Regular marked price: $17.99Discount Price: $12.23
Cost Savings: $5.76 (32%)Price fluctuation possible.
How soon does it ship: Normal ship time within one day
Shipping? Absolutely FREE if you qualify for Super Saver Shipping.
Type of bind: Paperback
Dewey Decimal Number: 234.7
EAN num: 9781581348408
ISBN number: 1581348401
Label: Crossway Books
Manufacturer: Crossway Books
Quantity: 1
Page Count: 224
Printing Date: March 06, 2007
Publishing house: Crossway Books
Sale Popularity Level: 159137
Studio: Crossway Books
Other books you might be interested in perusing:
Editor's Notes and Comments:
Product Description:
A thorough look at the false and empty doctrines that are attacking evangelicalism's commitment to one of its key doctrines--sola fide, by faith alone.
User popularity level:
Rated by buyers 
-
This is a book of scholarly papers by theologians with a traditional
Reformed understanding of the doctrine of justification. The papers
interacts with recent challenges to that doctrine. The papers are well
written, the book nicely typeset, and footnotes are where they belong
... at the bottom of the page they are referenced on. There is a
Scripture index and a Subject/Name index.
The Foreword is by David F. Wells, and in it he argues that there are
three streams in contemporary evangelicalism: the orthodox; the
marketers (pragmatists who while not denying orthodoxy, often keep it
out of sight as they package Christianity for `seekers'); and the
emerging church, which seems to be against doctrinal clarity (or
denies that it is possible). This is a passionate appeal for the
Reformation of evangelicalism, and, perhaps in places, is more
passionate than fair.
The very first chapter is by Guy Prentiss Waters, and is entitled
`Introduction: Whatever Happened to Sola Fide?'. This sketches the two
principle contemporary challenges to the Reformed doctrine of
justification: the New Perspective(s) on Paul, and the Federal Vision.
The second paper is by Cornelis P. Venema, and is entitled `What Did
Saint Paul Really Say? N.T. Wright and the New Perspective(s) on
Paul.' This is a good and fair (if short) treatment of the New
Perspective(s) on Paul, focusing in particular on the subtle position
of N.T. Wright, who is a powerful advocate of one strand of the `New
Perspective on Paul'. Venema sketches the debate, and points out
important areas where the New Perspective positions are
problematic. Venema is clearly drawing upon the various books he has
written on this subject, and such mastery of the debate shows, and
makes this an important short treatment of the debate. It is a pity
that the timing of this book meant that John Piper's more substantial
treatment of Wright's position could not be interacted with.
The third paper is by T. David Gordon, and is entitled `Observations
on N.T. Wright's Biblical Theology With Special Consideration of
`Faithfulness of God'.' Gordon helpfully takes on Wright on his own
ground of `Biblical Theology', and shows the inadequacy of Wright's
reduction of God's righteousness to `covenantal faithfulness'.
The fourth paper is by Richard D. Phillips, and is entitled `A
Justification of Imputed Righteousness'. In this, Phillips reviews the
recent debate between Arminians and the Reformed over whether
justification involves the imputation of Christ's righteousness
(passive or active). One good feature of this paper is that Phillips
interacts with D.A. Carson's important paper (`The Vindication of
Imputation', published in `Justification: What's at stake in the
Current Debates', 2004) which responds to the Arminian
arguments. Phillips also tackles New Perspective critiques of
imputation. An important overview of the current debate, and
a helpful rebuttal of the challenges.
The fifth paper is by C. FitzSimons Allison, and is entitled `The
Foundation Term for Christian Salvation: Imputation.' This is a
profoundly important essay which traces the deleterious impact of
imagining that we can stand before God with anything other than the
perfect righteousness of Jesus. In particular, Allison explores how
the whole concept of `sin' has to be down played in Roman Catholic
thought (and in other systems) to make our imperfect obedience or
`faith' the ground of our acceptance with God. Insightful and
stimulating.
The sixth paper is by T. David Gordon, and is entitled `Reflections on
Auburn Theology.' Auburn Theology or `Federal Vision', for those not
in the know, is a rag-bag term for the teachings of various `Reformed
Revisionists' associated with Auburn Avenue. Gordon, who has some
sympathies for the aims of the Federal Vision apologists, does a
sterling job of exposing some of the poor theology behind this
vision. In particular, he shows how they fail to take the plurality of
biblical covenants into account, and traces this monocovenantalism back
to John Murray. He acknowledges, however, that Murray was kept from
the mistakes of the Federal Vision by maintaining the historic federal
understanding of Adam's representative role. This paper unfortunately
does not do as good a job as it could have done in orienting the newcomer
to what actually the Auburn Theology is about.
The seventh paper is by David VanDrunen, and is entitled `To Obey is
Better Than Sacrifice: A Defence of the Active Obedience of Christ in
the Light of Recent Criticism.' ... Read More
Rated by buyers -
'There are those who see in this the passing of historical orthodoxy, and this is something that they mourn.' pg 13 David F Wells, Foreword
David F Wells sets off to trace the origin of the smoking gun, delivering an introduction that is unputdownable. Making shrewd observations and weaving the intricacies of the post-modern endeavor at upending the Reformation principle, By Faith Alone, he persuasively engineers the scope of the book. The incumbent attention to scriptural detail that follows is sure to secure the Reformation position in Scripture alone, thereby placing it beyond all doubt.
NT Wright is in the cross-hairs. The bishop of Durham, the home of strange sightings, has epitomized the latitudinarian spirit of the age. His writings are popular, thought-provoking and unconventional, yet sorely abandoning an approach to inspiration, propitiation, imputation and justification, constituting mea culpa. Ecclesiology, or the 'Sitz Im Leben', or cultural setting, is frequently seen to take precedence in his ahistorical folklore of the unfolding covenants and God's renewed grace. Equality being the norm these days, the Federal Vision is also on the receiving end of some scathing rebuke.
Cornelis P Venema opens fire by challenging the obscure parentage of the New Perspective on Paul: James Dunn and EP Sanders, who substantiated a hypothesis of an intricate legalistic community in Second Temple Judaism, so fundamental to post-modern form critical scholarship. Yet is it not just Pelagianism cloaked in a new garb? Is Paul not too clear on his position? Venema would seem to think so, making a sound refutation from Romans 1-5, and Galatians 3.
T David Gordon makes the astonishing find that NT Wright's estimation of God's wrath only goes as far back as Abraham, and thereby denies sin's origin being in Genesis 3, further denying any concept of total depravity. This fault-line wreaks havoc on the New Perspective's views of 'the righteousness of God', so beloved of Luther and the Reformation fathers.
If the imputed righteousness of Christ to saved sinners be denied, on what basis are we to be reckoned justified before a holy God? Richard D Phillips pronounces the flawed teachings of especially Arminian and the NPP academics untenable to our faith, by showing that the perfect obedience of Christ is the ground for our justification before God.
John Bolt makes perceptive expositions of Scripture, accumulating in what can only be phrased as a question: if God did not institute a creation covenant of works, why did a curse follow Adam and Eve's failure to comply? And are Genesis 6 and 9 not a re-statement of the same conditions of the creation covenant?
Gary L W Johnson's contribution is certainly the defining statement of this collection.
'Throughout Millet's book he seeks to make common cause with groups across the broad evangelical landscape - especially those identified with the pentecostal-charismatic wing of evangelicalism...because Mormonism insists on additional inscripturated revelation...Roman Catholics certainly believe an ongoing form of heavenly guidance comes through such means as papal encyclicals...people within Protestantism believe that spiritual gifts, such as the speaking and interpretation of tongues, is one means by which Deity communicates His will to individuals and groups.' pg 199
Unafraid to state his convictions, unafraid to challenge those who insist we change our distinctive Reformational position, and unafraid to call those to stop pretending to be parading in the beautiful attire of evangelicalism, (even reputable publishers, learned professors and charismatic persona) when they are, in fact, buck-naked! Would more theologians take issue with the truth as he has!
Let us not compromise our Reformed heritage, which was won through hard fought battles, and if need be, should be done so again, the Lord willing.
Rated by buyers 
-
By Faith Alone: Answering the Challenges to the Doctrine of Justification (Crossway, 2006) is a collection of essays that challenges the New Perspective on Paul, as well as the Federal Vision controversy that is currently raging in Reformed circles. Gary Johnson and Guy Waters do an admirable job of bringing together the diverse contributions from the authors into one readable book.
Most of the chapters deal directly with N.T. Wright's theological outlook, critiquing his exegesis and subsequent theological conclusions. A couple chapters focus more on the Federal Vision, and several chapters serve more as "filler," with general information on the covenants and typology.
There is much in the critique of Wright that is to be commended. Wright notoriously brings background theology to the forefront and shifts forefront theology to the background, and he is taken to task for some of his weak exegesis. At other points, the authors argue more from Reformed tradition instead of Scripture alone, which buttresses somewhat Wright's contention that many in the Reformed camp are more tied to their traditions and doctrinal statements than to the truly Reformed principle of sola Scriptura. The book gets bogged down in minute details of theological precision at times, making even the conditioned theological reader scratch his head and wonder, "Is that really that big a deal?" But sometimes, the stark differences between the two views come clearly to the surface, reminding us all what the debate is about.
A good essay/book to read alongside By Faith Alone is John Frame's "Within the Bounds of Orthodoxy" - for another revered Reformed theologian's take on the issues at stake and whether or not the differing views are necessarily mutually exclusive.
Rated by buyers -
Like most edited works, some chapters are great and some really aren't all that good. But on the whole, it's an excellent read for someone seeking to understand better the current ecclesiastical climate surrounding justification by faith alone.
The chapters that are especially good are the two by T. David Gordon. Even if you just bought the book for those to contributions, it would be worth every penny.
Rated by buyers -
This is a book of essays - nine in all (ten, if you count the introduction by Guy Waters) - responding to recent challenges to the historic Reformed understanding of the doctrine of justification by faith alone, concentrating on the New Perspective on Paul and the Federal Vision, but also engaging the classic Arminian position and Mormonism.
As might be expected from a book that consists of essays by various authors, the book is a little uneven. Some essays seem to be written with the interested lay person in mind, and others assumed much more prior knowledge on the part of the reader. In addition, since the essays were originally intended to stand alone, there is a fair bit of repetition of ideas and arguments.
That means there were essays I enjoyed reading, those that were beyond me, and those I just wasn't interested in. The very first two essays engage the writings of N. T. Wright. While I found the explanations and arguments in these two chapters very interesting, I don't think I know enough about the issues to judge them. I also enjoyed several essays defending imputed righteousness and the active obedience of Christ, because this is a doctrine that seems to come up in discussions occasionally, and it was helpful to see it defended from scripture. The essays related to the Auburn Avenue or Federal Vision controversy were mostly beyond me. I'm not Presbyterian, and I don't know enough about the issues to even understand the essays.
If you are like me, and a bit of a novice on these issues, you might need a little more background knowledge before you would find this book completely useful, but if you are up on these things, my uneducated guess is that you'll find this to be a valuable book.
Find other books like this one:
