Vos on the Forensic Aspect of Justification

In our opinion Paul consciously and consistently subordinated the mystical aspect of the relation to Christ to the forensic one. Paul’s mind was to such an extent forensically oriented that he regarded the entire complex of subjective spiritual changes that take place in the believer and of subjective spiritual blessings enjoyed by the believer as the direct outcome of the forensic work of Christ applied in justification. The mystical is based on the forensic, not the forensic on the mystical.

Vos goes on to dismiss the two prevalent opinions from proponents that argued that justification was not central to the teaching of Paul. The first was the position that Paul only dealt with the subject of justification on account of the Judaizers. To this Vos replied, “The implication of such a position would seem to be that, as the apologete distributes the emphasis not according to the inherent and eternal values of things but according to the requirements of a passing situation, so we have no right to say that in Paul’s own consciousness justification was the great dominating religious concern.”

The second proposal that Vos rejected was that which suggested that Paul only dealt with the doctrine of justification on a missional basis. The basis of this position was that the “true Pauline gospel is that justification disposes of the sins of the pre-Christian past and enables the convert to begin with a clean record. After the record has begun, salvation is no longer made dependent on the forgiving grace of God but on holiness of life such as will enable the Christian to stand blameless in the judgment day.” Vos responded to both arguments in the following masterful way:

it ought to be sufficient answer to quote Romans 5:1-11 and 8:31-39. The fervor of religious emotion which these passages and others like them breathe is, toto genere, different from the heat engendered by controversial debate. Neither are missionary formulas of provisional and relative validity adapted to kindle it. It proves that, where Paul rose to the most intense and comprehensive appreciation of what Christianity stands for, he did not leave behind him the consciousness of justification. On the contrary, it is from this consciousness that he draws the power to wing himself to the sublimest heights of religious enthusiasm.

The rest of the article can be found here. I cannot recommend this treatment of Paul’s teaching on justification stongly enough.