The Easter Verdict: God's Justification of the World in Christ's Resurrection
A Defense of Universal Objective Justification
Introduction
Tomorrow is Easter. The Church will gather to proclaim that Christ is risen—and in that proclamation lies the heart of everything we believe. For in Christ’s resurrection, God has declared His verdict over the world: forgiven.
In this essay, I shall defend the Lutheran doctrine of Universal Objective Justification (UOJ). UOJ is the thesis that God has absolved Christ of the sins of the whole world, subsequent to His vicarious satisfaction, such that all men are forgiven in Him. When God imputes the sin of the world to Christ and justifies Him in the resurrection from the dead, the whole world, as a collective whole, is declared righteous through objective imputation.
Following Robert Preus, we may define UOJ as follows:
Objective justification—which is God’s verdict of acquittal over the whole world—is not identical with the atonement, it is not another way of expressing the fact that Christ has redeemed the world. Rather it is based upon the substitutionary work of Christ, or better, it is a part of the atonement itself. It is God’s response to all that Christ died to save us, God’s verdict that Christ’s work is finished, that He has been indeed reconciled, propitiated; His anger has been stilled and He is at peace with the world, and therefore He has declared the entire world in Christ to be righteous.
This verdict is not synonymous with the Atonement but based upon it. UOJ is logically posterior to satisfaction but forms part and parcel of God’s ordained means of applying the satisfaction to sinners, flowing from His wisdom rather than strictly His justice simpliciter.
We must, however, distinguish universal objective justification from subjective justification. Subjective justification is that act of God whereby, upon a sinner placing faith in Christ, the benefits of Christ’s objective justification are communicated—not merely to the world considered in Christ, but to the person insofar as he does not make God out to be a liar but considers God’s verdict real and true. “Christ has not just forgiven the world; He has forgiven me,” the sinner declares. This is the cry of faith. This is what Easter means for you.
UOJ is thus a remarkably important thesis: the world can be objectively forgiven in the Divine Intention prior to being subjectively forgiven through faith. Many will die being objectively forgiven in Christ’s resurrection while lacking that forgiveness subjectively communicated to their persons. Justification by faith then becomes the means of laying hold of objective justification—establishing the crucial difference between UOJ and subjective justification. Far from undermining justification by faith, UOJ provides the objective foundation that makes subjective justification possible. It is the reason the Gospel can be preached to all people without reservation.
It is crucial to note that UOJ stands independent of the predestination question debated among Lutherans, though these notions are often conflated in our circles. Historical evidence supports this distinction: there were Intuitu Fidei defenders who accepted UOJ, and many have tied the idea to the Pietists, who were no Waltherians. Intuitu Fidei proponents can and should accept UOJ.
The Pardon Analogy and the Whole-Part Distinction
One helpful comparison likens this imputation to a legal pardon. Pardons must be accepted—faith being the means of acceptance—but the pardon holds true regardless of whether it is accepted. If the pardon is rejected, the person will be treated according to the legal arrangement existing outside the pardon’s bounds—that is, eternal punishment. But the pardon is real. It is there. It awaits only an open hand.
Or consider the slave freed by a payment on the part of a generous man: he can, in his freedom, choose to remain a slave. If humanity wishes to be regarded in Adam, it can do so. If not, it may flee to Christ and be regarded in Him. The chains have been broken. The door stands open. Why would anyone remain in bondage?
Here a crucial distinction must be introduced. Everything true of a whole is not necessarily true of its parts—just because an elephant is heavy does not mean all its parts are heavy. Similarly, just because the whole is forgiven as an entity, it does not follow that each individual person subjectively receives that absolution. After all, pardons—and justification is a pardon, albeit one based on a vicarious work—must be accepted.
Biblical Support
The doctrine of UOJ represents the face-value reading of several important texts that support justification by faith.
Romans 4:5
But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness.
God is said to justify the ungodly. Many refer this statement to subjective justification, but believers are not typically called “ungodly.” A safer route, as I see it, is to coordinate Romans 4:5 with Romans 5:6: “For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.” God absolves the ungodly, as such, in Christ’s resurrection—which includes all of us, prior to grace.
This means there exists an imputation prior to faith that faith grasps. The syllogism of faith works as follows:
God has forgiven the sins of the ungodly
But I am ungodly
Therefore, God has forgiven me
Do you see it? The third premise is yours to believe—but only if you are contrite. Only the broken sinner can grasp this word. The self-righteous man hears “God justifies the ungodly” and thinks it does not apply to him, for he does not see himself as ungodly. He must first be stripped of all hope in his own righteousness before he can rest in the righteous verdict of Another.
Here we must be precise: contrition is necessary to faith, but it is not necessary to forgiveness. Forgiveness is accomplished in Christ’s resurrection—it is there, objectively, for all. But faith cannot lay hold of it until the Law has done its terrible work. God must break the sinner before He can heal him. The Gospel is only good news to those who have first heard the bad news. This is why we preach both Law and Gospel—not because forgiveness depends on our contrition, but because faith does.
Trust in the third premise becomes the means of subjective justification. The objective verdict in UOJ is that upon which we trust God. God is said to impute this “faith” for righteousness. But what is this faith? The “faith” of Romans 4:5 appears to be the object of faith—the God who justifies those who are in themselves ungodly.
This syllogism explains the relationship between subjective and objective justification. In subjective justification, the sinner relies on the truths of objective justification. As such, subjective justification can be said to involve distinct acts on the part of God, but it can also be construed as one singular divine act. That is, there is one type—divine forgiveness—that is made common to as many sinners as subjectively appropriate it (various tokens).
Romans 4:25
Who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised because of our justification.
This is the Easter text par excellence. Christ was put to death on account of our sins and raised on account of our justification. Tomorrow morning, when the Church gathers to celebrate the resurrection, we are not merely commemorating a historical event. We are proclaiming God’s verdict over the world. On that first Easter Morning, God declared: “It is finished. The debt is paid. My Son has satisfied My justice, and in Him, I am reconciled to the world.”
We are to look at Christ as risen. More than that, we are to regard that event as that which assures us we have a gracious God. Nothing can separate us from God in Christ—that is, if we regard God as He is revealed in Christ.
Just as Christ was delivered for the sake of our sin (which is objective), He was raised for the sake of our justification (also objective). This is the face-value meaning of the parallel, and we should not depart from it unless context suggests otherwise.
Here an important dictum must be mentioned: forgiveness causes faith, and faith causes forgiveness. This seems paradoxical, but it is most true. The Gospel is the free preaching of the remission of sins. The remission of sins is a completed object, to be grasped, in the Divine Intention. We are to look at the payment as something made—in the same way the poor man is to look at the bread he is handed as an object to be consumed. The Gospel begets us anew, for we are born again by faith in the remission of sins. And yet, faith is that empty hand upon which forgiveness, unto our persons, depends.
We cannot receive the meat of divine mercy unless we eat. And faith answers to the deepest spiritual needs of man, in the same way that eating answers to his deepest physical needs. Indeed, we should—we must—regard God as gracious. We cannot regard Him any other way. The second that we regard the voice of the Law as final—and not a voice meant to point us to the Gospel—we lose all the other benefits of God, including our sanctification.
Romans 5:18–19
Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.
Adam’s universal condemnation is contrasted with Christ’s universal justification. Adam is said to have condemned us all; his unrighteous act is imputed to all men, reaching us through carnal generation. When we come into the world through the course of nature, Adam’s sin is made ours.
Similarly, Christ’s act of justification is imputed to the world in place of Adam’s condemnatory act. But not all are subjectively justified. Therefore, a justification exists outside of faith that undergirds it.
All men must appropriate this verdict with a corresponding reality—spiritual, as opposed to carnal, generation. We must be born again, for “that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:6).
The act is said, in the future tense, to result in justification for all men. That seems paradoxical—should we not rather say that the act resulted in justification for all men? Here, I would say the point in contrast is between Adam’s reign and Christ’s reign. Adam’s reign is past-oriented. Christ’s reign of righteousness is future-oriented—and not all are yet born. The idea is that objective justification is theirs once they come into the world, and they can seize it into their persons.
2 Corinthians 5:13–21
For if we are beside ourselves, it is for God; or if we are of sound mind, it is for you. For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died; and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again. Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God. For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
Perhaps the clearest instance of UOJ appears here. God has made all of us a new creation in Christ. As such, humanity is saved in the Divine Intention. For if One died for all, then all died (v. 14). In Christ, God has not imputed sins to the world—something Romans 4:6 regards as the same as forgiveness or justification. As such, sinners are reconciled to God.
And yet, something remains: sinners themselves need to be reconciled to God. The Word of Reconciliation—the preaching of the Gospel—is committed to men for precisely this reason: that we may regard God as true. Yet Paul still calls upon the Corinthians to be reconciled to their Father. Not all are subjectively justified.
A paradoxical sense emerges in which believers can be reconciled and not reconciled in different respects: reconciled insofar as they are part of the whole; unreconciled insofar as they are parts of the whole who have not yet appropriated the reconciliation.
Paul provides an illuminating parallel in verse 21 that further elucidates the relationship between UOJ and subjective justification:
Reconciliation answers to Christ being made sin
The non-imputation of the world’s sins parallels being made the righteousness of Christ
God makes Christ sin; as a result, the world does not have its sins imputed to it. In its place, there exists a righteousness of God in Christ that He accepts and approves—to be received in faith, by the message of reconciliation. For Christ was made sin for us, in order that we might be made the righteousness of God in Christ. This message of reconciliation is the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
John 1:29
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!”
Christ’s Atonement took away the sin of the whole world. But what is it to take away sins other than to forgive? Therefore, Christ’s life, death, and resurrection—His actions whereby we have a gracious God—ensure us that Adam’s verdict does not have final say. Christ’s verdict for us is available for all to appropriate. The Lamb has been slain. The sin has been borne away. This is finished work—and tomorrow we celebrate its confirmation in the empty tomb.
The “Righteousness Through Faith” Texts
All texts referring to a righteousness of or from God that is “through faith” do not contradict UOJ. These texts teach that faith is the effective means of appropriating the righteousness revealed in the Gospel (Romans 1:17). The righteousness is applied “through faith.” But these texts teach that the righteousness “of faith”—the righteousness subjectively grasped by faith—exists objectively prior to faith, in order that it might be seized. Therefore, even these texts, at face value, assume UOJ.
Other Supporting Texts
All those classes of texts that teach there is a righteousness of God that faith is to appropriate; all those texts that teach the Gospel is the preaching of the remission of sins; all those texts that say the righteousness of God is “through faith”; all those texts that assume there is a reality—in Christ—that faith need only cling to: all of these texts presuppose universal objective justification. Christ’s righteousness is the righteousness that avails for the world. We need only believe that it is ours to be forgiven.
The Sacramental Texts
Moreover, when Baptism is said to forgive sins absolutely (Acts 2:38; 22:16), when the Apostles and the Church are given the keys (Matt. 16:19; 18:18; John 20:23), when the Eucharist is said to be the New Covenant “for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28)—all of this affirms universal objective justification. Faith need not always be mentioned in connection with these because the forgiveness they present is not “conditional” in the sense that it must be earned. Faith is the empty hand that receives a fully constituted forgiveness, but we reject the idea that faith is a condition absolutely speaking. It is, instead, a sine qua non means—the same way that a beggar cannot receive an alm unless his hand is outstretched.
But here is the comfort: the sinner, in the act of justification, is not to regard his own faith—as a mere withered hand—but the jewel that is handed to it: Christ as He is presented in Word and Sacrament. Look not to your faith. Look to Christ. He is risen. He is yours.
Objections and Responses
Objection 1: Does UOJ Destroy Subjective Justification?
A standard objection claims that UOJ involves one single declaration of righteousness, thereby destroying the doctrine of subjective justification through faith—which involves several continuous imputations. This objection misunderstands the doctrine.
In one sense, the forensic act occurs in UOJ. However, we can rightly speak of two declarations or one declaration in different respects. It depends on what one means by “forensic act.” There exists:
One type: The justification in the resurrection
Various tokens: All those who have this righteousness applied to themselves
Justification is the absolution of our sins. The vehicle of that absolution is the imputation of both Christ’s active and passive righteousness—answering both our debt of repayment and our debt of obedience. But we can be forgiven in two senses:
Forgiven in the resurrection insofar as we are humans
Forgiven personally insofar as we are the faithful
One could rightly call these two separate acts of forgiveness, or one could say this is one act applied in two different respects.
Are we not, however, forgiven through the course of our lives? Do we not pray to God that He might forgive our trespasses daily? Yes. Here we must appeal to a deep and true reality. Our sins are forgiven, in the Divine Intention, in Christ’s resurrection. But our sins are not forgiven, subjectively, through faith, until they actually occur. Subjectively speaking, our sins are forgiven virtually in Christ upon initial faith but actually whenever faith intervenes for the sin as it occurs.
Objection 2: What About God’s Abiding Wrath?
Another objection argues that if all are forgiven, God has no abiding wrath on anyone. Yet Ephesians 2 teaches that God does have abiding wrath on those outside of Christ: “among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh... and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others” (Eph. 2:3). Therefore, UOJ must be false.
This misconstrues what UOJ teaches. Man can be considered under three headings:
As a human forgiven in the Resurrection: Forgiven in prospect—his pardon is provided for
As a human outside of Christ: Not seen favorably by God, though God wills his salvation
As a human in Christ through faith: Loved in an eminent way with the pardon applied
This concept proves no more contradictory than the doctrines of Law and Gospel. The Law teaches that God eternally wills to punish those who persist in sins. The Gospel reveals that God has eternally willed to provide sinners with forgiveness. Both truths stand together without contradiction.
What we are dealing with are two affections of the Divine Will. One affection—the affection of His justice—regards humanity in unbelief, cleaving to Adam, and condemns us and all our actions. Indeed, it condemns our person. The other affection—which the affection of justice is ultimately ordered toward—is the affection of mercy, but a mercy predicated on justice paid. God graciously sends Christ to pay the debt. Christ has paid in full, and in Him, we are to regard God as gracious to us. Anyone who does not regard God as what He is—gracious—makes Him out to be a liar. And yet, if one says he has no sin, he similarly makes God out to be a liar (1 John 1:8–10).
This answers to Luther’s famous dictum: God is most mutable, despite being immutable. If we regard God as angry at us, paradoxically, He is. And yet, if the sinner has the right object, and fleeing God’s anger, appropriates another word—the word of the Gospel—he has a gracious God.
Addressing Pieper’s “Change in God’s Heart”
Francis Pieper’s controversial remark that UOJ involves a change in God’s heart requires clarification. While imprecise, Pieper merely uses anthropomorphism to explain a deep and abiding truth.
Speaking more precisely, UOJ involves a change in the legal arrangements of God’s eternal will in relation to humanity, such that forgiveness is provided and established for the whole of mankind. Indeed, righteousness is imputed to the whole (humanity as an entity) such that it can be grasped by all the parts (faithful humans). This legal arrangement involves no metaphysical change in God—it is merely a declaration that a righteousness has been provided to man that God has accepted.
Moreover, God earnestly wills that all receive it by the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit communicates the righteousness provided in the Word to faithful man, who clings to it.
The Testimony of Walther and the Fathers
The Lutheran fathers understood these truths and proclaimed them with great pastoral care. Walther cites Abraham Calov on this point:
It is most important here that Calov says: “...that they have subsequently,” after their redemption, “become deserving of death in another manner.” In Christ all are redeemed, in Christ all are reconciled, in Christ all have their salvation earned, in Christ they are already saved. Therefore, the damned in hell will someday have to say: “I didn’t go to hell because I wasn’t redeemed, for God in Christ gave me all that was necessary for salvation. I didn’t go to hell because I was such a great sinner, for my sins were washed away through Christ. But I was rejected because I refused to accept this salvation from God’s hand, because I refused to believe.”
On the same point, Calov writes: It is not conditionally that we are redeemed, reconciled, and have our sins covered; on the contrary, unconditionally—wholly, perfectly, completely, insofar as this refers to merit and acquisition. However, faith is necessary in regard to fruit and acceptance. This is nothing else than appropriating the sinlessness, satisfaction, and reconciliation of Christ. For, if “One has died for all” this is the same (in God’s judgment) as though “all have died” (2 Corinthians 5:14). One dare never say to people: “You are saved provided you have faith”; rather the reverse: “Because Christ has redeemed you, therefore you now believe that you are saved.” A person does not believe he will come into an inheritance because of a future promise, but only when the promise has been assuredly given. So also here: true saving faith is not the faith that one will eventually be redeemed, but the faith that accepts the redemption that has long ago been accomplished through Christ. As certain as the Gospel is the teaching that proclaims the reconciliation and redemption of man, so certain is it that redemption and reconciliation is an accomplished fact.
(All Glory to God, pp. 150–151)
And Walther himself:
God is already reconciled with us through Christ’s suffering and death. No one needs to reconcile Him now. God is no longer angry with mankind. Hence in 2 Corinthians 5:20, it does not say: “Let God be reconciled with you,” rather “Be reconciled with God.” That is: You believe that God is angry with you, but He isn’t. If you don’t believe this, then for you, God is still angry. As I perceive God, so He is. If I believe that God is gracious to me, then He is gracious to me; if I believe that He is ungracious to me, then He is ungracious to me. That is: God is gracious to me through Christ’s redemption; and through faith, by which I place my confidence in this redemption, God’s grace becomes my own. On the other hand, God is ungracious to me when I reject the accomplished reconciliation through unbelief.
To this point, Luther writes: “When Scripture says God is angry, this is nothing more than that He is sensed to be that” (Sermons on Genesis, 1527, StL 3:143). “As one’s conscience responds to God, so He is. Regard Him as gracious, and He is gracious; regard Him as a frightening judge, so He is one.... Thus there is a variableness between Him and me, even though God’s nature is unchanged. But this is all because of faith” (StL 3:202f.).
Luther continues: Hence this is the benefit of Christ’s suffering and resurrection, that He did not do this for Himself but for the entire world, that on that silent Friday he trod underfoot the devil and my sins. As a result the devil flees at the name of Christ. Do you want to use these great blessings? Very well! He has already given them to you. Only do Him the honor of accepting them with gratitude. (Nine Sermons on Various Epistles and Gospels, 1530, StL 12:1586)
All these glorious gifts—righteousness, life, salvation—now are spread out before you; Christ has granted them to mankind through His Gospel, as Luther so well confessed in the 95 Theses: “The true treasure of the church,” according to the sixty-second thesis, “is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God” (AE 31:31).
(All Glory to God, pp. 151–153)
How is the sinner to deal with this existential paradox? By admitting both truths. The sinner is to say to the Law, “Yes, you are correct—in Adam I have sinned, and sin is my oldest friend.” But he is not to stop there. He is to say to the Law, “But that condemnation business you are on about—that is not for me. For I know another, my new friend the Gospel, who has told me something important: I am forgiven, and that payment you are on about has been made in Christ. The scales have been evened, and more than that, I have the righteousness of another to supply my every want.”
This is what it means to live as an Easter people. We do not deny our sin. We do not pretend we are righteous in ourselves. But we cling to Another who is righteous for us—and in Him, we have peace with God.
Conclusion
Universal Objective Justification stands as a deeply important truth that all believers should accept and hold as Gospel truth—literally. Far from undermining justification by faith, UOJ provides the objective foundation that makes subjective justification possible. It explains how God can justify the ungodly, how Christ’s resurrection benefits all humanity, and how the Gospel can truly offer forgiveness to all who hear it.
This doctrine preserves both the universality of Christ’s redemptive work and the particularity of faith’s reception. It maintains divine justice while proclaiming divine mercy. Most importantly, it ensures that when we preach “Christ died for you,” we speak not hypothetically but actually—not conditionally but certainly. In this way, UOJ serves as a cornerstone for evangelical comfort and the free offer of the Gospel to all people.
Tomorrow, the Church will gather to sing “Christ is risen!” In that proclamation lies everything. The empty tomb is God’s verdict over the world—a verdict of acquittal, a declaration of peace, a word of reconciliation spoken over all humanity. The question that remains for each of us is simply this: Will you believe it? Will you regard God as He has revealed Himself to be—gracious, merciful, and at peace with you in Christ?
Dear Christian, believe it. The resurrection is for you. Christ is risen—and in Him, you are forgiven.
Soli Deo Gloria