Correction - Disputations on Hermeneutics 5

I discovered several changes that needed to be made to the post, "Disputations on Hermeneutics 5".  Their nature warranted a noted correction; below is the corrected material.

Justification

Another doctrine one may observe in order to see the affects had by a hermeneutical structure as it is applied to scripture is the doctrine of justification.  In opposition to much of recent liberal theology, all Christian theology affirms the legal aspect of the atonement.   Often referred to in academic circles as “forensic justification”, the atonement wrought for us by Christ on the cross involves two sides: in Covenant Theology, the first part is expressed in terms of covenantal obedience on the part of the elect—the first Adam disobeyed the covenant God made with him, resulting in the condemnation of the world and the imputation of his sin to all his posterity, thus meriting for us God’s just damnation.  The second Adam, who is Christ, obeyed the covenant perfectly and merited favor for God’s elect, and by having His own righteousness imputed to us, God could be justified in declaring us “not guilty”, and calling us His Sons.  The second aspect of the event of Christ’s atonement was the sacrifice demanded by God’s holiness—having Christ’s righteousness imputed to us alone (however unimaginable given the wreched state of our souls) would not have been enough for God to justify us, because His justice demands payment of the debt against it, and it is not cast aside in the atonement, but Christ sacrificed Himself in the place of all those sinners who would eventually and who had already believed.  So, God does not love the elect in spite of their sin, but because of Christ’s payment for their sins.  The two sides of this doctrine (in Covenant Theology and other systems) are often referred to as the passive and active obedience of Christ: Christ actively obeyed God’s Law thus establishing the righteousness all believers need to stand before God without condemnation, and He passively obeyed God as He allowed Himself to be crucified and forsaken on the cross as a payment for all the sins of all who would ever believe.  So, in the atonement we see redemption accomplished by Christ in His life, death and resurrection (wherein the sins of all believers were imputed to Him), and applied to individuals temporally as they believe (having the righteousness of Christ imputed to them).  Therefore God’s exoneration of the elect is justified; His holiness is vindicated on the cross, and we inherit the Heavens and the Earth with Christ.

            Where Christian theological systems part ways has been over the doctrine of justification throughout the different ages of redemptive history; its accomplishment is generally viewed as transepochal but the manner of its application seems to be the source of the dispute.  Below I have included a chart that may be helpful in discerning the different views held by the different hermeneutical systems.