The rest of the book focuses mostly on aspects of Paul’s explanation of salvation in Galatians. Schreiner defends the traditional Protestant view that the Galatian error involved legalistic tendencies to require some kind of work—namely, circumcision—as a condition of law keeping for justification. He works through how Paul refuted that error with a proper view of faith as the sole instrument of justification, which is a totally forensic (i.e., legal rather than transformative) reality. Some of the more contentious aspects of Schreiner’s previous work on justification is largely absent in this book, most especially his argument for final justification at the last day according to works. A few brief comments suggest that he still holds that view, but arguments for it do not appear here. Instead, focus is on justification by faith in Christ as a present reality that is bound into salvation.
There are a few points, mostly concerning passing comments in this book, that I would raise in hopes that Schreiner might clarify his position in future work. The first is the claim that “before the coming of Jesus, faith wasn’t directed particularly to him since he had not yet been revealed to the world.” (66) Admittedly, Schreiner is interpreting the language of Galatians 3:23–25, which causes pause in being critical. I am not sure that this statement is precisely calibrated though. In Galatians 3:8–9, Paul says that Abraham heard the gospel—presumably the same that comes to us. Paul’s appeal to Abraham in Romans 4 as the example of how we are justified would seem to require that faith had the same object for him and us if we are justified in the same way. These premises would explain why New Testament authors state Christ’s presence in the types, shadows, and events of the Old Testament (1 Cor. 10:1–6; Jude 5). Schreiner may have been using imprecise language. We should be clear, however, that justifying faith has always had Christ the mediator as its object. Read more»
Harrison Perkins | “Christ Crucified: A Theology of Galatians, by Thomas R. Schreiner” | February 2025
RESOURCES
- Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
- Download the HeidelApp on Apple App Store or Google Play
- The Heidelblog Resource Page
- Heidelmedia Resources
- The Ecumenical Creeds
- The Reformed Confessions
- The Heidelberg Catechism
- The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, & Pastoral Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2025)
- Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008)
- Why I Am A Christian
- What Must A Christian Believe?
- Heidelblog Contributors
- Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to
Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.
Harrison Perkins
Harrison Perkins (PhD, Queen’s University Belfast; MDiv, Westminster Seminary California) is pastor of Oakland Hills Community Church (OPC), a member of the of the Heidelberg Reformation Association, a Senior Research Fellow at the Craig Center for the Study of the Westminster Standards, associate online instructor in church history at Westminster Theological Seminary, a visiting lecturer in systematic theology at Edinburgh Theological Seminary, and author of Reformed Covenant Theology: A Systematic Introduction.
More by Harrison Perkins ›
In Dr. Schreiner’s Romans commentary, there are several places where his baptistic roots seemed to me to overwhelm his exegetical skill (which is, of course, substantial). I happily read somewhere recently that he has altered some of his views about Romans 2 and possibly Romans 7. At the time he wrote his commentary, I could not distinguish his approach at all from the “Dominant Protestant Approach” that viewed Paul’s Jews as Luther’s Monastic Catholics. When I reviewed Perspectives on Our Struggle with Sin I was almost shocked that what I would regard as the “correct” view was not included. They just began with the assumptions that the “I” was an individual and that the “struggle” was not defeat. One of the several authors mentioned it in passing, but it was not given separate treatment.
BTW, Hendrickson is now editing my sequel to the Galatians book; some time this summer I hope The Law in Romans: Covenant-Historical Reasoning in Romans will appear.
tdg
Looking forward to it!
I can’t wait for that!
Schreiner’s students students say the second edition of Romans switches on the identity of the Gentiles in Romans 2. I haven’t gotten the second edition yet. I’d love it if he changed his view on Rom 2:13. He has lots of good insights, but there are significant mistakes in my estimation too.
Am I correct that T. David Gordon’s book “Promise, Law and Faith” addresses this issue as well, regarding Schreiner’s work?
Sorry, I’d have to reread it to answer with certainty
I happen to have a copy of T. David’s book, which has no index (!), at hand and I see Schreiner discussed c. p. 17 in the introductory chapter.
I recalled, for some reason, that in a comment under footnote 77, pg. 152, where Dr. Gordon notes that Schreiner makes an assumption that historic Israel believed in the law for salvation.
The Galatians may have believed that was the case, but the Jews of the Old Testament knew otherwise.
Admittedly, I’m well out of my depth here, but was rather looking for clarification.