Introduction

During a Bible conference at French Creek State Park in Pennsylvania a number of years ago, an OPC missionary to the people of India spoke about preaching the gospel. As he explained the kinds of reactions the gospel received in a land where most people are not even nominal Christians, he told us that the gospel of grace is not readily received. He noted, however, that "if the gospel required you to crawl a mile on broken glass, there would be a million converts in India."

There is a simple reason for that observation. A. A. Hodge once pointed out that all non-Christian religions presuppose that acceptance by God depends upon the quality of our actions and the quality of our character. If one studies the doctrines and practices of these "natural" theologies, it is clear that the whole development of thought revolves around this presupposition. Such "theologies" are simply an attempt to develop and define those actions which will achieve divine approval and, since there is some expectation of internal conformity, it is also necessary to determine the rules and method by which an acceptable character can be recognized. In other words, they seek to define who the "holy men" are and what righteous activity acceptable to God is.

Unfortunately, much of what calls itself Christianity accepts some version of this presupposition. It is true, that Christianity-as a general term that is applicable to those who in someway profess Christ-presupposes that the person and work of Christ has something to do with our acceptance before God. Yet much of the theology that claims itself to be Christian is little different from that non-Christian presupposition. Old fashioned Pelagianism, together with Liberalism and Modernism, view Christ as no more than an example to follow. They grant that He is an example which is superior to any other historic, religious leaders to be sure-but still only an example of how one is to be and to act in order to be acceptable to God. Post-modernism sometimes sees the "story" of Christ as a comforting narrative to assist us in our life's journey. Many even acknowledge that the death and resurrection of Christ may be of great, if not the greatest comfort. Yet this death and resurrection are not historically or metaphysically significant as to the matter of acceptance before God. The story of Christ is simply one among many in which we can find comfort in the midst of a world not of our making and out of our control.

Most of the more traditional, non-Reformed theologies which claim to be Christian do presuppose that the death of Christ is in some way the ground and cause of our salvation. Many even acknowledge that we are conceived and born in sin-that salvation must in some way be attributed to the grace of God. Yet, when studied closely, these theologies teach that our final acceptance by God depends upon the quality of our actions and the quality of our character. Roman Catholicism expresses the process in a very simple fashion. The quality of our character is changed by baptism. This new character is retained by participation in the other sacraments and, if not sufficiently purged in this life, finally purged in the fires of purgatory. The whole purpose is to render us holy enough to be approved by God. And this character, so changed and kept by magical means, produces the quality of actions accepted by God. And this combination of character and actions is finally why it possible to be justified in the sight of God.

Among conservative Protestant churches, including Reformed and Presbyterian denominations, there is slow return to magical, sacramental, self-oriented notion of justification. There is an emphasis back to the sacraments and the way in which these sacraments make the recipient acceptable to God, in either a preparatory or on-going manner. It is not surprising that many of those who are advocating this view of justification find the writings of Nevin brilliant. Nor is it surprising that many of the pastors accepting these teachings are turning to high liturgy, vestments, and focus on the sacraments as both the initial and continuing means of dispensing grace. Bundled into this theology is the presupposition that, in the final analysis, sacramental and personal activity make us acceptable to God, in other words, it is by our actions and character.

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate what the Bible teaches concerning the doctrine of justification. Justification, that which defines how it is that we are acceptable to God, does not depend upon the quality of our actions nor the quality of our character. If we are to know and understand the truth rightly and have a true desire to be received into God's favor and justified in His sight, it is necessary to accept what the true, Biblical doctrine of justification is. This doctrine is the heart of the gospel, and it is the means by which God can be both just and the justifier of those who place their trust in Christ Jesus alone. We must understand that Christ is not simply an example of righteousness, He is our righteousness. He is not simply an example of holiness, He is our holiness. It is not the quality of our actions and character that makes us acceptable to God-it is the quality of Christ's actions and character. And the promise of the gospel is that these are ours, if only we accept them with a believing heart.

What Is the Doctrine of Justification?

Those who teach a contrary doctrine often argue that their position is consistent with the Bible. What they fail to acknowledge, however, is that there is a difference between the doctrine of justification and the ways in which the words "justify" and "justification" are used in everyday as well as Scriptural meanings. For example, a normal, common sense understanding of the notion of justify is that whoever does what is right is righteous, or at least has engaged in just action. "Wisdom," says Christ in one place "is justified by her children." We understand that Christ is saying that the outcome of a given project or activity demonstrates the right use of knowledge and means to get it done. There is no expectation that the children of wisdom will somehow form a tribunal in which she is adjudicated righteous. James uses the term justify in the same manner when he says the outcome of faith demonstrates and proves the reality of that faith. Indeed, the whole of James' epistles is about the testing and proof of faith, and we have no need to deny that such a use of the term "justify" is appropriate and common.

However, when we speak of the "doctrine of justification," as it relates to our standing before God and pertains to the way and order in which God saves us from our sins, we need to understand the terms in a more restricted and technical sense. This is not because we wish to put our own "spin" on the terms. It is because the Bible itself is quite restrictive when it is speaking of the relationship between sin and salvation. Because of sin, death and condemnation came into the world. As such, we must distinguish between justify as meaning proof or demonstration and justify as meaning free from guilt. The Bible uses the terms in both of these senses, and to confuse the two is to fail to recognize how it is that God can justify us, even thought the law cannot.

The matter of sin-and the condemnation which results from sin-requires that we understand justification in contrast to that condemnation. Were there no sin, then the question of the quality of our actions and the quality of our character would be sufficient to make us acceptable to God. We were created to be so from the beginning. Sin, however, renders us incapable of such righteousness and holiness. And, it is clear from Scripture, that God will not justify the wicked nor condemn the righteous.

We must understand that this contrast between justification and condemnation is the great dividing line in the history of redemption. So it is not surprising that it is also the great dividing line in the history of the church as it develops its understanding of redemption and as it seeks to apply the gospel to the lives of God's people. It is therefore all the more necessary to understand justification in contrast to condemnation in order to understand what it is that God has done for us in Christ.

Among the strongest challenges to the Reformed doctrine of justification comes from a group which argues that it is necessary to view all doctrines of Scripture-including the doctrine of justification- "covenantally." Properly understood, this is wise advice. It is clear from various passages in Scripture that God is a covenant God, that His dealings with mankind involve a covenantal relationship, that the primary interventions in history are by means of covenant, and that all the promises and blessing from God involve giving and confirmation of covenantal oaths. But those who advocate "covenant thinking" and "covenant reading" and "covenant defining" have created a process that ignores the great "covenantal divide" that exists in the Biblical explanation of justification. The divide is not between covenantal faithfulness and faithlessness; it is between condemnation and justification.

"Judgment [came] of one [Adam's sin] unto condemnation," Paul teaches in the letter to the Romans; "but the free gift (came) of many trespasses unto justification" (Romans 5:16). This is the fundamental covenantal relationship that defines our right standing or acceptance in the presence of God. If we are of Adam, we stand condemned in the presence of God. If we are of Christ, we are justified. Paul reiterates this principle in his second letter to the Corinthians. To them he writes that the "ministration of condemnation (the Old or Mosaic Covenant) was glorious, much more does the ministration of justification (the New Covenant) exceed in glory" (II Cor. 3:9). "God has done," Paul teaches us, "what the law could not do"-it freed us from condemnation (Rom. 8).

The whole of new covenant teaching on the doctrine of justification presupposes that the Old Covenant, gracious though it was, ministered, or better, served condemnation. The Bible presupposes the contrast between condemnation and justification and that the law-perfect, holy, and righteous as it is-only condemns when applied to the question of whether or not we are acceptable to God. Rather than proposing some sort of faithful, covenant keeping that continues our right relationship with God, the Scriptures hold out, in stark contrast, that one is either condemned or justified. There is no middle ground. Nor is there some twilight place that one shifts back and forth between the two.

This single principle of contrast-condemnation or justification-is determined by a judge. It is not a status but a state-either condemned or justified. When applied to our eternal state, this determination is by the supreme Judge of the universe, against Whose judgment there is no appeal and no escape. It is, in the final analysis, a judicial decision and the relationship, although rendered by covenant, is a judicial relationship. This relationship is based upon the expectation of a Judge who, according to the teachings of Scripture, engages in the same decision-making process He expects from earthly judges who represent Him on earth. "If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, and [the judges] judge them," the Lord teaches Moses; "then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked" (Deuteronomy 25:1). Justification is the right to live and to move and to have one's being in the society of men and in fellowship with God, both in time and in eternity. The only other alternative is condemnation. Justification understood in this light, is more than simply the demonstration of right action or right thought. It is a judicial determination that keeps one from suffering the consequences and punishments that accompany condemnation.

How Are We Justified Before God?

Do Scriptures therefore presuppose or teach that we are justified before God based upon the quality of our actions and the quality of our character? Do non-Christian religions understand the fundamental principle, but lack the "right" things to do (crawling on glass seems a bit much)? If we remove Christ from the picture, there could be some argument for this position. But Christ has come. So, as He says to the Pharisees, they are still in their sins. This is why the distinction between legal and evangelical justification needs to be maintained. Our right standing before God-what determines whether we are acceptable to God or not-is not determined by the quality of our own actions and the quality of own character. The heart of the gospel is that this can be and has been accomplished by Another.

One of the clearest and most concise expressions of the Biblical doctrine of justification is found in the Heidelberg Catechism in answer to the question "How are you righteous before God?" (Question 60). "God grants and imputes to me the perfect satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ, as if I had never had nor committed any sin, and as if I myself had accomplished all the obedience which Christ has rendered for me, if only I accept this gift with a believing heart." The Reformed and biblical doctrine of justification is taught in this answer. It is what distinguishes the gospel from all other supposed means by which we are accounted righteous before God-whether those means are proposed by non-Christian or claimed by other Christian teachings.

There are three very important elements to this definition in the Heidelberg. These elements clearly demonstrate how the Biblical doctrine of justification differs from those who advocate the quality of action and of character as that which makes us acceptable to God.

First, justification is a gift. This must be clearly understood and embraced. It is of grace alone. "Without money," says Isaiah. At no cost to us-either individually or corporately. "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," Paul writes. But we are "justified freely, as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 3). It is God who "grants and imputes" to us this gift. It is not based upon nor determined by either the quality of our actions or the quality of our character. It is a gift independent of anything that is by us or in us. Nor is it a magical process that makes us capable of or inclined to do the right things and holy living. It is "granted and imputed" by God. It is in His power to do so, not in ours. The Judge alone has both the right and the power to grant this gift to whomever He chooses. It is His judgment that matters, not ours.

Second, the process is an exchange. We must never lose sight of this. While it is a gift to us-at no cost to us-there was a price that needed to be paid. Justice had to be extracted and satisfied against the condemnation which we received because of the sin of Adam. Each of us is guilty of that first sin as well as our own personal sins. This is a guilt that we have and increase daily. In order that our condemnation should be removed, our sins are "imputed" to Christ Jesus. He took the punishment due our sins upon Himself. This was necessary because guilt is a state of being, not an action. That guilt, which is the source of our condemnation, is transferred to Christ. In exchange, we are granted the "perfect satisfaction, holiness, and righteousness" of Christ (as if) "we had never had nor committed any sin." The righteous demands of justice and of the Judge are therefore met in this twofold exchange. Here is where the quality of actions and of character does come into play. The quality of Christ's actions and Christ's character upon the cross satisfied the demands of righteousness and justice against sin. So also the actions and character of Christ, His "righteousness and holiness" are now mine by imputation. The result of this exchange is that the Judge of the whole universe looks upon us "as if" we ourselves "had accomplished all the obedience Christ rendered for us." This is the gospel.

Third, the reception of this gift is by faith only. This is a crucial element, which we need to understand and practice diligently. Faith alone is suited for this purpose of receiving this gift. Faith is wholly passive in its reception-there can be no claims of action or character. "Not of works," says Paul. Faith brings nothing to the process. It merely receives from the hand of God, and it is the only means by which He, as the perfect and righteous Judge, can make us acceptable to Himself. It is by faith that we accept that God has laid upon Jesus the "sins of us all"-that "by His stripes, we are healed." It is because of faith that when we fail in our daily walk, we flee not to the quality of our actions or the quality of our character, but to Christ. Faith accepts Christ as the proof of that faith, and it attributes nothing to us. Our works are all imperfect and defiled with sin. It is not our obedience or covenant faithfulness that maintains our right standing with God-it is only, and will ever be, the perfect satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ. We must accept this with a believing heart-and by no other means. As John Calvin warns us, however much we account ourselves acceptable to God in our own person, by that much we deny the person and work of Christ in our behalf. Faith looks to Christ alone, Who God has made "our wisdom, and our righteousness and sanctification and redemption" (I Cor. 1:30).

Why Is this Doctrine Of Justification the Only True Understanding of Scripture?

"Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord." When discussing the doctrine of justification, the apostle Paul spends a great deal of time teaching about our sin and misery. There is "none righteous, no, not one" he teaches us in Romans. "No one understands; no one seeks God." For Paul, far from having a quality of character that can ever be or can ever be made acceptable to God, the quality of our character is altogether defiled and corrupted by sin. "No one does good, not even one." The quality of our actions fairs no better. All are under sin and, therefore, none can be justified by the law. This truth must never be forgotten nor covered over with what Jesus calls the "whitewash" of the hypocrites. The depth of our depravity calls for us to be condemned in both time and eternity.

And we must always remember and never forget: God is a just Judge. "He who justifies the wicked, and he that condemns the righteous, both alike are an abomination to the Lord" (Prov. 17:15). Herein lies the problem. How can a just Judge justify the wicked?

For this reason, fundamentally, we must maintain the Biblical doctrine of evangelical justification precisely. It is all about God. As a just Judge, He cannot overlook nor wink at sin-it must be punished. It is His holiness and His righteousness-His truth and His justice-that are at stake. If He is to give us eternal life, there must be a way in which He can be both just, and the justifier of the unjust. Therefore, Paul says, God put forth His own Son as propitiation by His blood. The truth and justice of God demand a high price, and that price is found only in the death of the Son of God. Our justification is a gift, but it was not without a price. That price was the life of the Son of God, who alone can know when the wrath of God is satisfied against the sins of His people. He alone could bear the burden of that wrath for His people. He, being righteous, was willing to be condemned in our place so that we, being wicked, can be justified. This is why Paul says that this means of salvation shows God's righteousness. He is just and holy. That has not changed. And our justification must be understood and accomplished so that He "might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (Romans 3:26).

This is not merely a "change of status." It is an exchange of guilt for righteousness. It is all about the absolute holiness and righteousness of God. To detract from that by trying to claim anything other than a believing heart is to deny that God extracted a price-from Himself-high enough to satisfy His justice. It is because of this that we are and can be justified.

Conclusion

The Reverend Mr. Bruce Hunt, an OPC missionary to Japan who suffered much during World War II, told of an encounter with a Japanese holy man. Pastor Hunt had asked the monk if he understood the difference between Christianity and his own religion. The monk replied that he did-it was the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of vicarious atonement. Pastor Hunt was amazed that how accurate the monk's perception was, and told him he was not far from the kingdom of God. We do well to keep this in mind.

Biblical justification presupposes that God is absolutely just. Therefore, in order to be acceptable to Him, we must be equally absolute in the quality of our actions and the quality of our character. Yet the Scriptures teach clearly that we fall far short of such perfection. The natural religions of the world therefore lower the bar in order to make it seem as if the goal could be attained. Many Christian theologies do little better. They promise that Christ has provided a boost for us and, once we get started by some sort of magical initiation, it is left up to us to finish the process.

We must be careful not to be deceived.

Only the perfect satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ is acceptable to God. God knows when His justice is satisfied. God knows what righteousness should be accounted as acceptable. It is a gift that is His to give. We cannot buy it. We cannot earn it. We must receive such with a believing heart. This is the truth of the gospel and the simplicity of Biblical justification. Anything else falls short of eternal life.

Introduction

There are a number of controversies surrounding the Biblical teaching that Jesus "sat down at the right hand of God" after His ascension into the heaven.  For example, it was a pivotal doctrine during the Reformation.  Zwingli and Luther argued over the proper meaning and administration of the Lord's Supper although, contrary to what some argue today, they were not that far apart.  At the Colloquy of Marburg in 1529, they had developed fifteen articles of agreement between the Lutheran and  Reformed understanding of the Lord's Supper.  By the end of the discussion, they had agreed on fourteen of the fifteen articles and, on the fifteenth article, they had agreed on five out of six points.  At issue in this last point was whether "the true body and blood of Christ are bodily present in the bread and wine" (Alister E. McGrath, Reformation Thought: An Introduction 3^rd Edition, page 190).  The disagreement over this sixth point was the "deal breaker" which led to the division between the Lutheran and Reformed churches.

This "deal breaker" revolved around the understanding of two Biblical phrases:  "seated at the right hand of God" and "this is my body."  Zwingli argued that Christ, after His ascension, was "seated at the right hand of God the Father Almighty" and was now literally located-body and soul- at that right hand.  Because He could not be in two places at the same time, His statement "this is my body" must be understood as a figure of speech.  It was not possible for Him to be both physically at the right hand of God and physically present all over Europe during communion with each congregation.  On the contrary, Luther countered.  The statement "at the right hand of God" was to be understood as a figure of speech, because there is not literal place that can be called "the right hand of God."  It is not a "physical" location where Christ now "sits" but represented the power of God by which Jesus reigns as the Governor of the Universe.  His promise to give us His "body and blood" is therefore to be taken literally, and we are to recognize that Jesus is bodily present at communion "by, with, and under" the elements of bread and wine wherever and whenever that communion was held.

There have been other controversies over the years in the debate of when, where, and how it is that Jesus is at the "right hand of God," but the dispute between Zwingli and Luther serves as a good cautionary tale for us as we look at the doctrine of the Apostles' Creed which the theologians call the "session of Christ."  It demonstrates the need to understand what is meant by the "right hand of God" as well as what is meant by "being seated."  In the following brief look at this article, we will see that both of these concepts-"the right hand of God" and "sitting"-are metaphors representing certain truths about God and about the glory and continuing work of Christ.  We will see how this doctrine of the creed relates to our comfort and our lives as confessing Christians.  While brief, this explanation gives a focused discussion on the attributes of God's power, dignity, and blessings and how Christ, as our Redeemer and Lord, exercises these attributes to the glory of God and our good.

"The Right Hand of God"

God is Spirit.  He does not have a body of any kind, much less eyes, ears, nose, arms, legs, or hands.  Although He can do what eyes do without eyes, ears do without ears, arms do without arms, He has none of these body parts literally.  There is no "physical" hand of any kind, right or left, that can be attributed to Him and so there is no "place" at which or by which anyone could sit.  When the term "hand" or "right hand" is ascribed to God in pages of the Bible, there is the need to understand the terms as a figure of speech.   As we look at the way in which "right hand" in particular is used in Scripture, we see at least three senses where the phrase is used to teach us certain concepts that are nevertheless "really true" about God.  They derive from everyday life and, even though God has no literal "hand," we can understand from the kinds of things the human "hand" is used for, to learn these truths about God.

The first and primary metaphor for the "hand" is that of "power."  This corresponds to the common way we use "hand" as a shortcut for activity or strength.  We talk about having or being a "hired hand" or, when we wish to demonstrate that something has been accomplished by ourselves, it is done "by my own hand."  This is much the same as we find in Scripture.  Joshua tells the Israelites that the purpose of setting up the twelve stones near Gilgal was "so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the hand of the LORD is mighty" (Joshua 4:24).  The phrase "right hand" is used also to designate that power.  After God saves them from the Egyptians, the Israelites sang "Your right hand, O Lord, glorious in power, your right hand, O Lord, shatters the enemy" (Exodus 15:6).  The Psalms speak about the "right hand" on several occasions, usually to designate the power to save or deliver from troubles.  "Now I know that the LORD saves his anointed; he will answer him from his holy heaven with the saving might of his right hand" (Psalm 20:6).  "My soul clings to you; your right hand upholds me" (Psalm 63:8).  "Why do you hold back your hand, your right hand? Take it from the fold of your garment and destroy them!" (Psalm 74:11).  "You have a mighty arm; strong is your hand, high your right hand" (Psalm 89:13).    The sense of "power" is the primary attribute that Christ assigns to the figure as well.  He tells the high priest of Israel "from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power" (Matthew 26:64-"power of God" Luke 22:69).  The "right hand of God" is clearly used in Scripture to designate the absolute power of God to accomplish whatever task there is.  It is a power to save and to sustain, and it is the power by which He governs all things both in heaven and on earth.

There is a second sense for the phrase "right hand" means honor in the sight of others.  When Bathsheba came into Solomon's presence, she was given a place on the "right of" his throne as a gesture of the honor he had for her (I Kings 2:19-although she wittingly or unwittingly misused that honor).  David prophesied concerning the Messiah of God that "The LORD said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool" (Psalm 110).  It is for this reason that Jesus "sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Hebrews 1:3).  "To which of the angels" has God ever given such a place of honor?  The expected answer is:  none.  Later in the book of Hebrews we at told that "we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the holy places, in the true tent that the Lord set up, not man" (Hebrews 8:1,2).  By the phases "Majesty on high" and "Majesty in heaven," we are to understand that Jesus is with the Father not only in power, but in all His sovereign glory and dignity, a glory and dignity that is "in heaven," a glory and dignity which comes from the Lord of glory and not from man.  It is a place of highest honor.

A third sense of the "right hand" is that blessings and benefits.  "In Your presence there is fullness of joy; at Your right hand are pleasures forevermore" (Psalm 16:11).  It is with the "right hand" that Israel blesses Ephraim, to the consternation of Joseph (Genesis 48:13-18).  This sense of blessing defines the goal to which Jesus looked during all His work and suffering while on this earth.  It was that joy He had with the Father before the foundations of the earth.  "Looking to Jesus," we are told, "the founder and finisher of our faith," we are to recognize that it was "for the joy that was set before Him [He] endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God" (Hebrews 12:2).  It is the joy which He had before His incarnation and was always before Him as a goal, a fullness of joy that is "at the right hand of the Father Almighty."

How Do we Understand "Is Seated"

"To sit" in the Scriptures often means simply to "sit down" in much the same way as we use the term.  However, just as "right hand" is a metaphor, so also "sitting" in Scripture does not always mean that physical or literal act of being "seated" in one spot.  It is also used to signify being in an undisturbed state where one can "think about things" without fear of being harmed.  When the "swords are beat into plowshares" and "spears into pruning hooks" then "they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree" (Micah 4:3, 4).  This is a proverbial phrase for security and enjoyment in uninterrupted thought.  "To sit" is also used to specify a meeting of some sort, where individuals are gathered for a purpose of mutual interest.  "Elisha was sitting in his house, and the elders were sitting with him" (II Kings 6:32).  This could have been a prayer meeting or the elders were there consulting Elisha about a matter, it does not say.  However, the phrase "sitting in his house" is to be understood not as the simple activity of "sitting"-as opposed to standing or milling around-but sitting for a definite purpose (compare this with Proverbs 31:23 "sits among the elders of the land").  Tamar is told to "sit a widow in your father's house," which means to remain or dwell (Genesis 38:11-and most translations read "remain" or "dwell" rather than "sit").  Moreover, one is not to "sit in the seat of scoffers" (Psalm 1:1)-which certainly entails more that resting one's feet.

With respect to Christ, it could well mean contemplation or dwelling.  He most assuredly deserves such a state.  However, the Scriptures teach that Christ is still very much active on our behalf, and the term "sitting" is used in the creed to designate the entirety of that activity over the past two thousands years.  Christ "sitting as the right hand of God" is best understood, therefore, in the same way we would understand Elisha and the elders or the individual in Proverbs.

The theological and technical term for His "being seated" or "sitting" is called "session" and the activity that Christ is engaged in is called the "session of Christ."  (The term "session" itself is derived from the Latin, and simply means "sitting.") When applied to "doing" something, it has a larger significance and is used to designate the authority by which a person or group of people act.  In law, for example, a court is not official until the judge "sits down," at which time the court is "in session" and the judge is ready to hear and decide a case.  Everything that happens after he "sits" down is the "official" action of the court and is recorded as such.  When the Congress of the United States meets for official decision making, they are "in session."  This is also how we speak of the judicatories of the church:  a Consistory or Classis or Synod.  When the members or delegates are met together, they are "seated in the bar of the house" and are therefore "in session" and ready to consider the matters that have been brought before them.  It is in this sense, no doubt, that Elisha and the elders were "sitting in his house."  To be "in session" or "seated" means to assume the position of authority and to exercise those duties and responsibilities that are particular to the institution for which or in whose behalf one "is seated."  For a judge, it is matters of law; for the Congress, it is matters of legislation; for the Consistory, Classis, and Synod, it is matters of the church.  For Jesus it means to be "above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come" (Ephesians 1:21).  When He is "in session" "all things [are] under his feet" (Ephesians 1:22).

Putting the Two Together

We need now to put the two figures together:  "at the right hand of God" and "sitting."  The "right hand of God" denotes the power, dominion, majesty, glory, and blessings of God the Father Almighty.  When Christ is "in session" ("sitting"), He is both enjoying and exercising that power, dominion, majesty, glory, and blessings.

Fundamentally, "being seated at the right hand of God the Father Almighty" means that Jesus Christ has the same and equal power with the Father.  As Ursinus points out, this is not an addition to the glory of Christ, but a manifestation of the deity of Christ which had been hidden or had "concealed itself", as it were, by the lowly and humble circumstances of His birth, life, suffering, and death.  As the eternal Son of God, He has been at the "right hand of the Father" from all eternity and, as such, has always been equal in power and glory with the Father.  He deserves the same worship and praise as the Father.  However, the necessities of our miserable condition required that He "humble Himself" and "take upon Himself the nature of man" and be "obedient unto death, even death on the cross."  But to look upon Him only in His humiliation does not give us the entire picture of Who He is and what He is to us.  We need to have, as it were, the whole of His person in perspective, in order that we clearly see the greatness of our Redeemer.  To be at the "right hand of God" is the manifestation of Him as the "radiance of the glory of God" as the "express image or transcript of God's person."  Having made "purification for our sins," His human nature is now received into heaven and He is clearly shown to us as the One by whom and for whom all things were made.  Peter points out in his letter that Jesus has "gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to Him" (I Peter 3:22).  It is Jesus Christ who "upholds the universe by word of His power" (Hebrews 1:3).

Secondly, "sitting at the right hand" does not mean that Christ is idle in heaven.  It is as the "King of kings and Lord of lords" that Christ exercises His power in various ways.  He continues to be true and righteous man; so He continues not only King, but our Chief Prophet and Priest as well.  As our Chief Prophet, "being therefore exalted at the right hand of God," Peter preached, "and having received the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing" (Acts 2:33).  The Spirit "takes of the things of Christ" and applies them to them us.  It is Christ who has given to the church "some apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers" (Ephesians 4:11).  He has never given up but continues to be the primary Teacher of the church.  As our Priest, He made sacrifice for our sins "once for all" and continues to make intercession for us.  He has "died-more than that, who is raised-Who is at the right hand of God, Who indeed is interceding for us" (Romans 8:34).  "We have such a high priest," we are taught in Hebrews, "One Who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven" (Hebrews 8:1).  When ordered to cease teaching in the "Name," Peter replies that "God has exalted Him at His right hand as Leader and Savior" (Acts 5:31).  Jesus continues to teach His people, intercede for His people, and is the Head of everything "to the church".

Finally, though not directly related to the article in the creed, the Scriptures indicate that Jesus, being "seated at the right hand of God," is the goal of our lives-individually and corporately.  As individuals, each of us is to look "to Jesus, the founder and finisher of our faith" (Hebrews 12:2).  It is by looking to Him that our own souls are humbled and we recognize that in Him and from Him alone we receive the beginning and the end of our salvation.  And, as Paul teaches, we are "more and more conformed to His image."  Too often we look to ourselves, our own effort, our own strength, and fail miserably and are miserable because of it.  Our faith does not simply begin with Jesus; it ends with Him as well.  Corporately, as a body, we need to accept what Paul tells us in Colossians, that "if then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.   Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth" (Colossians 3:1,2).   As a people, we are a spiritual entity-a temple for the habitation of the Holy Spirit.  And we are a spiritual kingdom, moving toward a spiritual end.  We look for a better country, a better life, and eternal glory.  That Christ is Who He is and has received the power, honor, dignity, and majesty to which He is entitled, these things should pull us forward toward our "heavenly home" which is the goal toward which we labor.

Knowing these things, we should have the prayer for each other and each of our churches that Paul had for the church at Ephesus:  "having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places" (Ephesians 1:2-5).