I am preaching through the book of Romans at Unity Baptist Church. As an aside let me say this: there is a long list of links in the RSS feed in the left-hand sidebar from our church website. The number of links to display is set at three (3) and always has been. One day it just started showing 10. I checked to see if the settings had changed and they had not. I changed the number to 10, updated my settings, went back into the design editor, changed it to three… and it still displays 10 posts, the maximum number allowed. At any rate, I am seven sermons into the Romans series and all of them are linked to the left of this post.

Romans 4 begins with a statement about Abraham being justified by faith, apart from works and the law. I remember A.J. Waters, who often described himself as “just an old country preacher” saying that you could remember what it means to be justified because it’s “just if I’d never sinned.” Justification refers to sins being washed away by the blood of Jesus, forgiven and never to be remembered. You might remember them and the devil might you remind you sometime of how bad you used to be to discourage you, but God says our sins are removed as far as the east is fro the west, cast into a sea of forgetfulness. Sanctification is different; that is the lifelong process by which we continue to read, pray and study God’s Word and work on those aspects of our lives that are not entirely christ-like yet. Little things might bother a mature Christian that a new believer would not even notice because they have big things to work on still. It’s a process and we get better at the processes the longer we walk. Justification, though, is immediate. It is over and done with before you wipe your eyes and stand up from the altar (or wherever you were when you confessed your sins and asked to be forgiven).

I decided to do a little bit of research (which means I Googled it) to see if an original source for “just if I’d never sinned” could be identified. As I suspected it’s so simple a saying and has been around so long there is no way telling where it came from or when. But I did run across a lengthy, well-researched post explaining how the saying is wrong and we should not repeat it. Dr. C. Matthew McMahon is the founder of Puritan Publications and pastor of Grace Chapel in Crossville, TN. His argument is that we have “dumbed down” theology with soundbites and pithy sayings and that the doctrine of justification, or our understanding of it, has been damaged by this definition. You can read his full post here. And I will not mince words: nothing he says about justification is wrong. I did not run down every scripture reference he gives or alludes to I agree with his understanding of how God approaches mankind’s sinfulness. I just think his argument is a little dramatic, somewhat overstated for the occasion of arguing against a pithy saying. If the statement were true, according to McMahon:

It would be inaccurate 1) in light of the wickedness and depravity of men’s hearts, 2) in light of its theological essence, and 3) in light of the cross of Christ, for, it would do great damage to all of Christ’s work as the Redeemer of God’s elect in the covenant of grace.

He argues that it is because of man’s sin that Jesus is able to offer justification. Again, I do not disagree with his assessment of justification. But that particular article reads like a scholarly journal. If I were defending a doctrinal dissertation I would not define justification as “just if I’d never sinned.” I used that old saying in my sermon introduction, after which I read the text of Romans 1:1-12, exegeted the text then provided application. I may not be an old country preacher but I am getting there. My congregation is made up of high school teachers, truck drivers, small business owners and so forth; not seminary students seeking a doctorate in theology. You have to start somewhere is what I’m trying to say. Justification is “just if I’d never sinned” is a pneumonic device to remember the simplest definition possible, but no one is arguing that is all it means and should be studied further.

I have a couple of preferred translations that I read but I would never discourage someone from reading another translation, even one I didn’t care for, if that might turn them away from reading the Bible. The same with other preachers; if I met someone that loves listening to Brother Jim on the local AM station, he doesn’t need to hear me make fun of the way he talks, question his level of education, or any other comment unbefitting a Christian brother to say of another minister. “Once saved, always saved” is the country/mountain preacher way of saying eternal security of the believer. It’s what Calvinists call perseverance of the saints. Now if you don’t believe in that doctrine that’s your business, but some would claim that eternal security is correct but once saved, always saved is flawed and then outline some reasons. You have to start somewhere. I don’t see either of these as dumbing down theology as much offering people beginner level theology. The folks who say “We don’t need theology, just the Bible” are not ready for McMahon’s post-graduate course. They still may listen to good Bible teaching while being exposed to good theology if you don’t tell them what it really is.

We need to remember that we are redeemed sinners, another statement he is right about. But at the moment of salvation our record is expunged, we are made perfect in God’s eyes as our identity is hid in Christ. That is the good news of the gospel.