‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).
If the above statement is true, and if the teaching during the Reformation was true, the teaching of sola fide or justification by faith alone needs to be visited again in our day. This is not just some extraneous principle; it has to do with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. While it is not thought to be gracious or winsome to go around saying that those who hold to differing theologies have compromised the teaching of the Reformation, it is still something that needs to be preached across our land. While it may be thought that to be against unity to say that those with a different theology have compromised the Reformation, yet if there is no unity in the Gospel there is no true unity. The following quote immediately precedes the quote above in the original book.
What is the source and status of faith? Is it the God-given means whereby the God-given justification is received, or is it the condition of justification which it is left to man to fulfil? Is it a part of God’s gift of salvation, or is it man’s own contribution to salvation? Is our salvation wholly of God, or does it ultimately depend on something that we do for ourselves? Those who deny the latter (as the Arminians later did) thereby deny man’s utter helplessness in sin, and affirm that a form of semi-Pelagianism is true after all. It is no wonder, then, that later Reformed theology condemned Arminianism as being in principle a return to Rome (because in effect it turned faith into a meritorious work) and a betrayal of the Reformation (because it denied the sovereignty of God in saving sinners, which was the deepest religious and theological principle of the Reformer’s thought). Arminianism was, indeed, in Reformed eyes a renunciation of New Testament Christianity in favour of New Testament Judaism; for to rely on oneself for faith is no different in principle from relying on oneself for works, and the one is as un-Christian and anti-Christian as the other (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).
If the above quote is accurate about the beliefs of the Reformers, then we live in a day that teaches virtually the opposite of the truths taught in the Reformation. Indeed it uses the same words in many places, but it does not teach the same content. The justification or Gospel that the Reformers taught was that the source of faith was God Himself and there was no other source. If faith is simply a condition that is left up to a man to fulfill apart from God, which a free-will has to be if it is truly free, then that is man’s contribution to salvation and it is that on which salvation turns. This is not a salvation or justification that depends wholly on God. The classical and biblical teaching on justification is that God declares just those who have their sins cleansed and have a perfect righteousness. Of course that can only happen by grace alone and Christ alone. But if all of that depends on one act of man’s free will then that one act of faith is a meritorious act in some way and justification is not on the basis of Christ alone and grace alone. That is removing faith from the broader principles of Scripture and of the Reformation. That leaves a justification and salvation which depends on one choice or act of the will rather than grace alone. It is not a salvation that is wholly of God that depends on nothing in man and nothing man can do.
The Arminian position denies the utter helplessness of man in sin. If those who hold that position at any point affirm the utter helplessness of man in sin, then they are no longer Arminians. The Arminian position, even if it takes the name of Arminius, is inescapably part of the Pelagian system in some way. There is no semi-Reformed position. A person believes in grace alone from the depths of his or her soul or s/he does not. But all other positions that are not Reformed are on a sliding scale of Pelagianism. So Arminian thinking is inevitably a form of Pelagianism and so it is semi-Pelagianism in some way. But even if the Arminian denies that faith is meritorious in some way, those are just words that deny the logical and inevitable conclusion of his or her position. If justification depends on the act of a free-will and by definition the will to be free has to be free from the internal acts of the irresistible grace of God, that act that God responds to with salvation has merit in it. That position, despite the protestations of the professing Protestants who hold to it or stand by those who do, is a betrayal of the Reformation. More importantly, it is to fall from grace in the sense that it is a fall from grace alone. If there is only one Gospel and that Gospel is the Gospel of grace alone, we must not turn a blind eye to this vital issue. One drop of poison is enough to spoil a pure glass of water. The smallest work, even if verbally denied to be meritorious, is enough to make grace to be no longer grace (Romans 11:6). This is a matter of eternal importance.
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment