Nov
01
2012
Simultaneously Righteous And A Sinner?
My good friend Jono Linebaugh (New Testament Professor at Knox Theological Seminary and content manager for LIBERATE) wrote a thoughtful post on Martin Luther’s famous phrase Simul iustus et peccator–simultaneously justified and a sinner (you can read it here). One reader questioned whether “sinner” is an appropriate term to describe Christian identity. This is an important question. After all, Paul writes to sinful Christians and calls them “saints.” Once God saves us, aren’t we new creatures?
Jono wrote a clarifying explanation of Luther’s phrase–explaining what is and what is not meant that the Christian is “at the same time righteous and sinner.”
I’m posting his response here.
“Sinner” is an identity word and is misapplied if it’s used to name the Christian’s identity—their person. Before God, identity is not a both/and (sinner and righteous); it is an either/or (sinner or righteous). The basis of this difference is not anthropological (what I do or don’t do). It is strictly and solely Christological: to be in Christ is to be righteous before God.
Paul does something unprecedented (in comparison with early Jewish literature) in that he designates all people outside Christ with the identity “sinner” (Rom 5:8, for example). But even more novel and scandalous is his corresponding claim that it is precisely “sinners” who are identified as “righteous” in Christ (Rom 3:23-24). So, to borrow an expression from a Reformation confession, while the old Adam is a “stubborn, recalcitrant donkey,” this does not define Christian identity before God.
In light of this, it’s important to clarify that simul iustus et peccator is NOT a description of our Christian identity; it is NOT a description of who we are before God. What it is, however, is a description of the both/and that characterizes the Christian life as lived.
The pastoral payoff here is that it enables us to affirm (without crossing our fingers) that in Christ—at the level of identity—the Christian is 100% righteous before God while at the same time recognizing the persistence of sin. If we don’t speak in terms of two total states (100% righteous in Christ and 100% sinful in ourselves) corresponding to the co-existence of two times (the old age and the new creation) then the undeniable reality of ongoing sin leads to the qualification of our identity in Christ: the existence of some sin must mean that one is not totally righteous. This is acid at the very foundation of the peace we have with God on the other side of justification. To say simul iustus et peccator is therefore not to say that “sinner” is our identity; it is to say that while we remain sinful in ourselves we are, in Christ, totally righteous.
This pastoral pattern is reflected in 1 Corinthians. In themselves, the Corinthians are anything but sanctified saints: they are quarreling and creating factions around various Christian leaders; they are taking one another to court; sexual immorality is rampant; the bodily resurrection is being denied; worship is chaotic. But writing to these people in the face of this sin, Paul addresses them as “those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2). The possibility of this kind of speech is anchored in a distinction between who the Corinthians are in themselves and who they are in Christ. This confident and creative “calling”—this naming of a person in terms of who they are in Christ—is the catalyst of change. To call a person by their “new name” is to summon them away from faith in themselves–away from the sin and death that defines the old age–and to summon them to faith in Christ, to the salvation and status that defines the new creation and the Christian as one whose identity is “hid with God in Christ.”
26 Comments
The fact that this fact is even up for debate among Christians lately is surprising. We truly have too low a view of God’s law and his holiness and too high a view of ourselves.
Tullian,
In light of this, it’s important to clarify that simul iustus et peccator is NOT a description of our Christian identity; it is NOT a description of who we are before God. What it is, however, is a description of the both/and that characterizes the Christian life as lived. I think this sums it up nicely. Even though there is now no condemnation…when God looks upon his elect he sees his son therefore not identifying us as sinners (or unbelievers) but children of God that sins while yet in this fleshly body. The Spirit against the body and the body against the flesh. Or Jacob against Esau and Esau against Jacob or as one writer puts it it’s the Jacob in us (the goodness of God or the Spirit)that wars against the Esau in us evil or the fallen flesh but nonetheless it is know longer I but Christ who lives in me.
Thanks Tullian
This post addresses is very fundamental question, thanks for repeatedly hitting this point. What I realize afresh every time I think about it is that my life is characterized by the trace of all my sins. I have no way on my own to change this trace at all. In this trace I see my 100% sinfulness. Without the grace of God I am condemned. What I wanted to emphasize in my reply is this 100% sinfulness, because it takes from me every hope to improve on myself. I can only survive this through the grace of God. For God, in Christ, I am 100% righteous.
Guys, the question is, why does Paul say twice in four verses (Rom 7:17-20), “It is no longer I who sins, but sin that dwells in me.” ? And why does Paul repeatedly indicate throughout Romans 6-8 that the problem is NOT with my nature, but with “this BODY of sin……BODY of death!” ?? Further, why, in 8:23 does Paul say that we are waiting for our adoption as sons, “…that is, the redemption of our [what?] BODY!” ?? I’m not making this up. Bottom line question is, do we really understand the nature of the saint/new creation/inner man? And do we know what the flesh is?
I think Scott’s question is the same as mine. What does it mean to be regenerated/a new Christian with God’s law written on my heart? I have always thought that becoming a Christian meant that my nature is changed, that something actually happened inside me. From my experience that is true.
Scot Leonard,
Bottom line question is, do we really understand the nature of the saint/new creation/inner man? And do we know what the flesh is? Scot if you don’t know the answers to these questions I would have to ask myself am I really a Christian.Are we not to be ready held accountable to those who are naive, If we can’t as Christians answer these basic questions then maybe one should examine himself…
We are righteous in Christ = Saint
We still sin daily = sinner
I know I’m a saint by faith in Christ… His promise that it is so. Not because I actually “experience” it by way of feelings or seeing it.
Most view the Christian life internally by experience… the change inside of me… I feel your presence in this place… this is why I abandoned American Christianity. It completely typifies the Christian life of abstractions qualified by someone’s standard who appears to “have arrived” in some great measure regardless of how short of perfect they admit they really are.
A church of the reformation tradition understands the basic fact of “Law and Gospel” in the life of all Believers.
We are sinners in fact.
We are righteous by faith.
“We are to CONSIDER ourselves dead to sin.”
How can we do that if we are still sinning? Because in our Baptisms (Romans 6), God put us (the old sinner) to death with Christ. And He raises us (in that same Baptism) to new life in Christ. (also Romans 6)
It’s quite liberating. Liberty from the ‘having to prove by what I do, say, feel, or think, religious project that 95% of the world’s Christians are on.
“For freedom Christ has set us free.”
And the chorus of crickets reveals that the Reformation never made it to America. (in any appreciable way)
Scott Leonard,
I have no idea what James said/meant in response to your comment (it sounded like he was questioning your salvation), but we should talk. I agree completely with what you said about the new identity. Here’s a link to my blog where you can read the “Christian Dissociative Identity” posts. blog.godsmystery.com
Pastor Tullian
thank you for continually posting and reposting the gospel message. We need (I need) to hear it over and over again. I believe you reclarified the Saint/sinner dillema. God calls us a Saint in spite of ourselves only in Christ. Otherwise, I am only a Saint in name because of my sin? That’s Grace.
@ STeve
we are righteous by faith alone… that is the crux of the matter. And that is why I also believe Baptism is important, not just a suggestion.
Paul ST Jean,
You are so right, my friend.
More than that…it is a commandment. Jesus ordered us to Baptize and to be Baptized.
_
When people have a proper understanding of the external Word…then they are less apt to get into all these self-focused religious projects that place themselves back at the center, and that move the finished work of the Cross to the periphery.
Tyler,
Again it never ceases to amaze me how something that’s said according to how one receives it can be misinterpreted. There are many dispositional ways a comment can be viewed and expressed. One will see it as aggressive and may be offended, one may see it expressed with a question mark, one may see it expressed with low tones and with meekness and so on. Depending on the individual one could miss the writers intention or the writers dispositional frame of thought and could take it out of context. That would explain why one might have know idea what one is implying. I should of used better punctuation that usually gets me in trouble. Periods where they shouldn’t be etc can really make a mess of things. I will exercise better grammar and punctuations in the future. I apologize for any misleading.
Inching along here…….
So, what if Paul had returned to Corinth 20 years later and saw all the same things happening? Would he then have said, “Ok, you guys must not be Christians!”
This comment, above, ” ‘having to prove by what I do, say, feel, or think, ” threw me a bit. Of course, in the flesh, we ought not to try to ‘prove’ ourselves to God or others. And yet, James (!) does say that true faith WILL BE ACCOMPANIED BY GOOD WORKS. So, if there are no good works to accompany one’s faith eventually….then?
Thanks for the good discussion.
Where can I find the whole text of what Luther wrote, in English?
I appreciate Luther’s contribution OBVIOUSLY but wonder sometimes that we take everything he says as divine sometimes. He was a great MAN but he did say quite a bit that was wrong (ie his harsh comments about the Jews?) Just saying that we need to be careful when we say “Calvin” or “Luther” that we not make them idols, perhaps. Just a thought. Ugh. Idols at every turn it seems!
Thanks again for those who contribute here!
STILL SEEKING TRUTH daily
Tyler, we will definitely talk! Steve, the word “reckon” in Romans 6 simply means to add it up! It is in accounting term. Everything happens through faith. But when we exercised saving faith we were regenerated and we beca me brand new creatures and that is why Paul says twice within 4 verses “it is no longer I who sins. Look back in detail at my original question and deal with the text and the issues there. I am amazed at the silence when it comes to thoroughly exegeting Romans 6-8. If you want to see who does it thoroughly, look at D Martin Lloyd Jones, William R Newell and John MacArthur. They were not afraid to let Paul say what he says!
I love what John MacArthur said regarding the question of why I still send if I am a Christian. He said it is simply due to the fact that I am a new creature living in a dead, unsaved body! Spend time fearlessly memorizing and meditating on Romans 6 through 8 and you will make the same statement. And it is not gnostici sm. Again, answer my specific original questions above.
Another great question is what does it mean to be in Christ? If you want to say that that is only a positional category or a standing in “God’s eyes,” then I am afraid you will have to say the same thing about Christ in you! Guys, we are literally in Christ. We just don’t know what it means. We don’t know what reality is. After all, how could I really be in Christ when I am sitting here on planet earth? Paul explains it if you are willing to listen and to let him say what he says.
Sorry….previous post should have said, “I love what John MacArthur said regarding the question of why I still SIN….”
Scott,
Here’s my email address so you can contact me. tyler.wentzel@gmail.com I would be very pleased to talk with you more about this, as it appears you have discovered the same things I have, and constantly point back to the foundation of Romans 6-8, as I do.
The above picture, by the way, of the trembling man holding his “SIN” sign is extremely unbiblical in light of the way God looks at us. If all we do is hide behind the cross of Christ (which, by the way, it’s not the cross that gives us our righteousness, it’s Jesus’ resurrection, Romans 4:25), why should God save us at all? That is, if he only wishes to look at the righteousness of Christ, why should he save anyone? No, the goal of God in saving us was not to let us cower and whimper behind the finished work of Christ, it was for us to BELIEVE what Jesus did for us on the cross and at his resurrection, and then be joined to Christ–as partaker of his righteousness and true holiness (Eph. 4:24). Therefore, because we’re placed INTO Christ, God can look upon us without seeing a cowering, sinful person behind his righteousness. He can look at Christ and see US–”for we are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones” (Eph. 5:30). “In whom we have BOLDNESS and ACCESS with CONFIDENCE by the faith of him” (Eph. 3:12).
“The Sword of the Spirit” Christians who would work with such people must have both a knowledge of the problems as they appear to the mind of the thinking unbeliever and a patient willingness to point out in the Word of God whatever of answer there is for the natural man. At the same time, we must remember that “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (I Corinthians 2:14). However, since we know that truth does not change and that God’s method of dealing with souls is ever the same, we must be faithful in our wielding of the slaying sword of the Spirit. Thus only can we meet their real need. God never raised any soul to life through the Gospel without first slaying him with the law. With honest skeptics, for such often fall into this class, we should be firm and fearless while we speak the truth in love. Our burden should be: a holy God declares that all are less perfect than He, and therefore sinners; that the wages of sin is eternal death; but
that He has provided a Sin-bearer in Christ who has fully met every demand of divine justice against the sinner. It is the entrance of such a word that gives light. No man has ever been argued into salvation; no man has ever been led to Christ through human wisdom. Only the flat presentation of human need and
Christ’s sufficiency will do it. “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts” (Zechariah 4:6).
Tyler,
Sounds like an echo from my statement above. But nonetheless M.H. is Right. Look how many times The Apostles sinned repeatedly. Remember when Satan came to Jesus and asked Jesus permission to sift peter. Paul, the things I will not to do I do…Or the one that always hits me the hardest because this teacher was so dramatic It’s been a burnt impression since. As you know Phillip was with Jesus almost from the outset and three years down the road one day when they were all just hangin out Phillip says to Jesus, Lord! (like it was just routine conversation) show us the Father that we may believe. This is a real emotional point for me Jesus must have fell back in his chair, can you amagine!! how devastating, the teacher says that Jesus says Oh! Peter you don’t know by now…and are we not like that today even David said Lord, against you you only have I sinned against…what you say is true Tyler and what M.H. says is true only to be summed up what Tullian says – In light of this, it’s important to clarify that simul iustus et peccator is NOT a description of our Christian identity; it is NOT a description of who we are before God. What it is, however, is a description of the both/and that characterizes the Christian life as lived. I think this is a sound declaration.
Amen, Tyler. We have far more than a justified standing before God. We were literally born a second time. When Paul said, “if any man be IN CHRIST, he is a new creature, old things passed away, new things have come,” he meant just that. We are new creatures living in an unredeemed body, where the law of sin resides “in my members.” If Jesus and Paul talk in the same breath of Christ in us and we in Christ, then guess what? I am IN Christ just as much as He is IN me. Some one invented a nonbiblical word to deal with their shock and unbelief regarding Paul’s statements. Guess what that word is: “positional!” Even though Paul says twice in for verses that it is no longer I who sins, but sin that dwells in me, it can’t be true, therefore it must be true POSITIONALLY! That is actually sinning down Paul AND Christ’s glorious statements about our union with Christ.
James, I agree with you that there are many people who need to be encouraged that they are not alone in falling into sin. And I know Tyler would agree that these truths understood properly never imply that we get to a place where we cannot sin. So we are new creatures who are literally in Christ, as He is literally in us, but we live in unredeemed bodies wherin lies the law of sin. That is the flesh.
[...] Even though Rick gives some theological lip service to the sin that continues to plague the redeemed, his tenor and tone downplay the seriousness of our ongoing corruption and the Christians desperate need of God’s grace. He seems to suffer from an over-realized eschatology when it comes to the the doctrine of sanctification. This is extremely dangerous for the reason that Ligon Duncan points out above: “Misunderstanding or underestimating the continuing corruption in the believer leaves the Christian unprepared for the warfare of sanctification and leads to a variety of spiritual problems.” Missing from Rick’s perspective is the unique dynamic explained here. [...]
[...] Even though Rick gives some theological lip service to the sin that continues to plague the redeemed, his tenor and tone downplay the seriousness of our ongoing corruption and the Christians desperate need of God’s grace. He seems to suffer from an over-realized eschatology when it comes to the the doctrine of sanctification. This is extremely dangerous for the reason that Ligon Duncan points out above: “Misunderstanding or underestimating the continuing corruption in the believer leaves the Christian unprepared for the warfare of sanctification and leads to a variety of spiritual problems.” Missing from Rick’s perspective is the unique dynamic explained here. [...]