Rev. Joshua Engelsma’s Overthrow

On September 23, 2025, Rev. Joshua Engelsma took his turn at a Protestant Reformed lectern to overthrow the doctrine of justification by faith alone. The occasion for his speech was an officebearers’ conference organized by the council of Crete Protestant Reformed Church, where he is the pastor.

Reverend Engelsma acknowledges that Crete’s council chose “Justification and Forgiveness” as the title of the conference in light of the ongoing controversy between the Reformed Protestant Churches and the Protestant Reformed Churches (PRC) over the doctrine of justification. This is an important admission because the PRC has pretended for years that the issue is something else. Three years ago, an officebearers’ conference themed on the doctrine of sanctification attempted to point to that doctrine as the issue at stake, as if we who deny that fellowship with God is in the way of man’s obedience deny the doctrine of sanctification. Just before I left the PRC, a senior pastor in the denomination also claimed that the issue at stake is sanctification when he told me that ministers in the PRC were working to give a proper emphasis to the doctrine of sanctification because the PRC historically had over-emphasized justification. Likewise, the red-herring charge is made against the Reformed Protestant Churches that they are inherently antinomian, or at least they tend toward being antinomian. In contrast to these claims, the PRC’s false teaching on justification has brought ruin to the denomination, so it is welcome that the issue being discussed is the doctrine of justification.

Reverend Engelsma makes clear that the “enemies” he aims at in the speech are the Reformed Protestant Churches. At the beginning of the speech, he states that it was important to the council of Crete

to deepen our understanding and appreciation for the truth of our justification, and then also to set forth biblically, confessionally, what it is that we hold to in light of the false charges that are laid against us by our enemies…

I have in mind especially the enemies of the Protestant Reformed Churches who bring allegations of false charges against us as denial of the truth of justification by faith alone [sic].¹

As an aside, it is almost amusing to hear Protestant Reformed ministers bleating in their sermons and speeches about being falsely charged. I keep hearing about these false charges and slander. Where is the falsehood? What is the slander? Who is the author of these false charges and slander? Come out with it, and let us know; and instead of complaining generically about these false charges, explain and refute them with the truth!

It may be helpful to state, black on white, what charges the Reformed Protestant Churches do lay at the feet of the Protestant Reformed Churches. The PRC denies the doctrine of justification by faith alone. Specifically, the PRC denies justification by faith alone by redefining faith, so that the essence of faith becomes the activity of believing.² The PRC denies justification by teaching that the way of obedience, repentance, believing, or any combination of these are necessary to experience fellowship with God.³ The PRC denies justification by faith alone by requiring the activity of repentance prior to being forgiven by God.⁴

Perhaps in an attempt to ward off these charges, the council of Crete planned an officebearers’ conference on the topic of justification. The council commissioned its minister, Rev. Joshua Engelsma, to deliver the keynote speech and to explain the relationship between once-for-all justification and daily forgiveness.

The speech begins with a definition and a brief explanation of justification. As he progresses in his speech, Reverend Engelsma acknowledges God’s justification of sinners in eternity:

What does that mean with respect to justification in eternity then? We certainly believe and maintain that justification, like all of God’s works in time and every aspect of our salvation, has its eternal source in God’s decree of election. From eternity in his decree of election, God determined to justify his people.

Reverend Engelsma also gives a nod to God’s justification of sinners at the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ:

What then about justification at the cross and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ? And again, we firmly maintain the one basis of our justification being in the cross and in the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 4, of course, makes that inseparable connection, verse 25, speaking of Jesus who was delivered for our offenses and was raised again for our justification.

Again, we don’t have time to delve deeply into the idea of imputation, but that’s so critical here…Justification is God’s positive declaration to us that we’re righteous, that we’re innocent before him, and that’s only on the basis of what Jesus Christ has accomplished throughout his life of perfect obedience to the law of God, Christ’s perfect keeping of the law of God throughout his life. That’s imputed to us, counted as our own. And it’s on that basis that God declares us positively to be righteous as if we ourselves have perfectly kept the law. There’s no justification apart from the fullness of the saving work of our savior.

From here, very stealthily, Reverend Engelsma writhes in another direction. You see, it is important for what he is going to say next that he acknowledges justification in eternity and justification at the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ. You would hardly notice, but what Reverend Engelsma says next neatly puts eternity and the cross somewhere safely on a high shelf because he does not need them anymore. He does this because according to Engelsma eternity and the cross are not really the most important things. There is something else that people should be looking for. He says regarding justification in eternity and at the cross: “While we maintain that…that’s not the main emphasis of the word of God.”

Oh, really? Tell me more.

Reverend Engelsma is choosing his words very carefully, and it is helpful for us to back up and look more closely at his words regarding justification in eternity and justification at the cross. What he says when he speaks of the PRC’s maintaining justification in eternity is that justification has its “source” in eternity. To understand what he means, note what he does not say. He does not say that justification is an eternal reality. To say that justification has its “source” in election is like reminiscing wistfully about the past, without this past having any real bearing on one’s present circumstances. That is the effect of Reverend Engelsma’s speaking of justification’s “source” in eternity and then saying that eternal justification is not the main emphasis of the word of God.

The same can be said regarding the cross. What Reverend Engelsma says about the cross is that justification has its “basis” in the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Note the word “basis.” While true, the meaning of this statement in its context actually limits justification at the cross. Justification at the cross is only the “basis” but not the reality that God’s people are in fact justified at the cross. To Reverend Engelsma justification was not finished at the cross. If he did regard justification as finished at the cross, he would not have added the conjunction “but.” After he acknowledges the saving work of the savior, he says,

That being said—maintained—at the same time the emphasis of the word of God in speaking of justification is not what happened at the cross but what happens in the life and the experience of the believer.

The crux of justification for Reverend Engelsma is not the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Something else is important. In fact according to Reverend Engelsma, the word of God emphasizes something else entirely. The crux of justification for Reverend Engelsma is “the life and experience of the believer.” That has the eerie echo of Professor Cammenga’s teaching that it is not enough for salvation that Christ died.

What then is it within the life of the believer that brings justification into his experience? Engelsma explains: “We’re justified by faith, and faith is understood as believing, something that happens in the life and experience of the child of God.”

Follow carefully what Reverend Engelsma is doing. He has established a distinction within justification between justification at the cross and eternity over against justification in time. His purpose in establishing this distinction is so that he can show the child of God at which aspect of justification he should be looking. Engelsma then argues that since justification is by faith, and faith is believing (which happens in time), therefore, it has to follow logically that the word of God is mostly interested in what happens in time, in man’s experience, rather than in eternity or at the cross.

This is hacksaw theology. Never mind that distinctions in theology can, even must, be made. We may do that. However, any time those distinctions are made, two things must be kept in mind. First, the purpose of distinctions must be to the greater glory of God, so that he might be known more clearly. Second, distinctions notwithstanding, we must remember that God and his truth are one perfect whole. Reverend Engelsma ignores both, since in his dismembering of justification he sets aside the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ, who is the glory of God and the unity of the purpose of God. Reverend Engelsma in his distinction shows himself to be a theological hack.

What Reverend Engelsma sets over against the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ and election in eternity is man’s activity of believing. He simply states without any explanation that “faith is understood as believing.” He does not mention faith as union with Christ, which is the definition of faith given by the Heidelberg Catechism in Lord’s Day 7. Never mind that faith is the work of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the elect and not the work of man. Never mind that God is eternal and his works are above time, so that even before we were conceived, we existed with God as elect in Christ. Reverend Engelsma cannot give a complete definition of faith because if he properly taught faith, he could not dismember justification the way he does in the speech. This is the reason that from the very beginning of our controversy with the PRC, we charged them with having a different doctrine of faith. Reverend Engelsma proves that when one has a wrong doctrine of faith that he cannot properly teach justification. Sweeping aside a proper view of faith, Reverend Engelsma simply identifies faith with the activity of believing. Set aside the cross. Man also has to believe! As I had been told by a former pastor as I was leaving the PRC: “But the Holy Spirit cannot believe for you!”

You also need to repent! Because, while Engelsma sneaks it in at the end, according to him he is privileged to preach this gospel (which is no gospel) “to sinful, penitent sheep.” Not just to any sheep, but bring the gospel to the repentant ones.

More could be said of Reverend Engelsma’s hacking away at the gospel. He also takes a swipe at sanctification. He states without any ambiguity that “sanctification is…progressive” in the life of the child of God. I should not be as surprised as I am by this statement. It is natural that when one’s justification is not complete at the cross, neither will sanctification be complete in the perfect holiness of Christ. If justification has to be completed in the life and experience of the child of God, then certainly sanctification must progress through his life too.

What then of the subject of his speech, relating once-for-all justification and daily forgiveness? How can these two be related, while maintaining the glory of God in Christ and the unity of his truth?

Romans 10:14–15 asks a similar question and also gives the answer:

14. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15. And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

How do we relate once-for-all justification and daily forgiveness? The only way for us to believe and experience daily that we are forgiven all our sins is to hear it from the very voice of Christ. There is no man who stands before me who could convince me that my sins are forgiven and that I have no guilt. All my works testify against that. My very existence as a member of the human race with Adam as its head testifies against that. No amount of my activities of repenting and believing will convince me that my sins are forgiven. But God—glorious distinction!—but God gave the gospel. In the preaching of the gospel, he declares, as from his own mouth, that all my sins have been wiped away in the blood of Christ at the cross thousands of years ago. It is simple. In our lives and experiences, God gives us the gospel, which is the declaration of the finished work of Christ. And more, by the Spirit of the risen Christ, God gives me to receive Christ, the work of Christ, and all the benefits of Christ in my experience. Having that by faith (my living bond with Christ), even though I live two millennia after Jesus Christ walked on the earth, I really was there with him. I was nailed to the cross. There on the cross all my sins were paid for. I was crucified with Christ. Justified by faith. Forgiven by faith.

That is how to relate once-for-all justification and daily forgiveness. That is the gospel.

In contrast to this Reverend Engelsma cannot preach the gospel of the cross of Christ. It is impossible, given the theology he develops in this speech. By dismembering the doctrine of justification and supposing that the cross of Christ and election in eternity are separate from the life and experience of the believer, Engelsma makes the cross of Christ irrelevant to the church and overthrows the doctrine of justification. I am certain he will still stand on the pulpit and talk in a very dignified way about the cross and resurrection of Christ, election in eternity, and the imputation of the merit of Christ. For all that dignified speech about the cross and merit of Christ, Reverend Engelsma craftily builds and preaches a theological foundation for the rampant Protestant Reformed theology that it is not enough for salvation that Christ died, while carefully avoiding those cursed words. Because based on the theology of his speech, neither election in eternity nor the cross is enough.

Reverend Engelsma did not overthrow the gospel. Nobody can overthrow the gospel because the gospel is the power of God. Rather, Reverend Engelsma had the gospel taken from him, and he himself has been overthrown.

“Lo, this is the man that made not God his strength” (Ps. 52:7).