What’s love got to do with it? According to John Piper’s recent book What is Saving Faith?, affectional elements, including one’s love, satisfaction in and treasuring of God, are included in the definition of justifying faith itself—though, this may not come as a . . . Continue reading →
A True faith in God through Jesus Christ is the principal act of that spiritual life, which is begun in the elect by regeneration, as well as the fountain head, from whence, all those living works which follow after regeneration, proceed: the . . . Continue reading →
To many Romanists, Thomas Aquinas stands out as the epitome of their tradition. His thinking was the basis for Trent, Vatican I and II. His teaching is extolled as the loftiest and most important Roman “Catholic” theology. In contrast, the average evangelical . . . Continue reading →
In one area, however, the treatise is problematic, namely his understanding of the nature of justifying faith. Gerstner acknowledged that Edwards did express the doctrine of justifying faith somewhat differently from his Calvinistic forbears, “…there can be little doubt that Calvinistic theologians . . . Continue reading →
Good works proceed from saving faith; faith that does not bear fruit is not saving faith (see James 2:19). James 2:24 is talking about works as fruit and evidence of saving faith, not meritorious works that save us. In fact, James reminds . . . Continue reading →
“What is a nice OPC minister like you doing constantly quoting Martin Luther on Twitter?” is the familiar refrain after people take a gander at my feed. Normally, I admit when I am guilty as charged, but there is no great guilt . . . Continue reading →
Salvation by Allegiance Alone: Rethinking Faith, Works, and the Gospel of Jesus the King, took me back 20 years to my seminary days.1 Back then the New Perspective on Paul was tearing up the scene in biblical studies and the Federal Vision . . . Continue reading →
Edwards is very clear that faith does not justify a believer as a virtue or as forming any part of the righteousness which is the basis or ground of God’s judicial verdict. In this, he clearly stands with the Reformed tradition over . . . Continue reading →
Not only the works that we do in our own strength, or that we do before regeneration, or that we do without the merits of Christ, but all works, of whatever sort, are excluded from justification. This is so repetitively certain in . . . Continue reading →
What are the different opinions as to the relation between faith and love? 1st. The Romanists, in order to maintain their doctrine that faith alone is not saving, distinguish between a formed, or perfect, and an unformed faith. They acknowledge that faith . . . Continue reading →
Kim Riddlebarger, who did his doctoral research on Warfield, has a nice set of quotations from him on the nature, character, and definition of faith in the act of justification. Continue reading
In his discussion of works, Calvin anticipates the great error of many contemporary critics of the Reformation doctrine. They think that as long as they say that salvation is by grace alone they have said all they need to say theologically, but many medieval theologians said exactly that. They taught that grace alone worked to transform and sanctify the life and that all the works of the Christian are the fruit of grace. Such an improved life, however, is still an imperfect life and cannot stand in the judgment. Calvin summarizes the situation succinctly: “If righteousness is revealed in the gospel, surely no mutilated or half righteousness but a full and perfect righteousness is contained there. The law therefore has no place in it” (Institutes 3.11.19). What one needs to stand in the judgment, Calvin declares over and over again, is a perfect righteousness. No matter how much progress one makes in grace during this life, so that one’s life becomes holier, holier, and holier, it will never get to the point where it will be able to stand in the judgment. Continue reading →
Justifying faith is properly that which is defined in the catechism; according to which definition, the general nature of saving faith consists in knowledge and an assured confidence; for there can be no faith in a doctrine that is wholly unknown. It . . . Continue reading →
The major—and expected—exception is Jonathan Edwards, whose view of faith no doubt stands behind Piper’s approach to this issue. Edwards believed that love is at the heart of faith: “That even faith, or a steadfastly believing the truth, arises from a principle . . . Continue reading →
From its inception, the goal of the Classic Reformed Theology Series from Reformation Heritage Books (sponsor of the Heidelcast) has been to present, in English, primary source texts in Reformed theology. This new volume is the sixth in the series, which began . . . Continue reading →
After the theologians the bishops took the floor, song speaking for two or more hours at a time. Some were well-versed in the subject. Their approach, like that of the theologians, was generally framed by Scholastic categories, and, despite Pole’s words, they . . . Continue reading →
One does not often think of Hebrews when it comes to the doctrine of justification—we normally go right to Paul’s writings. Continue reading
Ver. 5. —But to him that worketh not, but we leave it on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. But to him that worketh not.—This is entirely misunderstood by Dr. Macknight and Mr. Stuart, as if it . . . Continue reading →
For many evangelicals and for some ostensibly Reformed folk it has been fashionable for the last several years to teach that we are justified now by grace alone (sola gratia), through faith alone (sola fide), on the basis of Christ’s righteousness imputed . . . Continue reading →
In this episode Dr Clark answers Heidelmail from Kwan about what Acts 2:42 and signs and wonders, from Exile1986 about how to answer a child’s question about why we cannot see Jesus right now, and from Jerome about an expression in Dane . . . Continue reading →