<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Meet The Puritans &#187; Witsius</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.meetthepuritans.com/tag/witsius/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com</link>
	<description>It&#039;s a Seventeenth Century World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 13:31:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Judgment According to Works Bibliography</title>
		<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/21/judgment-according-to-works-bibliography/</link>
		<comments>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/21/judgment-according-to-works-bibliography/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 05:20:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Jones</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[John Owen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thomas Goodwin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Calvin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[final judgment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Goodwin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Owen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vindication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Witsius]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=553</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you are interested in both old and modern views on how the Reformed orthodox have typically argued for a judgment according to works I think you may find the following references helpful in the first instance.  I&#8217;m not saying that the Reformed have always said the same thing on this issue.  In fact, I [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you are interested in both old and modern views on how the Reformed orthodox have typically argued for a judgment according to works I think you may find the following references helpful in the first instance.  I&#8217;m not saying that the Reformed have always said the same thing on this issue.  In fact, I rarely ever say that.  Several of the first of ten references are going to form the substance of an essay I am writing on this theme in Reformed orthodoxy.</p>
<p>1. Herman Witsius, <em>The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man</em>, pages 418-419. For example, Witsius writes:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Let us briefly explain the whole manner of this justification in the next world. Christ, the judge, being delegated to that office by the Father, Acts x.42. Acts xvii. 32. will pronounce two things concerning his elect. 1st. That they are truly pious, righteous and holy. And so far this justification will differ from the former; for by that the ungodly is justified, Rom. iv.5. Whereas here, God, when he enjoins his angels to summon one of the parties to be judged, says, ‘gather my saints together’ &#8230; these words refer to the last judgment &#8230;. The ground of the former is inherent righteousness, graciously communicated to man by the Spirit of sanctification, and good works proceeding therefrom &#8230;<span id="more-553"></span></p>
<p>2. Thomas Goodwin. See: Works, 7:181ff. Goodwin affirms a double justification <em>by God</em>; the first <em>authoritative, </em>the second <em>declarative</em> or <em>demonstrative</em>.</p>
<p>3. John Owen. See: Works, 5:161ff. Similarly to Goodwin, Owen argues that while we are not justified on account of our works, God will judge all men, “and rendereth unto all men, at the last judgment, according to their works”(5:161). Furthermore, the “end of God in the last judgment is <em>the glory of his remunerative righteousness</em>, 2 Tim. 4:8)” (Ibid).</p>
<p>4. John Calvin. <em>Institutes</em>, III.17.10.  For example, Calvin writes: “As we ourselves, when we have been engrafted into Christ, are righteous in God’s sight because our iniquities are covered by Christ’s sinlessness, so our works are righteous and are thus regarded because whatever fault is otherwise in them is buried in Christ’s purity, and is not charged to our account. Accordingly, we can deservedly say that by faith alone not only we ourselves but our works as well are justified” (<em>Institutes</em>. III.17.10).</p>
<p>5. Samuel Rutherford. <em>The Covenant of Life Opened</em>. Actually, this work is more frustrating than enjoyable for me; it&#8217;s way too verbose.</p>
<p>6. Richard Gaffin, <em>By Faith, Not By Sight</em>, p. 94ff.</p>
<p>7. Geerhardus Vos, <em>The Pauline Eschatology</em>, pp. 261-287.</p>
<p>8. Herman Ridderbos, <em>Paul </em>&#8230;, pp. 178-81 (“Judgment According to Works”)</p>
<p>9. John Murray, <em>Commentary on Romans</em>, pp. 78-79.</p>
<p>10. Robert Letham, <em>The Work of Christ</em>, pp. 181-86.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/21/judgment-according-to-works-bibliography/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
