Latest / Reformed Thinking / Can God Forgive Without Justice? | John Owen

Transcript

Can God Forgive Without Justice? | John Owen · Reformed Thinking

0:00
Welcome to Reformed Thinking. Today, we are taking on a
0:03
comprehensive deep dive into a piece of theological history
0:07
that demands your absolute attention.
0:08
Yeah, we are. The mission for our time
0:10
together today is to examine the preparatory notes, the
0:13
dedications and the offers. Preface to a 1653 theological
0:17
treatise. Right.
0:18
And it was written by the great Puritan theologian John Owen.
0:21
The work is titled A Dissertation on Divine Justice.
0:24
And it was originally published in Latin under the title The
0:27
Diatriba. Yes, the diatriba.
0:29
Now, before we get bogged down in the historical context of
0:33
17th century England, I want you to consider a staggering
0:36
theological question. It really is a heavy question.
0:39
It is could God have forgiven human sin by a simple choice
0:43
without requiring any sacrifice or atonement whatsoever?
0:46
Could he have just, you know, looked at fallen humanity, waved
0:49
his hand, and declared everyone pardoned?
0:52
It sounds like a theoretical puzzle you might hear in a late
0:54
night dorm discussion, but John Owen, who stands as a giant of
0:58
the Christian faith, saw a highly dangerous heresy lurking
1:02
behind a yes to that specific question.
1:04
He absolutely did. And as Protestant Christians who
1:07
hold fast to reform theology in the Westminster Confession, both
1:11
of us see this historical text intersecting directly with the
1:14
core tenets of our faith. We are talking specifically
1:17
about Christ's satisfaction for sin.
1:20
If you get the mechanics of this wrong, the entire basis of the
1:22
gospel shifts beneath your feet. Right.
1:24
So we're going to look closely at what Owen had to say about
1:27
this, focusing on the very prefaces we're he laid out his
1:30
absolute necessity for writing the book in the first place.
1:33
Let us start with the core dispute.
1:36
It is a question that stops you right in your tracks.
1:38
It gets straight to the heart of who God is in his very nature.
1:42
We are looking at a massive debate over whether Dodd's
1:44
justice is essential to his being or if it is an arbitrary
1:48
choice. The central argument Owen
1:51
tackles in this work is refuting the idea that God's justice is
1:55
just a free act of his will. His opponents were arguing that
1:58
God could theoretically choose not to punish sin at all.
2:01
They were suggesting that justice is something God decides
2:03
to exercise, like putting on a coat, rather than an inescapable
2:09
part of his very nature. Owen steps into the ring with a
2:12
very clear, highly definitive thesis.
2:15
Sin, punishing justice, is a natural attribute of the divine
2:19
nature. It's exercise is absolutely
2:21
necessary to God. Yes, he cannot simply ignore
2:24
sin, any more than he can cease to be holy or cease to be
2:28
infinite. I think we need to break that
2:30
down for the listener, because the stakes here are
2:32
astronomically high. We need to illustrate why the
2:35
grave consequence of getting this wrong motivated Owen so
2:39
intensely. If you say God can forgive sin
2:42
without satisfying justice, then there is no strict necessity for
2:45
the the atonement. The cross of Jesus Christ
2:47
becomes optional. I want you to think about it
2:49
like a judge in a courtroom. If a judge has the authority to
2:53
just arbitrarily drop a speeding ticket because he feels
2:55
generous, that is an act of free will.
2:57
Right. But if a man has committed first
2:59
degree murder and the judge just says, you know what, I am in a
3:02
good mood today, you are free to go.
3:04
That judge is no longer just. He has violated the very concept
3:08
of justice itself. Owen saw that conceding this
3:11
point surrendered the entire theological argument to the
3:14
Sicilian heresy, the. Sicilians were a highly
3:17
influential group following the teachings of Faustus Ascenis,
3:20
and they completely deny the necessity of Christ's penal
3:23
substitution. That brings us right to the core
3:26
of the threat. The Sicilians viewed Jesus as an
3:29
exceptional moral example. Someone who showed us how to
3:32
live obediently unto God. But they adamantly rejected the
3:36
idea that Jesus was a substitute, absorbing the
3:38
literal wrath of God on behalf of sinners.
3:41
They argued that God being supreme, could just forgive if
3:45
justice is not a necessary attribute of God, the Sicinians
3:49
win the debate mathematically and the cross loses its absolute
3:53
necessity. To secure this theological Fort
3:55
against such a devastating error, Owen builds his proof on
3:58
4 distinct pillars in the first part of his book.
4:01
First, he argues from the statements of Holy Writ.
4:03
He brings the full, undeniable weight of Scripture to show
4:06
God's justice in action. Pointing to passages that
4:09
describe God as a consuming fire who will by no means clear the
4:12
guilty. Which makes perfect sense,
4:14
starting with the text itself. But he does not stop there.
4:17
Not at all. Second, he argues, from the
4:19
consent of mankind. He points out that even natural
4:23
human conscience across all cultures and civilizations
4:26
expects sin to be punished. There is an innate knowledge in
4:30
humanity that cosmic scales must be balanced.
4:34
Third, he points to the course of Providence.
4:37
He demonstrates how God's judgments have historically
4:40
played out in the world. You look at the flood, the
4:42
destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the exile of Israel.
4:45
History is a continuous display of God's vindicatory justice.
4:50
And 4th, which I find to be the most beautiful argument, he
4:53
points to the attributes of God as revealed in the cross of
4:56
Christ itself. The cross is the highest, most
4:58
undeniable proof that justice must be satisfied.
5:02
God would never subject His own beloved Son to the unfathomable
5:06
agony of crucifix fiction if another, simpler way, like a
5:10
mere word of pardon were possible.
5:12
But here's where the historical record throws a massive,
5:15
shocking curveball. You would naturally assume Owen
5:18
was out there solely fighting against the heretical Sicilians.
5:20
Battling the outsiders who were trying to tear down the gospel.
5:23
But the historical reality is much more intricate.
5:27
He was actually debating highly respected Orthodox theologians
5:31
within his own university. Within his own theological camp,
5:34
even this was friendly fire. It is one thing to debate an
5:37
outsider who explicitly denies the gospel.
5:40
It is quite another to realize the people inadvertently
5:44
undermining the necessity of the cross are your own esteemed
5:48
colleagues. And the most shocking opponent
5:50
in this crossfire friendly fire was none other than Doctor
5:54
William Twist. For anyone familiar with
5:56
Reformed history, that name carries massive, almost
5:59
unassailable weight Doctor. Twist was the highly esteemed
6:02
Pelocutor of the Westminster Assembly for those.
6:05
Who might not know that term? The Pelocutor was essentially
6:07
the chairman. The theological moderator chosen
6:10
to lead the very gathering of divines that produce the
6:12
Westminster Confession of Faith. He was.
6:14
A Titan of orthodoxy yet in a 1632 work called Vindicia,
6:18
Gracia Twist argued that God punishes sin simply in virtue of
6:22
a free decree. He.
6:23
Claimed God does not punish under the prompt of essential
6:25
justice as an unavoidable perfection of his character,
6:29
but. Simply because he freely decreed
6:30
to do so. In Twist's view, God could have
6:33
easily decreed otherwise. Wait.
6:35
If Twist was the head of the Westminster Assembly, the very
6:38
group that codified the Reformed doctrines we hold to, how could
6:42
he and Owen be on totally opposite sides of such a massive
6:46
theological issue? Why?
6:47
Would Twist argue that it comes? Down to what Twist was trying to
6:51
protect, Twis and others who aligned with him were fiercely
6:55
guarding the concept of God's absolute freedom.
6:57
They. Wanted to ensure that God is not
7:00
constrained by anything outside of himself that.
7:02
He is truly sovereign over all things, including the mechanisms
7:05
of salvation. They.
7:06
Believed that saying God must punish sin placed a limitation
7:10
on his divine freedom so. They categorized the punishment
7:13
of sin as a free choice, a decree that God made rather than
7:16
an inescapable reflex of his nature.
7:19
It is stunning to think about the implications of that.
7:21
Well-intentioned and defense and Twist was not alone in this
7:24
camp. Samuel Rutherford, another
7:27
monumental figure in Scottish Reformed theology, took a very
7:30
similar stance in. 1649 Rutherford put forth an argument
7:34
claiming that if you look at God's absolute capabilities
7:37
completely apart from his decree, he could have pardoned
7:40
sin and gifted heaven to humanity without any ransom.
7:45
Without any satisfaction from a surety.
7:47
And just to clarify for the listener, a surety in this
7:50
context is a guarantor, someone who assumes the legal debt of
7:54
another which. Is precisely what Christ did for
7:57
us, Rutherford. Was arguing that God does not
7:59
punish sin by necessity of nature, the way fire necessarily
8:03
casts out heat or the sun necessarily casts out light.
8:06
He. Argued God acts freely in this
8:07
regard so. Here is John Owen looking at the
8:10
theological giants of his own tradition and realizing they
8:13
have inadvertently left the back door were wide open for the
8:16
Sicilians to walk right in to. Make matters even more intense,
8:20
these opponents were bringing the great reformer John Calvin
8:23
into the mix to validate their claims.
8:25
They misused a specific passage from Calvin's writings to
8:29
bolster their case against essential justice.
8:31
They. Cited Calvin's commentary on the
8:33
Gospel of John, specifically chapter 15, verse 13 in.
8:36
That commentary Calvin wrote a phrase suggesting God could have
8:40
redeemed us by a word or a nod, but chose not to in order to
8:45
show how much he cared for our salvation.
8:47
The. Opponents seized on this
8:49
isolated phrase to say, look, even the great Calvin agrees.
8:53
God could have bypassed the bloody cross entirely.
8:57
You. Could see how that would be an
8:58
incredibly persuasive argument in the 17th century theological
9:01
debate if. You have Calvin on your side.
9:03
You practically have the argument one.
9:06
But Owen approaches this with incredible scholarly integrity.
9:10
He does not just dismiss Calvin or attack his opponents with
9:13
pure vitriol. He.
9:14
Actually defends Calvin. He points out that this was a
9:16
single, highly isolated phrase written when Calvin was not
9:20
specifically addressing the precise mechanics of divine
9:22
justice or the atonement. Owen argues that if you look at
9:25
Calvin's broader body of work, particularly his Institutes of
9:28
the Christian Religion, it clearly and repeatedly supports
9:32
the necessity of satisfaction to divine justice.
9:35
Owen essentially rescues Calvin's reputation from being
9:38
weaponized by those holding the opposing view that.
9:41
Historical Context is what makes the genesis of this book so
9:45
incredibly gripping. We are tracing the timeline of
9:48
how this dense treatise came to be, and it actually started as a
9:52
highly charged public debate 4. Months before writing the
9:55
preface we are examining today, Owen defended these very theses
9:59
during a public disputation at Oxford.
10:02
You have. To imagine the scene a massive
10:04
haul filled with the most brilliant scholars of the era
10:08
debating the absolute necessity of God's justice.
10:10
Entirely in Latin, but. The academic format of those
10:14
disputations had severe limitations.
10:16
It did indeed. The public defense was strictly
10:19
limited to an hour. When you are dealing with a
10:21
theological topic of this vast magnitude, an hour is incredibly
10:25
brief. Owen notes that this constraint
10:27
meant he can only slightly touch on the true nature of
10:30
vindicatory justice. The.
10:31
Strict rules of the academic exercise did not permit him to
10:34
enter fully on the chief point. What he called the great hinge
10:37
of the entire entire controversy, the necessary
10:40
exercise of that justice an. Oral debate simply could not
10:44
bear the weight of the massive scriptural exegesis and complex
10:48
logical proofs required to settle the issue permanently.
10:52
You. Cannot establish the
10:53
foundational mechanics, the core mechanics of the atonement in 60
10:58
minutes of verbal sparring and. His colleagues recognized that
11:01
deficiency immediately. They saw the gravity of the
11:03
topic hanging in the air. They understood that if the
11:07
necessity of Jesus Christ satisfaction was left ambiguous
11:11
because of a time limit, the entire Reformed understanding of
11:14
salvation was at massive risk. So.
11:16
They urged Owen to write a comprehensive scholastic
11:19
dissertation. They pushed.
11:20
Him to put his arguments into a permanent, rigorous written form
11:24
that could be studied and debated for generations.
11:26
What? Is truly astonishing is the
11:28
speed at which Owen accomplished this monumental task.
11:32
We are talking about a man who was incredibly overworked.
11:34
He was carrying an immense load of administrative duties,
11:37
pastoral responsibilities and political engagements.
11:40
Yet. He completed the manuscript for
11:42
this massive, dense theological treatise in just a few days in.
11:45
His preface He attributes this rapid success not to his own
11:49
towering intellect, but entirely to the favor of the Father of
11:54
Lights. He.
11:55
Stole a few leisure hours from his other heavy engagements and
11:58
the work just flowed out of him it.
12:00
Shows how thoroughly these magnificent truths had saturated
12:03
his mind and soul long before he ever sat down with a quill and
12:07
ink that. Brings us to the dedication of
12:09
the book. This place is this specific
12:12
theological dispute right in the middle of 17th century
12:16
geopolitical turmoil. The recipient of the dedication
12:19
is fascinating. Lord Oliver Cromwell Owen
12:23
addresses. Cromwell, with his massive,
12:24
intimidating titles as commander in Chief of the Parliamentary
12:27
forces of the Commonwealth of England and.
12:29
The Chancellor of the celebrated University of Oxford.
12:32
You have this incredibly dense theological work regarding the
12:36
necessity of the atonement being handed directly to the most
12:39
powerful military and political political figure in the entire
12:42
nation right in the aftermath of the English Civil War and.
12:45
Owen handles this dedication with remarkable humility intact.
12:49
He. Actually apologizes for
12:50
diverting Cromwell's attention from the welfare of the
12:52
Commonwealth. He acknowledges that Cromwell is
12:55
currently surrounded by wars and rumors of wars and the
12:58
relentless fury of political parties bent on mutual
13:02
destruction. Owen is very self aware here.
13:04
He knows he is handing a book about scholastic Latin theology
13:08
to a man managing bloody battlefields, national crises
13:12
and a highly unstable government.
13:14
He calls his book a little by work compared to the immense
13:17
weight of state business Cromwell sustains daily to.
13:20
Illustrate his point and justify sending the book Owen uses a
13:24
striking historical anecdote in the dedication he.
13:26
Compares himself to a celebrated scholar who was so absorbed in
13:30
his learned trifles during the violence act of his city that he
13:33
completely neglected his own personal safety.
13:35
The story. Goes that the invading military
13:38
commanders spared the scholar's life simply because he was so
13:40
thoroughly dedicated to his studies amidst the total chaos
13:43
and destruction. Owen.
13:44
Is essentially saying to Cromwell, I know the country is
13:47
in massive upheaval, I know you're fighting literal wars,
13:50
but I'm the scholar in the SAC City absolutely focused on this
13:53
theological truth because it matters that much the.
13:55
Eternal truth outlasts the temporal chaos it.
13:58
Is a brilliant, highly evocative way to justify his work.
14:02
He and it's openly to Cromwell that the book is polemical It.
14:06
Is a work of controversy designed to refute opponents,
14:08
but. He makes a crucial distinction
14:10
about Christian polemics. He argues that Christian warfare
14:13
uses weapons appropriate to truth.
14:16
Those weapons are the Word of God and solid reason, not
14:19
physical hostility. He.
14:21
Laments that religion has been evil spoken of because zealous
14:24
people have used seditions, rebellions, and literal physical
14:28
wars to settle divine controversies.
14:30
Owen. Is pleading for the arena of
14:32
debate to be confined to scripture and logic he.
14:35
Tells the commander in chief that defending the truth of the
14:37
Gospel with the pen is a sacred war, completely distinct from
14:41
the bloody strife happening in the physical world.
14:43
It is. One thing to defend your work to
14:45
a military general. But Owen had an even tougher
14:48
crowd to address next. The everyday reader trying to
14:51
make sense of these dense, blinding truths.
14:54
Moving from the dedication into the preface, addressed directly
14:57
to the reader, Owen shifts gears to discuss his epistemology.
15:01
He is. Tackling how we actually come to
15:03
know divine truth, He. Asks A vital question.
15:06
Why are these theological subjects so incredibly difficult
15:10
to grasp? Why?
15:10
Do even the greatest minds, the brilliant scholars of Oxford,
15:14
struggle to comprehend the mechanics of divine justice and
15:17
the exact nature of the atonement?
15:19
Owen answers that with one of the most brilliant analogies in
15:22
all of Puritan literature, he. Talks about the concept of the
15:25
excess of light. He says that what we perceive as
15:28
darkness or obscurity and divine subjects is not actually an
15:32
absence of light at all. Rather, it is celestial glory
15:35
striking our weak, finite eyes. God dwells in inaccessible
15:39
light. Think about walking outside on a
15:41
cloudless day and staring directly into the blazing sun.
15:44
The Sun. Is pure, unadulterated light,
15:47
but if you look right at it, your vision immediately goes
15:49
dark because your retinas cannot handle the sheer intensity.
15:52
Owen. Says that is exactly what
15:53
happens when human minds try to comprehend the immense, infinite
15:57
purity of God's justice, the. Limitation is not in God's
16:00
revelation. The limitations are weak,
16:02
finite, creaturely capacity to process His overwhelming glory
16:07
he. Is very careful, however, to
16:09
distinguish his view from the Roman Catholic views prominent
16:12
at the time. He strictly rejects the claim
16:15
that the scriptures themselves are obscure or intentionally
16:18
hidden from the common person. He.
16:20
Insists the Word of God is pure, perfect and enlightening.
16:24
The problem never lies with the text of scripture.
16:27
The. Text is sufficient to
16:28
communicate all necessary truths for salvation.
16:32
The darkness we experience when doing heavy theology is entirely
16:36
due to our human incapacity to take in the sheer brilliance of
16:39
the divine nature without the active, continuous assistance of
16:43
the Holy Spirit. This.
16:44
Reliance on the Holy Spirit leads Owen to issue a severe,
16:48
almost frightening warning about relying solely on human
16:51
intellect in the study of theology.
16:53
He. Uses the analogy of the builders
16:55
of Noah's Ark. He.
16:55
Compares theologians who rely entirely on their own analytical
16:58
abilities to those ancient Craftsman think.
17:01
About those men. They worked furiously, using all
17:04
their skills to build a massive, mathematically perfect vessel
17:08
that successfully saved others from the flood.
17:10
But. Because they themselves lacked
17:12
faith and did not enter the ark, they drowned in the very waters
17:15
the ark floated upon. Owen says that brilliance
17:18
scholars who try to comprehend divine truths without the Holy
17:21
Spirit's illumination are doing the exact same tragic thing
17:25
they. Might construct impressive
17:27
airtight theological systems, but without spiritual light they
17:31
only succeed in discovering their own technical or
17:33
artificial ignorance they. Work like busy bees producing
17:36
honey for others, but they miss the saving reality themselves
17:40
and perish that. Warning should make anyone
17:43
studying theology pause and take a long breath.
17:47
Coming from a man who was arguably the greatest intellect
17:49
of his generation, it shows his massive pastoral heart.
17:53
He did not want his students just mastering Latin and logic,
17:56
he wanted them to actually know the God they were studying and.
17:59
It ties perfectly into his personal circumstances at the
18:02
time, which he discusses quite openly in the preface.
18:05
Owen. Was writing this massive
18:06
theological work as a highly reluctant administrator he.
18:09
Had been installed as the Vice Chancellor of Oxford by
18:12
Parliament 2 years prior to writing this book, but.
18:15
He felt totally inadequate for the role, He explicitly says he
18:19
vastly preferred rural retirement and preaching the
18:22
gospel to a local congregation over the endless headaches of
18:26
scholastic administration. You.
18:27
Can practically feel his exhaustion bleeding through the
18:30
text he. Talked about the frequent
18:32
arduous journeys, the endless committee meetings, and the
18:35
heavy burden of managing a massive university in a time of
18:39
national instability. And Oxford was not in a
18:42
peaceful, serene state. The university was facing an
18:45
existential threat. Rumors were spreading everywhere
18:48
about the total abolition and destruction of the colleges
18:50
there. Were radical factions in the
18:52
country actively trying to tear down the entire academic
18:55
institution, viewing it as a relic of the past or a threat to
19:00
their specific agendas? Owen.
19:02
Takes this opportunity to sharply categorize these enemies
19:05
of education and his critique is absolutely scathing he.
19:08
Divides the people attacking Oxford into four distinct groups
19:12
first. He calls out the incredibly
19:14
ignorant. These are people who think all
19:16
human knowledge fits neatly inside their own little cabins.
19:19
They know. Nothing of ancient history,
19:21
languages or the broader world and they want to destroy what
19:24
they don't understand out of pure anti intellectual.
19:27
Second, he identifies the evil doers.
19:31
These are individuals who hate the moral light of education
19:33
because they want to sin without scrutiny.
19:35
They. Want institutions of moral and
19:37
intellectual clarity dismantled so their dark deeds remain
19:41
entirely hidden from public critique, The. 3rd category he
19:44
identifies is highly fascinating.
19:47
He points to the unqualified individuals who push themselves
19:50
into offices they cannot handle. He.
19:52
Likens them to the fox who lost his tail in the famous old fable
19:56
to. Outline the fable for you.
19:57
It tells of a fox who loses his tail in a trap and out of sheer
20:01
embarrassment, tries to convince all the other foxes that having
20:04
no tail is actually the new superior fashion.
20:07
Hoping. They will all cut their tails
20:09
off so he won't look foolish. Owen says these unqualified men,
20:12
because they lack knowledge and academic credentials, want to
20:16
deprive everyone else of knowledge to hide their own
20:19
shameful ignorance. They.
20:20
Want to systematically lower the societal standard so their own
20:24
incompetence is not exposed. And finally, the fourth group,
20:29
the Idol Prodigals. These are simply greedy
20:32
individuals gaping with open mouths to steal the university's
20:36
massive revenues. They.
20:37
Don't care about education or theology at all, they just want
20:40
to pillage the endowments for their own pockets against.
20:43
All these cultural enemies, Owen mounts A vigorous, highly
20:46
passionate defense of his colleagues.
20:48
He. Praises the heads of the
20:50
colleges at Oxford, highlighting their candor, their immense
20:53
diligence and their deep piety against these treacherous
20:57
columniators. He.
20:58
Wants the world, and perhaps Cromwell specifically, to know
21:02
that despite the political chaos and the attacks from these
21:05
radical anti intellectual factions, the university is
21:08
filled with godly, brilliant men.
21:11
Men who are faithfully passing on the truth of the gospel and
21:14
solid learning to the next generation.
21:16
He. Leverages his own massive
21:17
credibility to shield his colleagues from the cultural mob
21:21
trying to burn the institutions down as.
21:23
We look at the concluding remarks of Owen's preface.
21:26
We see his philosophy on writing style, which perfectly matches
21:29
his theological convictions. Owen.
21:31
Expresses a total disregard for ornamentation in his writing.
21:34
He. Is dealing with Latin diction,
21:36
which was the academic standard of the day, a language built for
21:40
rhetorical flourish. But he deliberately rejects
21:43
elegance and rhetorical decorations.
21:46
His absolute priority is clarity.
21:48
As long as his words clearly express the undeniable truth of
21:51
the matter, he does not care if this style is considered plain,
21:55
unrefined or even crude by the academic elite.
21:58
He. Drops a brilliant quote to drive
22:00
this point home. He.
22:01
Asks, say bishops of what avail is glitter to sacred subjects?
22:07
It's. As a rhetorical question that
22:08
cuts right to the bone of theological writing, when.
22:11
You were writing about the agonizing, blood soaked death of
22:14
the Son of God to satisfy the immutable justice of the Father.
22:17
Trying to dress that reality up with fancy vocabulary is
22:20
practically an insult to the subject matter.
22:23
The. Truth of the Cross is glorious
22:24
enough on its own. It does not need human glitter
22:26
to make it compelling. Owen.
22:28
Actually points out the inherent danger of utilizing that kind of
22:31
flourish. He states that a theologian who
22:33
focuses on displaying magnificent, verbose garlands
22:36
will only make himself a richer victim to the sharp criticisms
22:39
of the learned if. You focus on showing off your
22:42
extensive vocabulary and your clever phrasing.
22:44
Your critics will attack your style, tear apart your rhetoric,
22:48
and completely miss your theological substance.
22:51
By stripping away the rhetoric entirely, Owen forces his
22:54
opponents to deal entirely with the massive scriptural and
22:57
logical arguments he has built. He leaves them absolutely
23:00
nowhere to hide. They cannot debate his grammar,
23:04
they have to debate his theology.
23:06
Let. Us synthesize the massive scope
23:08
of what we have just walked through today.
23:10
You have looked over the shoulder of an exhausted vice
23:13
Chancellor writing to the commander in chief, Oliver
23:15
Cromwell, in the midst of massive national upheaval.
23:19
You have. Seen John Owen rigorously defend
23:21
the absolute necessity of God's essential justice against
23:24
brilliant men within his own theological camp who mistakenly
23:27
thought God could just waive the penalty for sin by a free decree
23:31
and. You have learned how to approach
23:33
dazzling, blinding divine truths not with arrogant human
23:38
intellect, but with humble reliance on the Holy Spirit's
23:41
illumination, avoiding the tragic fate of Noah's
23:44
carpenters, the. Relevance of this historical
23:46
theological battle for you today cannot be overstated.
23:49
Understanding that God's justice is an absolute necessity rather
23:53
than an arbitrary choice completely shifts the gravity of
23:56
the gospel. You believe in it.
23:58
Grounds irreformed faith and absolute theological certainty
24:01
if. God's justice is essential to
24:03
His nature then the cross of Jesus Christ was not a random
24:06
choice or a cosmic afterthought the.
24:09
Punishment of sin is a cosmic certainty.
24:11
Knowing this, the grace shown to us in Christ becomes infinitely
24:15
more staggering it. Means God did not bypass His
24:18
justice to save you. He met the terrifying,
24:20
unyielding demands of His own nature through the willing
24:24
substitute of His Son It. Changes everything about how we
24:27
view Salvation it. Does and want to leave you with
24:29
one final lingering thought. If God's justice is an essential
24:34
part of his nature that cannot possibly be bypassed by a simple
24:37
choice, how does that reframe your understanding of the
24:40
Incarnation? It means the Manger in the cross
24:43
were not Plan B or one option among many, but the absolute.
24:46
Only mathematical and spiritual possibility in the universe to
24:49
reconcile God's immutable justice with His vast love, part
24:52
of the staggering weight of a love that goes through the
24:54
unavoidable fire of essential justice.