Justification by Faith Alone: Affirming the Doctrine by Which the Church and the Individual Stands or Falls (Reformation Theology Series)

What I did not know is that JBFA, a compilation of essays, was published in 1995 as a response, or reaction, to "Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission and the Third Millennium." They are reacting to a document that seeks to bring Evangelicals and Catholics to common ground, but which virtually ignores THE major difference between the two, since the Reformation itself, and that is the doctrine of Justification by Faith Alone. So, the JBFA is a counter to another work, but a much needed counter. Any attempt to unify Protestants and Catholics must consider this topic.

The essays and authors are as follows:

1. Long Before Luther: Jesus and the Doctrine of Justification - Dr. John F. MacArthur, Jr.

2. Justification by Faith Alone: The Forensic Nature of Justification - Dr. R.C. Sproul

3. Justification by Faith Alone: The Relation of Faith to Justification - Dr. Joel R. Beeke

4. Justification by Faith Alone: The Nature of Justifying Faith - Dr. John H. Gerstner

5. Justification by Faith Alone: The Sufficiency of Faith for Justification - Dr. John H. Armstrong

JBFA has an all-star cast of authors. They provided me with information that I did not know. As a student of language, I knew that one of the most difficult aspects of learning a language is gaining a mastery of prepositions. This may sound trivial to non-linguists, but it is true. I now know some of the linguistic reasoning behind the doctrine of justification by faith. The brief section with this information is not overbearing to the reader. I found it very helpful.

Dr. Don Kistler edited this compilation of essays. I wish a little more forethought had gone into how this project would come together. Each author did address specific nuances of the doctrine of justification by faith alone. However, most of the essays covereded very similar ground on the background of the doctrine and the historic theological differences between Protestant and Catholic belief on this issue. The book became very repetitive and laborious in this regard. It probably could have cover this doctrine just as thoroughly in half the space if it had been approached differently.

A second issue I have with the book is that it does not accomplish what it promises. In the Preface Dr. Kistler writes, "Not relying on the works of the Reformers and Puritan divines, whom we largely publish, for final authority, the authors support by sound exegesis of Scripture the Reformational position that a faith which receives forgiveness and justification is the faith that doesn't look to itself but to God (p. x)." While the authors did explain this view of justification very well, they also seemed to rely on the works of the Reformers and Puritans more than on Scripture. I did not keep a tally, but it seemed that far more quotations came from historical figures than from Scripture. Such notable scholars should be able to articulate this doctrine from Scripture alone. I was disappointed in this aspect of the book, because I much prefer to see doctrine from Scripture than history.

A final issue stems from the incoherency of the concept of "faith" in this compilation. If the authors had decided upon a working definition of this one word, it would have gone a long way in making this book pleasant reading. Even if each author had stated a definition of faith for each essay, it would have been helpful. Instead, the reader must wade through murky waters trying to sort out just what the authors were trying to say. In one paragraph, one of the authors personifies faith and faith is suddenly taking action. The Bible personifies wisdom, but never faith. I found myself wondering if these concepts of faith were actually Biblical, or merely theological (and, there is a difference). Hand-in-hand is the overall issue of terminology, or vocabulary. Most of the Latin is explained in English. However, I did not find JBFA to be clear reading since I am not overly familiar with the vocabulary of Reformed Theology (even though I have a Master's in Theology).

Overall, I liked the book. I found it to be very informative on the doctrine of Justification by Faith ALONE. I do believe it could have been done better. I do not believe it is truly an introductory book on this topic. If you are familiar with the language of Reformed Theology and you realize this book is written contra Catholicism you will most likely enjoy this book. If you are Catholic and wonder what is the difference in Protestant belief on justification, this book will be very helpful to you, but you must be aware it is not written to please a Catholic audience.


A good work--could have been edited   May 24, 2003
 6 out of 9 found this review helpful

I found this work to be a decent, sound introduction to the protestant interpretation of sola fide. I am a protestant and agreed with everything said. However, the book does have its lapses. As the editors mentioned in the preface (and the negative reviewers did not notice), none of the authors corraborated with each other in writing this, thus the repetition. The one fault I do have with the book is the tension of how was Augustine portrayed. Macarthur has him affirming sola fide and Sproul has him denying it. Which one is true? I think that Both, if viewed in context, are accurate. Students of Church History know that Augustine was a theological paradox (and in many instances, such as predestination, he changed views later in life). He is known as the father of the reformation and the father of the modern Roman Church. He had a romish view of the sacraments and a protestant view on sin and predestination. Sproul nor Macarthur should have appealed to him.
The Review:
The authors write passionately, not necessarily neutral or overly objective; they write to win souls.
Macarthur did show that Jesus taught sola fide, although implicittly and not as extensively as Paul.
Sproul did a fine job, especially drawing on McGrath's book, Iustitia Dei
John Gerstener and John Armstrong had long sections with extensive bibliographies.
"Rome not Home" by Gerstener can not be judged to be right or wrong. He is merely retelling a lifelong observation of Catholic scholar, Scott Hahn. And for the information one reviewer, Gerstener does shed light on how Reformers view "apostasy", although that is not his intention.

Final Analysis:
The book was passionate, well-written, and mediocrely edited. Unfortunately, that lowers its value in Catholic's eyes. It is an intro, not an exhaustive text. Read it as a springboard for understanding the 400 year old conflict.
By the way, read pp. 160-164 for our understanding of James 2, Romans 3, Genesis 15 and 22.