Shall there be no difference in the examination of the Elect and the Reprobate?
Yes. For,
1. The Elect shall not have their sins, for which Christ satisfied, but only their good works, remembered.
2. Being in Christ, they and their works shall not undergo the strict trial of the Law simply in it self; but as the obedience thereof doth prove them to be true partakers of the grace of the Gospel.
—James Usher (1581–1656), A Body of Divinity 8th ed. (London: R. J.; Jonathan Robinson; A. and J. Churchill; J. Taylor; J. Wyatt, 1702), 468.
R. Scott Clark
R.Scott Clark is the President of the Heidelberg Reformation Association, the author and editor of, and contributor to several books and the author of many articles. He has taught church history and historical theology since 1997 at Westminster Seminary California. He has also taught at Wheaton College, Reformed Theological Seminary, and Concordia University. He has hosted the Heidelblog since 2007.
More by R. Scott Clark ›
Fesko: “In the resurrection there is already wrapped up a judging-process, at least for believers: the raising act in their case, together with the attending change, plainly involves a pronouncement of vindication. The resurrection does more than prepare its object for undergoing the judgment. The resurrection of the church is not the anticipation of the issue of judgment, but is de jure the final judgment. As Herman Bavinck writes, “The resurrection of the dead in general, therefore, is primarily a judicial act of God.” The resurrection is not the penultimate event prior to the final
judgment; the resurrection is the final judgment.
We must correlate the resurrection with the fact that those who place their faith in Christ have already been raised and seated with him in the heavenly places (Rom. 6:4; Eph. 2:6). Were a person guilty of sin and worthy of condemnation, he would neither be raised with Christ nor seated with him in the heavenly places. ” http://www.opc.org/os.html?article_id=65