’s comments on Gal. 2:20: Ibid., 26:167,
168.
36
McGrath, 2:36-38.
181
 JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
‘grafted into Christ’, so that the concept of incorporation becomes
central to his understanding of justification. The iustitia Christi [the
righteousness of Christ], on the basis of which man is justified, is treated
as if it were man’s within the context of the intimate personal
relationship of Christ and the believer.”37 In Calvin’s Institutes of the
Christian Religion, he identifies both the legal element38 and the
transformational element39 in justification.
Calvin properly objected to Andreas Osiander’s (1498-1552) view
that justification involves infusion of essential righteousness into the soul
of the believer. In his answer, Calvin emphasized the importance of
personal union with Christ. He wrote:

Moreover, lest by his cavils he deceive the unwary, I acknowledge that

we are devoid of this incomparable gift [righteousness] until Christ
becomes ours. Therefore, to that union of the head and members, the
residence of Christ in our hearts, in fine, the mystical union, we assign
the highest rank, Christ when he becomes ours making us partners with
him in the gifts with which he was endued. Hence we do not view him
as at a distance and without us, but as we have put him on, and been
ingrafted into his body, he designs to make us one with himself, and,
therefore, we glory in having a fellowship of righteousness with him.40

McGrath summarizes later theological developments: “Luther’s

concept of justification, his concept of the presence of Christ within the
believer . . . all were rejected or radically modified by those who
followed him.”41 In his later works, Melanchthon promoted legal-only
justification, as Luther never had.42 The authors of the Lutheran Formula
of Concord (1577), including Martin Chemnitz, followed Melanchthon,

37
Ibid., 36, 37; cf. Wilhelm Niesel, The Theology of Calvin (Philadelphia:
Westminister, 1956), 120-139.
38
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, transl. Henry Beveridge
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1559, 1962), III.XI.2, 3.
39
Ibid., III.XI.10.
40
Ibid.
41
McGrath, 2:32.
42
Ibid., 23-26.
182
 GANE: ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION
not Luther.43 The tendency within orthodox Lutheranism has been to
treat justification as a “legal fiction.”44

Conclusion
The biblical evidence indicates that justification as forgiveness and
the imputation of Christ’s righteousness is both forensic and
transformational. It also establishes that justification includes the new
birth experience for the believer.
Despite N. T. Wright’s assertions and John Piper’s counter-claim,
Luther and Calvin closely and accurately followed Paul’s understanding
of justification (or imputation of righteousness) as involving both a
forensic and a spiritually transformational aspect.

Erwin R. Gane earned the M.A., M.Div., and M.Th. from Andrews University
Theological Seminary and the Ph.D. in Renaissance/Reformation from the
University of Nebraska. He has taught theology at Avondale College in
Australia, Union College in Lincoln, Nebraska, and Pacific Union College in
Angwin, California. From 1986 to 1995 he was the editor of the Adventist Adult
Sabbath School Bible Study Guide. He has pastored churches in both Australia
and the U.S. He has written seven books: Heaven’s Open Door (a study of the
seven seals of the book of Revelation; Pacific Press, 1989); This We Believe
(Pacific Press, 1993; co-authored with Leo Van Dolson); Enlightened by the
Spirit (Pacific Press, 1995); You Ask, God Answers (Orion Publishing, 1998);
Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians (Orion, 2003); Jesus Only: Paul’s Letter to the
Romans (Amazing Facts, 2005); and An Examination of Desmond Ford’s Book,
Right with God Right Now (Orion, 2009). [email protected]

43
Ibid., 29.
44
Ibid, 44, 45.
183