What do you think?
Rate this book
Faith Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine of Justification
Saving faith justifies sinful humans before God, say the New Testament and historic Protestant teaching.
And justifying faith, a work of God's grace and individual merit, gives saving faith, adds the Roman Catholic Church.
"No." shout Martin Luther and his theological descendants. "Christians are justified by faith through God's mercy alone. To add our merit to God's grace destroys the gospel."
R. C. Sproul solemnly warns Evangelicals to again hear that cry. Some Evangelical and Catholic leaders ignored the central issue of justification by faith in the document "Evangelicals and Catholics The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium." That document is only one indicator, says Sproul, that Protestants are increasingly unaware of or unconcerned about this vital distinctive.
After decades of scurrilous caricatures and misinformation, Roman Catholics and Protestants are finally speaking to each other, and this is revealing a greater variety of viewpoints within both camps. It is also revealing (a) how little most Protestants know about their own convictions and (b) with what great ease they find the concerns raised by the Reformation to be simply irrelevant. How can this be? Has Rome's position changed? In fact is has not. The Vatican II documents as well as the new Catechism of the Catholic Church reinvoke the theological position of the Council of Trent, condemning the gospel of justification by an imputed righteousness. If it is not Rome that has altered its position in favor of the gospel, then it must be the other partner that has moved from its earlier position.
And justifying faith, a work of God's grace and individual merit, gives saving faith, adds the Roman Catholic Church.
"No." shout Martin Luther and his theological descendants. "Christians are justified by faith through God's mercy alone. To add our merit to God's grace destroys the gospel."
R. C. Sproul solemnly warns Evangelicals to again hear that cry. Some Evangelical and Catholic leaders ignored the central issue of justification by faith in the document "Evangelicals and Catholics The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium." That document is only one indicator, says Sproul, that Protestants are increasingly unaware of or unconcerned about this vital distinctive.
After decades of scurrilous caricatures and misinformation, Roman Catholics and Protestants are finally speaking to each other, and this is revealing a greater variety of viewpoints within both camps. It is also revealing (a) how little most Protestants know about their own convictions and (b) with what great ease they find the concerns raised by the Reformation to be simply irrelevant. How can this be? Has Rome's position changed? In fact is has not. The Vatican II documents as well as the new Catechism of the Catholic Church reinvoke the theological position of the Council of Trent, condemning the gospel of justification by an imputed righteousness. If it is not Rome that has altered its position in favor of the gospel, then it must be the other partner that has moved from its earlier position.
219 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1995
66 people are currently reading
1287 people want to read
About the author
R.C. Sproul Jr.
44 books47 followersRobert Craig Sproul, better known as R.C. Sproul, Jr., is a Calvinist Christian minister and theologian and is the son of R.C. Sproul, a noted Reformed theologian and founder of Ligonier Ministries.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 88 reviews
January 27, 2019
I hate to give only three stars to anything written by Sproul, but this one didn't really grab me. It's primarily a response to "Evagelicals and Catholics Together," so there was a lot of discussion of history and councils. It just wasn't the angle I wanted on the subject of "Sola Fide."
February 1, 2008
Being born and raised a Catholic, I barely learned enough about my OWN faith. This was a really fascinating introduction to the basic tenant of Protestant faith.
September 3, 2023
it is safe to say that i have never felt so protestant as when i read this book. it affirmed my thoughts on the (significant) differences (well, namely one significant difference, sola fide) between catholicism and protestantism and gave plenty of scripture to back it.
i will say, i have never read that deep of a theological book, so there were parts about the church fathers or church history that felt like they went over my head, and thus i skimmed 🙂 but, it was clear that much thought, research, and history went into sproul’s writing. RC Sproul comes out swinging, but it was never in a demeaning way. he relies on the gospel to do the work for him; he simply explains it in clear terms.
a couple quotes that jumped out at me (although i could say that about all of the last chapter of the book):
“Is a doctrine that denies the forensic character of justification properly called the gospel? If justification rests in part or in toto on anything other than the imputed righteousness of Christ, may it properly be called the biblical gospel?” (p. 44)
“Justifying faith is by no means an empty or merely formal concept. It is a living response to Christ and energetically involves both mind and soul. It is both cognitive and affective. It is not speculative, temporary, or presumptuous.” (p. 90)
i will say, i have never read that deep of a theological book, so there were parts about the church fathers or church history that felt like they went over my head, and thus i skimmed 🙂 but, it was clear that much thought, research, and history went into sproul’s writing. RC Sproul comes out swinging, but it was never in a demeaning way. he relies on the gospel to do the work for him; he simply explains it in clear terms.
a couple quotes that jumped out at me (although i could say that about all of the last chapter of the book):
“Is a doctrine that denies the forensic character of justification properly called the gospel? If justification rests in part or in toto on anything other than the imputed righteousness of Christ, may it properly be called the biblical gospel?” (p. 44)
“Justifying faith is by no means an empty or merely formal concept. It is a living response to Christ and energetically involves both mind and soul. It is both cognitive and affective. It is not speculative, temporary, or presumptuous.” (p. 90)
August 6, 2011
There has always been diversity within Evangelicalism, but also a bedrock of core beliefs, namely sola scriptura (scripture alone) and sola fide (justification by faith alone), that have united us. In recent decades, however, there has been a seismic shift. A recent article in my Reformed denomination's magazine discussed whether the Reformation was even necessary. Nowhere in the lengthy article was sola fide (faith alone) even mentioned, much less discussed. The impression clearly given by this and by other recent publications such as the 1994 Evangelicals and Catholics Together document is that Evangelicals and Catholics do in fact believe the same gospel. The implication is that the split in Christendom caused by the Reformation should never have happened.
R.C. Sproul wrote this book in response to the new ecumenical mood. He explains why the precise language used by the Reformers was not theological hair-splitting, that the stand they took against Rome was not a tragic, unnecessary tempest in a teapot. He shows that current attempts at finding a unity of faith are essentially meaningless because both sides can read diametrically different theologies into the same words.
We learn that the ultimate issue of the Reformation had to do with the grounds of our justification: on what basis will God ever declare a person to be just? The Roman Catholic Church says the only way God will ever declare a person just is on the basis of inherent righteousness. Of course you can't be righteous without the help of Christ and grace, but though these are necessary for justication, they are not sufficient. You must cooperate with infused grace such that righteousness inheres within you; it becomes your own.
The Reformation view was that the only grounds by which God ever declares one just is the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. It is the righteousness that properly belongs to Christ alone, and not our own, however achieved, that merits salvaton in front of a just and holy God. So we are justified by faith alone in this sense: faith is the instrument by which we embrace Christ; we put our trust in him, and in him alone as the grounds of our salvation. The moment we put our trust in Christ, God in a legal action transfers, or imputes, the righteousness of Jesus to our account. At the end of my life I stand before the judgement seat of God and I am clothed, not in my own inherent righteousness, but in the righteousness of Christ. God declares me just in Christ. The bottom line in the dispute, then, is the nature of that covering: is it Christ's righteousness, or my own?
So the one word over which the whole controversy was fought was the word "imputation." You take away the concept of imputation, as Rome does, you take away sola fide; you take away sola fide, you take away the gospel. Not only does Rome reject sola fide, but at Trent she placed it under an anathema, declaring it to be a damnable heresy. And to this day Trent's pronouncements remain official church doctrine.
Sproul clarifies the difference between the two positions with his discussion of the Roman Catholic conception of merit. Here he sees an "unresolved paradox," namely the claim that merit is rooted in grace, that it is "gracious merit." The idea is that the ultimate meritorious ground of our justification is found in the merit of Christ, but as the sinner must do necessary works of satisfaction in the sacrament of penance, he essentially must "merit the merit of Christ. Salvation is accomplished through the merit of Christ and on the merit of the believer" (p. 149).
This finds its ultimate expression in the idea of the treasury of merit, which is filled by the merit of Christ and the supererogatory merit of Mary and the saints, who had more merit than they needed to get into heaven. That excess can be transferred to those who are deficient, by the authority of the church, through an indulgence.
Sproul has elsewhere said that "there is no concept within the Roman Catholic Church more basally repugnant to the Reformed faith than the concept of the treasury of merit. A person who believes in justification by faith alone weeps at this notion." Why? Because "we believe in a treasury of merit, too, one that is inexhaustible. But we don't believe that one nickel of that treasury has been contributed by anyone other than the Son of God. That's the issue: the sufficiency of Christ and Christ alone to redeem me."
ECT proclaims a unity of faith between Evangelicals and Catholics. Clearly that cannot be true. For it to be true, either Rome would have had to change from its position articulated at Trent by embracing sola fide (and it has not), or Evangelicals would have to no longer consider faith alone to be essential to the gospel. Standing with the Reformers, Sproul believes that sola fide is the very essence of the gospel, and is alarmed to see his peers on the one hand unhesitatingly affirming sola fide, while on the other hand proclaiming a unity of faith with Rome in a document that utterly ignores this doctrine.
If Luther and the Reformers were right that the doctrine of sola fide is the article upon which the church stands or falls, and if the good news that this doctrine proclaims can properly be described by the words "post tenebras lux" - after darkness, light, then we would do well to heed Sproul's words that "the light of the Reformation is waning" (p.48). This book, clear, thorough, and irenic in tone, deserves to be read by all thoughtful Christians who care to learn more about the precious Biblical truths of God's one and only gospel.
R.C. Sproul wrote this book in response to the new ecumenical mood. He explains why the precise language used by the Reformers was not theological hair-splitting, that the stand they took against Rome was not a tragic, unnecessary tempest in a teapot. He shows that current attempts at finding a unity of faith are essentially meaningless because both sides can read diametrically different theologies into the same words.
We learn that the ultimate issue of the Reformation had to do with the grounds of our justification: on what basis will God ever declare a person to be just? The Roman Catholic Church says the only way God will ever declare a person just is on the basis of inherent righteousness. Of course you can't be righteous without the help of Christ and grace, but though these are necessary for justication, they are not sufficient. You must cooperate with infused grace such that righteousness inheres within you; it becomes your own.
The Reformation view was that the only grounds by which God ever declares one just is the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. It is the righteousness that properly belongs to Christ alone, and not our own, however achieved, that merits salvaton in front of a just and holy God. So we are justified by faith alone in this sense: faith is the instrument by which we embrace Christ; we put our trust in him, and in him alone as the grounds of our salvation. The moment we put our trust in Christ, God in a legal action transfers, or imputes, the righteousness of Jesus to our account. At the end of my life I stand before the judgement seat of God and I am clothed, not in my own inherent righteousness, but in the righteousness of Christ. God declares me just in Christ. The bottom line in the dispute, then, is the nature of that covering: is it Christ's righteousness, or my own?
So the one word over which the whole controversy was fought was the word "imputation." You take away the concept of imputation, as Rome does, you take away sola fide; you take away sola fide, you take away the gospel. Not only does Rome reject sola fide, but at Trent she placed it under an anathema, declaring it to be a damnable heresy. And to this day Trent's pronouncements remain official church doctrine.
Sproul clarifies the difference between the two positions with his discussion of the Roman Catholic conception of merit. Here he sees an "unresolved paradox," namely the claim that merit is rooted in grace, that it is "gracious merit." The idea is that the ultimate meritorious ground of our justification is found in the merit of Christ, but as the sinner must do necessary works of satisfaction in the sacrament of penance, he essentially must "merit the merit of Christ. Salvation is accomplished through the merit of Christ and on the merit of the believer" (p. 149).
This finds its ultimate expression in the idea of the treasury of merit, which is filled by the merit of Christ and the supererogatory merit of Mary and the saints, who had more merit than they needed to get into heaven. That excess can be transferred to those who are deficient, by the authority of the church, through an indulgence.
Sproul has elsewhere said that "there is no concept within the Roman Catholic Church more basally repugnant to the Reformed faith than the concept of the treasury of merit. A person who believes in justification by faith alone weeps at this notion." Why? Because "we believe in a treasury of merit, too, one that is inexhaustible. But we don't believe that one nickel of that treasury has been contributed by anyone other than the Son of God. That's the issue: the sufficiency of Christ and Christ alone to redeem me."
ECT proclaims a unity of faith between Evangelicals and Catholics. Clearly that cannot be true. For it to be true, either Rome would have had to change from its position articulated at Trent by embracing sola fide (and it has not), or Evangelicals would have to no longer consider faith alone to be essential to the gospel. Standing with the Reformers, Sproul believes that sola fide is the very essence of the gospel, and is alarmed to see his peers on the one hand unhesitatingly affirming sola fide, while on the other hand proclaiming a unity of faith with Rome in a document that utterly ignores this doctrine.
If Luther and the Reformers were right that the doctrine of sola fide is the article upon which the church stands or falls, and if the good news that this doctrine proclaims can properly be described by the words "post tenebras lux" - after darkness, light, then we would do well to heed Sproul's words that "the light of the Reformation is waning" (p.48). This book, clear, thorough, and irenic in tone, deserves to be read by all thoughtful Christians who care to learn more about the precious Biblical truths of God's one and only gospel.
October 20, 2017
I listened to this and found it so helpful that I then immediately read it. A very fair analysis of the differences between Protestants and Catholics regarding justification by faith. Some examples:
"Again Rome has always insisted that faith is a necessary condition for justification. What they denied historically is that is a sufficient condition. The Reformation was waged, not over the question of justification by faith, but over the issue of justification by faith alone. It was the sola or sola fide that was the central point of dispute." (36)
"The question of inherent versus imputed righteousness goes to the heart of the Reformation debate. When the Reformers spoke of forensic justification, they meant a legal declaration made by God that was based on the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the believer, not on Christ's righteousness inherent in the believer." (99)
"The debate over justification often suffers from a crass caricature by which the Reformed position is characterized as 'justification by faith' and the Roman Catholic position is characterized as 'justification by works.' Popular sentiment tends to conclude that Rome is not concerned with faith
and that the Reformers were not concerned about works." (155)
"In the Roman formula works are a necessary precondition for justification. In the Reformed view works are a necessary fruit of justification." (156)
"The questions that remain are these:
1. Is sola fide essential to the gospel?
2. Is the gospel essential to Christianity and to salvation?
3. Is the denial of the gospel an act of apostasy?
In the sixteenth century both Rome and the Reformers gave the same answers to questions 2 and 3. Both sides agreed that the gospel is essential to Christianity and that the denial of the gospel is an act of apostasy, even if the parties who deny it hold to all other essentials of Christianity.
The debate then and the debate now focus on question 1: Is sola fide essential to the gospel? The Reformers answered this question with a categorical affirmative. Rome answered with a categorical negative. Rome not only denied that sola fide is essential to the gospel, she denied it altogether. She declared it a pernicious heresy and put her emphatic and unambiguous anathema on it." (178)
"If in fact sola fide is a heresy, then Rome did the right thing. If, on the other hand, sola fide is the very essence of the gospel, then in her misguided zeal Rome condemned the gospel. If the true gospel is condemned after careful deliberation, then that condemnation, intentional or not, is an act of apostasy. ... To condemn the gospel intentionally is obviously more heinous that to do so unintentionally. But unintentional heresy is still heresy, as both sides agree." (179)
(Note: I'm stingy with stars. For me 2 stars means a good book. 3 = Very good; 4 = Outstanding {only about 5% of the books I read merit this}; 5 = All time favorites {one of these may come along every 400-500 books})
"Again Rome has always insisted that faith is a necessary condition for justification. What they denied historically is that is a sufficient condition. The Reformation was waged, not over the question of justification by faith, but over the issue of justification by faith alone. It was the sola or sola fide that was the central point of dispute." (36)
"The question of inherent versus imputed righteousness goes to the heart of the Reformation debate. When the Reformers spoke of forensic justification, they meant a legal declaration made by God that was based on the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the believer, not on Christ's righteousness inherent in the believer." (99)
"The debate over justification often suffers from a crass caricature by which the Reformed position is characterized as 'justification by faith' and the Roman Catholic position is characterized as 'justification by works.' Popular sentiment tends to conclude that Rome is not concerned with faith
and that the Reformers were not concerned about works." (155)
"In the Roman formula works are a necessary precondition for justification. In the Reformed view works are a necessary fruit of justification." (156)
"The questions that remain are these:
1. Is sola fide essential to the gospel?
2. Is the gospel essential to Christianity and to salvation?
3. Is the denial of the gospel an act of apostasy?
In the sixteenth century both Rome and the Reformers gave the same answers to questions 2 and 3. Both sides agreed that the gospel is essential to Christianity and that the denial of the gospel is an act of apostasy, even if the parties who deny it hold to all other essentials of Christianity.
The debate then and the debate now focus on question 1: Is sola fide essential to the gospel? The Reformers answered this question with a categorical affirmative. Rome answered with a categorical negative. Rome not only denied that sola fide is essential to the gospel, she denied it altogether. She declared it a pernicious heresy and put her emphatic and unambiguous anathema on it." (178)
"If in fact sola fide is a heresy, then Rome did the right thing. If, on the other hand, sola fide is the very essence of the gospel, then in her misguided zeal Rome condemned the gospel. If the true gospel is condemned after careful deliberation, then that condemnation, intentional or not, is an act of apostasy. ... To condemn the gospel intentionally is obviously more heinous that to do so unintentionally. But unintentional heresy is still heresy, as both sides agree." (179)
(Note: I'm stingy with stars. For me 2 stars means a good book. 3 = Very good; 4 = Outstanding {only about 5% of the books I read merit this}; 5 = All time favorites {one of these may come along every 400-500 books})
May 27, 2018
This book mirrors a lot like Norman Geisler's book "Defending Inerrancy". Here Sproul uses the attempt at Catholics and Evangelicals to come together under a banner of one common doctrine. From there, Sproul attempts to make the case that salvation is by Faith alone and goes so far as to say that that not only was that the foundation on which the Reformation was launched but it the foundation on which the whole true Church rests.
Sproul does an amazing job of covering the subject. There is so much to the subject that I didn't realize went into the subject. Just breaking down what the Apostles meant when they talked about "faith" and the seven acts of faith it encompasses. Sproul also covers imputed righteousness (Evangelical) vs. infused righteousness (Catholic), merit and grace, and really good write up on faith and works especially a great breakdown of James 2.
While this book is relatively short it is deceptive and here's where I must warn readers. The first quarter of this book is a quick reader. You get into the document of discussion and a short history of the Reformation on the topic. Once you get into chapter 4 you slam into a snails pace. The next three chapters are seminary level, high level doctrine work. What Sproul doesn't do that I wish he did was to have a definitions page. He also doesn't help to remind the reader about previous points made. Once he's moved on from the first definition it's rare he goes back and reminds readers about topics they are probably hearing for the first time. Another little annoyance is Sproul likes using the Latin because that's what the Reformers interacted with and sometimes made quips with. For things like Sola Fide and the like it's fine, but there are other phrases where, if you don't know the original source these injections of Latin already add to a jumble you're trying to work through.
This is a much needed book to read especially by evangelicals today. But have a notebook ready to take notes and create your own definition cheat sheet. Sproul does a great job in this book comparing what Scripture says, what the Reformers said, and how it conflict's with Rome's doctrine. This book should be read so that the average Christian truly knows what they mean when they say are saved (justified) by grace through faith and not of works lest any man should boast (Ephesians 2:8-9). Final Grace - B+
Sproul does an amazing job of covering the subject. There is so much to the subject that I didn't realize went into the subject. Just breaking down what the Apostles meant when they talked about "faith" and the seven acts of faith it encompasses. Sproul also covers imputed righteousness (Evangelical) vs. infused righteousness (Catholic), merit and grace, and really good write up on faith and works especially a great breakdown of James 2.
While this book is relatively short it is deceptive and here's where I must warn readers. The first quarter of this book is a quick reader. You get into the document of discussion and a short history of the Reformation on the topic. Once you get into chapter 4 you slam into a snails pace. The next three chapters are seminary level, high level doctrine work. What Sproul doesn't do that I wish he did was to have a definitions page. He also doesn't help to remind the reader about previous points made. Once he's moved on from the first definition it's rare he goes back and reminds readers about topics they are probably hearing for the first time. Another little annoyance is Sproul likes using the Latin because that's what the Reformers interacted with and sometimes made quips with. For things like Sola Fide and the like it's fine, but there are other phrases where, if you don't know the original source these injections of Latin already add to a jumble you're trying to work through.
This is a much needed book to read especially by evangelicals today. But have a notebook ready to take notes and create your own definition cheat sheet. Sproul does a great job in this book comparing what Scripture says, what the Reformers said, and how it conflict's with Rome's doctrine. This book should be read so that the average Christian truly knows what they mean when they say are saved (justified) by grace through faith and not of works lest any man should boast (Ephesians 2:8-9). Final Grace - B+
December 8, 2009
This is a MUST READ if you have wondered what the main difference is between Roman Catholocism and Protestantism. What was the Protestant Reformation all about? What is THE essential doctrine of Biblical Christianity that divides Rome and her dissidents? Why is the modern ecumenical movement so dangerous? Why did Luther's 95 theses result in such a schism? Heavy duty reading, and a much needed intellectual kick in the head to the mega-church culture.
January 26, 2009
Pretty good.
January 30, 2021
I found fairly easy to read and follow along. Sproul is an excellent communicator. Why only three stars? The first and most important criticism is that this book uses scripture sparingly to prove his point; he quotes lots of writers, especially Calvin and Luther. Second criticism is that uses he uses quite a bit of Latin, which I feel is a bit pretentious. Third, which goes in hand with the first, he uses a lot of philosopical arguments. My opinion, not that it's worth much, if you are arguing that faith alone saves, and part of your creed is by scripture alone, you should use scripture as your defense.
May 21, 2022
This is a dangerous book that completely ignores and never even mentions the command of baptism (Acts 2:38) . It uses very little scripture to back up its claims
, instead relying on the wisdom of men via the Council of Trent, Luther , Calvin and man made creeds to develop his case. As “an exhaustive analysis on the doctrine of faith alone”, the lack of scripture was shocking. If you want to know where to find out about salvation, I suggest leaving behind the teaching of fallible men and rely on the New Testament alone.
, instead relying on the wisdom of men via the Council of Trent, Luther , Calvin and man made creeds to develop his case. As “an exhaustive analysis on the doctrine of faith alone”, the lack of scripture was shocking. If you want to know where to find out about salvation, I suggest leaving behind the teaching of fallible men and rely on the New Testament alone.
August 22, 2024
I think for so long I didn’t care to work out what it really truly meant to be justified before God. I just assumed I was. I wasn’t exactly sure how or why. Now I am certain. Mr R.C.’s explanations for Sola Fide were so precise and simple, yet complex and thorough and liberating. But isn’t that just the Gospel! Praise God for people who are wiser than I.
May 29, 2018
It is a very tough book to read but very educational too! It also talks about ECT (Evangelicals and Catholics Together). It is important about Faith Alone! Alone is an important word that we can’t leave out!
January 8, 2020
This book does a great job of establishing the Protestant view on Justification, comparing and contrasting it with the Roman Catholic view and other divergent views within the Christian faith. As always, I appreciate Sproul’s clear way of laying everything out and how he draws his conclusions.
February 6, 2023
Listened to audiobook but my mans is spitting fire
November 23, 2025
I recognized the author from an interview I saw, where he was interviewed along with another pastor that I occasionally follow. So, when I saw this book, I picked up a copy. My copy is a 25th anniversary copy, a silver color in hardback.
I thought this might have content to inspire faith or to savor faith or to direct our faith to God. Instead, it's more of a theologically technical analysis of faith. I knew that it would involve the faith vs. works debate, as to which saves us and gets us to heaven. I thought that might be an encouragement as I've seen a loved one wander. But ... and this is more important than mere encouragement ... I was glad to see that the book not only addressed the works vs faith debate, but also addressed the antinomianism that so many churches fall into, in their valid efforts to escape legalism. I think of it as legalism as a ditch on one side, and antinomianism as a ditch on the other side.
"The debate over justification often suffers from a crass caricature by which the Reformed position is characterized as 'justification by faith' and the Roman Catholic position is characterized as 'justification by works.' Popular sentiment tends to conclude that Rome is not concerned with faith
and that the Reformers were not concerned about works." (155)
"The questions that remain are these:
1. Is sola fide essential to the gospel?
2. Is the gospel essential to Christianity and to salvation?
3. Is the denial of the gospel an act of apostasy?
Sproul's diagrams were also helpful. Particularly:
Roman Catholic View: Faith + Works -> justification
Reformation View: Faith -> justification + works
And the difference between imputed righteousness (Reformation view) and infused righteousness (Catholic view). It's interesting to me that Catholics think of imputed righteousness as "legal fiction" because they think "A person is either just or sinful. They can't be both at the same time. (For the reformers, one is both at the same time, but not in the same way.)"
This book reminds me of John Piper's "The Future of Justification." Of the two, I'm not sure which one I'd recommend most. The topic is important, but both books involve a difficult slog through technical ground.
I think Sproul said some crucial things in this book, but I have a hard time envisioning the average church attender either reading it or understanding it. He had a good mind for theology, but, at least in this book, did not show a good communication skill for the common reader.
First, I think he didn't really make his case for why this book and its topics are important until the ending chapters. If that's not immediately apparent to today's reader, I doubt they would wade that far into it to find out. That is to say, why are apostacy and syncretism and faith important concepts?
"But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema." - Paul in Galatians 1:8.
Why is holding to the gospel so important?
"It is a concern for the flock, the people of God."
"Jesus, Himself, who was characteristically gentle and tender with the victims of false teaching, but vehement in denouncing false teachers as serpents, dogs, and the like."
"When a child has been bitten by a dog, the parents chase the dog but console and soothe the weeping child with the sweetest of words." That is, "We should show that toward those poor disciples who have been led astray we feel as parents feel toward their children, so that they may see our paternal zeal and maternal feelings toward them and may see that we seek their salvation. But when it comes to the devil and his servants ... we should follow the example of the apostles. We should be ... condemning their sham as sharply and harshly as we can." - Luther
"He calls them troublers of the church and of consciences [those preaching untrue gospels], who do nothing but seduce and deceive and endless number of consciences and cause horrible damage and trouble and condemnation going on in the church ..." - Luther
"So weak and miserable is this present life, and so beset are we by the snares of Satan, that one fanatic can often destroy and completely undo in a short time what it took faithful ministers the hard labor of many years day and night to build up." - Luther
"But the Word of God must bind the conscience and take precedence over any and all other loyalties."
"To remain obstinate and unyielding in error is a sin. To be uncompromising with the truth of the gospel is a virtue and is demanded of all who would be servants of Christ."
"That all religions are tolerated, however, does not mean that all religions are equally valid or that each religion must tolerate all theological views."
"The gospel itself cannot change."
The second reason I think the average reader would struggle with this book is that Sproul often references scripture or parts of scripture without saying what verses these come from. I think I usually caught them, but a more casual reader might not. For example, Sproul quoted "one Lord, one faith, and one baptism" without saying where that phrase is from:
"There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all." - Ephesians 4:4-6, NIV
Thirdly, I'd rather see where an idea is presented in scripture than what various other people say about it. There were several times verses could have been applied to the situation:
"For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight." - Romans 3:20
"For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from the law." - Romans 3:28, ESV
"For by grace you have been saved, through faith. And this is not of your own doing; it is the gift of God, not the result of works, so that no one may boast." - Ephesians 2:8, ESV
Fourth, there are so many technical terms that I didn't know, that I began to annotate the margins with their definitions. There were likewise many definitions that I did know, but doubt that the casual reader knows, so I added those as well. I plan to pass this volume along, and am hopeful that it's more likely to be read if definitions are provided. I do think this is an important topic, and it's important for us to have an understanding.
I'll include them here.
There are 37 terms, not including ones I didn't add because he defined them in the text. Of these, I previously knew 22, if you want to compare scores. (22/37 is 59%. I failed.) I am including my favorite quote at the end of this review. My other favorite quotes are above in the "why this book?" part of my review.
ameliorated - make something bad better
anathema - something loathed or cursed
antinomianism - the belief of not being bound by moral law; "Easy-believism"
apostacy - an act of refusing to continue to follow a faith. A change away from following it.
attrition - a repentance motivated by a fear of punishment.
condign merit - merit proportional to positive or negative reward. Entitled to reward.
congruous merit - good deed, appropriate for reward, but reward is not obligatory.
contrition - remorse; feeling or showing sorrow over one's actions for having offended God, coupled with a resolve to turn away from the sin.
dispensationalism - belief of seeing God's order in history
evangelical - having to do with sharing one's faith. (It does not have a political meaning.)
evangelism - the act of sharing one's faith
expiation - atonement
forensic - legal declaration
gospel - good news. More specifically, in this context, it means the good news of Jesus choosing to die for our penalty of sin, to rescue us.
heresy - a religious opinion contrary to church teaching, often indicating a seriousness on a core belief such that the individual is not saved as a result.
impute - attributed to someone by virtue of another
inchoate - incomplete, not fully formed
indulgence - the purchase of an end to punishment
inerrancy - containing no errors
inhere - stick to, exist permanently in
irenic - aiming for peace
justification - to treat as righteous before God
modalistic - the belief that God is a single person with three roles, rather than the belief that God is one being with three persons.
obscuration - the action of hiding something
obstreperous - difficult to control
orthodoxy (Biblical) - right thinking, thinking from the Bible, or with a Biblical worldview.
Pelagianism - denies the doctrine of original sin, that we inherit our tendency to sin
penance - an action to show sorrow over sin and a change of heart
plenary - unqualified, absolute
polemical - expressing a strongly critical attack
recant - to withdraw or repudiate a statement
regenerate - formed or created again
righteous - this is not self-righteous, which is a somewhat smug opinion of oneself. I often find people confuse the two. Righteous means to have right behavior with a right heart in right relationship with God, not to be smug about it, because we know our righteousness comes from God.
sanctification - being made holy, more like Jesus in attitude and action
simony - the buying or selling of ecclesiastical privileges.
schism - split or division
syncretism - a buffet-style approach to religion, where people take some of this and some of that, resulting in conflicting, incompatible, and illogical combinations of beliefs.
Favorite quote:
"If two parties agree on the wording of a statement, but do not mean the same thing by the words used, is the agreement a real agreement?"
I thought this might have content to inspire faith or to savor faith or to direct our faith to God. Instead, it's more of a theologically technical analysis of faith. I knew that it would involve the faith vs. works debate, as to which saves us and gets us to heaven. I thought that might be an encouragement as I've seen a loved one wander. But ... and this is more important than mere encouragement ... I was glad to see that the book not only addressed the works vs faith debate, but also addressed the antinomianism that so many churches fall into, in their valid efforts to escape legalism. I think of it as legalism as a ditch on one side, and antinomianism as a ditch on the other side.
"The debate over justification often suffers from a crass caricature by which the Reformed position is characterized as 'justification by faith' and the Roman Catholic position is characterized as 'justification by works.' Popular sentiment tends to conclude that Rome is not concerned with faith
and that the Reformers were not concerned about works." (155)
"The questions that remain are these:
1. Is sola fide essential to the gospel?
2. Is the gospel essential to Christianity and to salvation?
3. Is the denial of the gospel an act of apostasy?
Sproul's diagrams were also helpful. Particularly:
Roman Catholic View: Faith + Works -> justification
Reformation View: Faith -> justification + works
And the difference between imputed righteousness (Reformation view) and infused righteousness (Catholic view). It's interesting to me that Catholics think of imputed righteousness as "legal fiction" because they think "A person is either just or sinful. They can't be both at the same time. (For the reformers, one is both at the same time, but not in the same way.)"
This book reminds me of John Piper's "The Future of Justification." Of the two, I'm not sure which one I'd recommend most. The topic is important, but both books involve a difficult slog through technical ground.
I think Sproul said some crucial things in this book, but I have a hard time envisioning the average church attender either reading it or understanding it. He had a good mind for theology, but, at least in this book, did not show a good communication skill for the common reader.
First, I think he didn't really make his case for why this book and its topics are important until the ending chapters. If that's not immediately apparent to today's reader, I doubt they would wade that far into it to find out. That is to say, why are apostacy and syncretism and faith important concepts?
"But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema." - Paul in Galatians 1:8.
Why is holding to the gospel so important?
"It is a concern for the flock, the people of God."
"Jesus, Himself, who was characteristically gentle and tender with the victims of false teaching, but vehement in denouncing false teachers as serpents, dogs, and the like."
"When a child has been bitten by a dog, the parents chase the dog but console and soothe the weeping child with the sweetest of words." That is, "We should show that toward those poor disciples who have been led astray we feel as parents feel toward their children, so that they may see our paternal zeal and maternal feelings toward them and may see that we seek their salvation. But when it comes to the devil and his servants ... we should follow the example of the apostles. We should be ... condemning their sham as sharply and harshly as we can." - Luther
"He calls them troublers of the church and of consciences [those preaching untrue gospels], who do nothing but seduce and deceive and endless number of consciences and cause horrible damage and trouble and condemnation going on in the church ..." - Luther
"So weak and miserable is this present life, and so beset are we by the snares of Satan, that one fanatic can often destroy and completely undo in a short time what it took faithful ministers the hard labor of many years day and night to build up." - Luther
"But the Word of God must bind the conscience and take precedence over any and all other loyalties."
"To remain obstinate and unyielding in error is a sin. To be uncompromising with the truth of the gospel is a virtue and is demanded of all who would be servants of Christ."
"That all religions are tolerated, however, does not mean that all religions are equally valid or that each religion must tolerate all theological views."
"The gospel itself cannot change."
The second reason I think the average reader would struggle with this book is that Sproul often references scripture or parts of scripture without saying what verses these come from. I think I usually caught them, but a more casual reader might not. For example, Sproul quoted "one Lord, one faith, and one baptism" without saying where that phrase is from:
"There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all." - Ephesians 4:4-6, NIV
Thirdly, I'd rather see where an idea is presented in scripture than what various other people say about it. There were several times verses could have been applied to the situation:
"For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight." - Romans 3:20
"For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from the law." - Romans 3:28, ESV
"For by grace you have been saved, through faith. And this is not of your own doing; it is the gift of God, not the result of works, so that no one may boast." - Ephesians 2:8, ESV
Fourth, there are so many technical terms that I didn't know, that I began to annotate the margins with their definitions. There were likewise many definitions that I did know, but doubt that the casual reader knows, so I added those as well. I plan to pass this volume along, and am hopeful that it's more likely to be read if definitions are provided. I do think this is an important topic, and it's important for us to have an understanding.
I'll include them here.
There are 37 terms, not including ones I didn't add because he defined them in the text. Of these, I previously knew 22, if you want to compare scores. (22/37 is 59%. I failed.) I am including my favorite quote at the end of this review. My other favorite quotes are above in the "why this book?" part of my review.
ameliorated - make something bad better
anathema - something loathed or cursed
antinomianism - the belief of not being bound by moral law; "Easy-believism"
apostacy - an act of refusing to continue to follow a faith. A change away from following it.
attrition - a repentance motivated by a fear of punishment.
condign merit - merit proportional to positive or negative reward. Entitled to reward.
congruous merit - good deed, appropriate for reward, but reward is not obligatory.
contrition - remorse; feeling or showing sorrow over one's actions for having offended God, coupled with a resolve to turn away from the sin.
dispensationalism - belief of seeing God's order in history
evangelical - having to do with sharing one's faith. (It does not have a political meaning.)
evangelism - the act of sharing one's faith
expiation - atonement
forensic - legal declaration
gospel - good news. More specifically, in this context, it means the good news of Jesus choosing to die for our penalty of sin, to rescue us.
heresy - a religious opinion contrary to church teaching, often indicating a seriousness on a core belief such that the individual is not saved as a result.
impute - attributed to someone by virtue of another
inchoate - incomplete, not fully formed
indulgence - the purchase of an end to punishment
inerrancy - containing no errors
inhere - stick to, exist permanently in
irenic - aiming for peace
justification - to treat as righteous before God
modalistic - the belief that God is a single person with three roles, rather than the belief that God is one being with three persons.
obscuration - the action of hiding something
obstreperous - difficult to control
orthodoxy (Biblical) - right thinking, thinking from the Bible, or with a Biblical worldview.
Pelagianism - denies the doctrine of original sin, that we inherit our tendency to sin
penance - an action to show sorrow over sin and a change of heart
plenary - unqualified, absolute
polemical - expressing a strongly critical attack
recant - to withdraw or repudiate a statement
regenerate - formed or created again
righteous - this is not self-righteous, which is a somewhat smug opinion of oneself. I often find people confuse the two. Righteous means to have right behavior with a right heart in right relationship with God, not to be smug about it, because we know our righteousness comes from God.
sanctification - being made holy, more like Jesus in attitude and action
simony - the buying or selling of ecclesiastical privileges.
schism - split or division
syncretism - a buffet-style approach to religion, where people take some of this and some of that, resulting in conflicting, incompatible, and illogical combinations of beliefs.
Favorite quote:
"If two parties agree on the wording of a statement, but do not mean the same thing by the words used, is the agreement a real agreement?"
March 13, 2018
Clearly articulates the central issues of the debate.
October 23, 2009
This book is a solid exposition of salvation, the Christian doctrine of justification, from a leading Reformed thinker. In the early 1990’s, a group of Catholic and Protestant thinkers and theologians, motivated to come together by their common social concerns in the West, published the statement Evangelicals and Catholics together, in an attempt to come to a common understanding about what they were talking about concerning justification. Sproul uses the language of that statement to criticize it and to show to teach the importance of the doctrine of justification from a Reformed perspective.
Sproul grounds this book in historical theology. He wants the reader to see why the 16th century reformers disagreed so sharply with Rome over this vital doctrine. Along the way, he wants modern readers to understand that just because opposing parties may agree on the same terms, that does not mean they agree on the same meanings. What follows is a solid, relatively short (less than 200 pg) exposition on what is meant by justification from the perspective of traditional Catholic and Protestant thought. His analysis of the thought on justification by people like Aquinas and Calvin is especially valuable.
The author’s hope in this book is that the reader, by understanding the importance of its doctrine, its full meaning, and richness, would be motivated to move beyond the general secularism of the age. He wants the evangelical believer to be aware of subtle shifts in thought and doctrine that move the whole foundation of faith, and he wants the reader to understand the importance of events in theology that have framed the issue clearly, so that later generations could learn more clearly and directly.
The general evangelical reader may find the subject more complex than they are normally faced with, because of the weightiness of the material covered. Yet Sproul was obviously motivated to inform the reader of the importance of the subject in as precise a language as possible. This book is certainly recommend, even if the events around the Evangelicals and Catholics Together statement are fading, for the evangelical reader who wants to dig into how high, wide and deep the work of Christ is.
Sproul grounds this book in historical theology. He wants the reader to see why the 16th century reformers disagreed so sharply with Rome over this vital doctrine. Along the way, he wants modern readers to understand that just because opposing parties may agree on the same terms, that does not mean they agree on the same meanings. What follows is a solid, relatively short (less than 200 pg) exposition on what is meant by justification from the perspective of traditional Catholic and Protestant thought. His analysis of the thought on justification by people like Aquinas and Calvin is especially valuable.
The author’s hope in this book is that the reader, by understanding the importance of its doctrine, its full meaning, and richness, would be motivated to move beyond the general secularism of the age. He wants the evangelical believer to be aware of subtle shifts in thought and doctrine that move the whole foundation of faith, and he wants the reader to understand the importance of events in theology that have framed the issue clearly, so that later generations could learn more clearly and directly.
The general evangelical reader may find the subject more complex than they are normally faced with, because of the weightiness of the material covered. Yet Sproul was obviously motivated to inform the reader of the importance of the subject in as precise a language as possible. This book is certainly recommend, even if the events around the Evangelicals and Catholics Together statement are fading, for the evangelical reader who wants to dig into how high, wide and deep the work of Christ is.
December 15, 2013
I really refreshing look into the doctrine of justification by faith alone, R.C. Sproul, writing in a reactionary defense to the then recently signed ECT (Evangelicals and Catholics Together, circa 1994) document, does a great job at outlining the history of the doctrine, as well as highlight contradistinctions between classic Reformed views, and the Roman Catholic view.
The book especially was fun to read given the historicity of much of the content, as Sproul goes through a brief overview of the Reformation where the doctrine of justification by faith alone was disputed; namely, he does a pretty thorough job at contrasting the Council of Trent's cannons with Luther, Calvin, and other Reforming opinions that were in sharp distinction with them.
The book also helped me understand the traditional Catholic view of justification as it progressed and evolved over time from a hard-Augustinian view, to a semi-Augustinian view, and finally to a view in-between semi-Pelagianism, and the Reformed view--a view which walked a razor thin line, one R.C. says they probably cut themselves on! Moreover, the explanation of sanctification as a means whereby one justification is reached, and the doctrine of infused righteousness all served to help me better understand the Roman Catholic position in contradistinction to justification by faith alone and Christ's imputed righteousness.
All in all, the book was a pleasant read, an excellent addition on my shelf, and one that will make for a good resource in the future as well.
Brent McCulley
The book especially was fun to read given the historicity of much of the content, as Sproul goes through a brief overview of the Reformation where the doctrine of justification by faith alone was disputed; namely, he does a pretty thorough job at contrasting the Council of Trent's cannons with Luther, Calvin, and other Reforming opinions that were in sharp distinction with them.
The book also helped me understand the traditional Catholic view of justification as it progressed and evolved over time from a hard-Augustinian view, to a semi-Augustinian view, and finally to a view in-between semi-Pelagianism, and the Reformed view--a view which walked a razor thin line, one R.C. says they probably cut themselves on! Moreover, the explanation of sanctification as a means whereby one justification is reached, and the doctrine of infused righteousness all served to help me better understand the Roman Catholic position in contradistinction to justification by faith alone and Christ's imputed righteousness.
All in all, the book was a pleasant read, an excellent addition on my shelf, and one that will make for a good resource in the future as well.
Brent McCulley
February 14, 2018
To believe any gospel other than the true gospel is to believe in a Jesus other than the true Jesus. The reformation is as important today as it was back then.
May 16, 2024
Written Review
Started reading May 16, 2024. Finished reading May 16, 2024... COULDN'T PUT IT DOWN!
AMAZING. Wow, this was so good. I am certainly in my "theological era" and I am enjoying reading theological books. This is a great one! R.C. Sproul is a great writer, and this book is my first written example of his work. It is smart, and very dense. There is so much Latin in this book that there is a Latin index in the back of the book. I never thought I'd ever read a book that had that.. neat! This is an example of what I BELIEVE. This was amazing. MUST READ!
Sproul goes pretty hard toward the Roman Catholics on their thoughts of Justification by faith and works through Christ. This book is basically a complete refutation towards that dogma. And this gets into the James V. Paul - Works V. Faith debate. Great. Really great stuff here! Also, an incredible amount of John Calvin's and Martin Luther's words. Something I've never read, and want to read so much more of now. WOW!
I highly recommend reading this book, as a seasoned Christian or even a new Chrisitian. It is great to see the judicious aspect of our justification by faith alone.
To preface what I'm about to say, if you've never heard of Reformed Theology... you don't need to know what that is prior to reading this book. This goes in depth in the Reformed Theological perspective, and I love it! You may not call yourself "reformed" but you might be reformed. A lot of this book deals with what is called the "five solas". That is a Latin term "sola".
This is a Reformed Theological term, and here is a description of that: The five solas were not exactly Reformation slogans, but they serve as a good summary of the Reformed faith. Neither Martin Luther nor John Calvin nor any other Protestant Reformer summarized his teachings in a tidy list including Scripture alone, Christ alone, faith alone, grace alone, to the glory of God alone. Taking flight in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, this fivefold summary became the shorthand version of what is known as Reformed theology. While this description of the Reformed faith came later, it still captures well the core of the gospel in all its graciousness and Christ-centeredness, just as it is revealed in the Scriptures. These five solas show the glory of God’s gracious way of salvation in a way that sets the tone for true theology, resounding in how we think and live in this world. [Ligonier Ministries] (What Are the Five Solas? (ligonier.org))
Overview
"Faith Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine of Justification" by R.C. Sproul is a robust theological treatise that revisits the foundational Christian doctrine of justification by faith, a principle that was central to the Protestant Reformation. Sproul, a renowned theologian and founder of Ligonier Ministries, delivers a compelling argument in defense of this doctrine, addressing both historical and contemporary challenges.
Content Summary
The book is structured in a way that methodically examines the doctrine of justification by faith alone (sola fide), making it accessible for both theologians and lay readers interested in deepening their understanding of Reformation theology. Sproul begins with a historical overview, highlighting key figures like Martin Luther and John Calvin, who were instrumental in articulating and defending the doctrine against the Roman Catholic Church's teachings.
Sproul then delves into a biblical exposition of justification, meticulously analyzing relevant scriptural passages. He argues that justification is a forensic declaration by God, where sinners are declared righteous through their faith in Jesus Christ, not by their works. This section is rich with theological insights, showcasing Sproul's deep engagement with the Bible and Reformed theology.
In the latter part of the book, Sproul addresses contemporary debates and misconceptions about justification. He critiques modern theological movements that, in his view, undermine or obscure the doctrine of sola fide. Sproul defends the Reformed perspective against these challenges, reinforcing the necessity and sufficiency of faith for salvation.
Strengths
One of the book’s primary strengths is Sproul’s ability to present complex theological concepts in a clear and engaging manner. His writing is both scholarly and pastoral, making it accessible to a wide audience. Sproul's passion for the subject is evident throughout the book, and his arguments are well-supported by biblical references and historical context.
Another strength is the book's relevance. Even though it was published in 1995, the issues Sproul addresses remain pertinent as debates over justification continue within various Christian circles. Sproul’s defense of traditional Reformed theology provides a valuable resource for those seeking to understand or teach the doctrine of justification by faith alone.
Weaknesses
Some readers might find Sproul’s Reformed perspective to be limiting if they come from different theological backgrounds. His critiques of opposing views, particularly those of the Roman Catholic Church and certain modern theological trends, are rigorous and sometimes polemical, which could be off-putting to those who hold different beliefs.
Additionally, while the book is thorough in its treatment of justification, some readers might desire a more extensive exploration of how this doctrine intersects with other aspects of Christian living and practical theology. This is something I noticed, but really didn't hinder my enjoyment!
Conclusion
"Faith Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine of Justification" by R.C. Sproul is an essential read for anyone interested in Reformed theology and the doctrine of justification. Sproul's clear exposition, historical awareness, and passionate defense of sola fide make this book a significant contribution to evangelical scholarship. Whether you are a theologian, pastor, or layperson, this book offers valuable insights into one of Christianity's core doctrines.
The atonement is vicarious because it is accomplished via imputation. Christ is the sin-bearer for his people, the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God) who takes away (expiates) our sin and satisfies (propitiates) the demands of God's justice. The cross displays both God's justice (in that he truly punishes sin) and his grace (because he punishes sin by providing a substitute for us). (p, 104).
Started reading May 16, 2024. Finished reading May 16, 2024... COULDN'T PUT IT DOWN!
AMAZING. Wow, this was so good. I am certainly in my "theological era" and I am enjoying reading theological books. This is a great one! R.C. Sproul is a great writer, and this book is my first written example of his work. It is smart, and very dense. There is so much Latin in this book that there is a Latin index in the back of the book. I never thought I'd ever read a book that had that.. neat! This is an example of what I BELIEVE. This was amazing. MUST READ!
Sproul goes pretty hard toward the Roman Catholics on their thoughts of Justification by faith and works through Christ. This book is basically a complete refutation towards that dogma. And this gets into the James V. Paul - Works V. Faith debate. Great. Really great stuff here! Also, an incredible amount of John Calvin's and Martin Luther's words. Something I've never read, and want to read so much more of now. WOW!
I highly recommend reading this book, as a seasoned Christian or even a new Chrisitian. It is great to see the judicious aspect of our justification by faith alone.
To preface what I'm about to say, if you've never heard of Reformed Theology... you don't need to know what that is prior to reading this book. This goes in depth in the Reformed Theological perspective, and I love it! You may not call yourself "reformed" but you might be reformed. A lot of this book deals with what is called the "five solas". That is a Latin term "sola".
This is a Reformed Theological term, and here is a description of that: The five solas were not exactly Reformation slogans, but they serve as a good summary of the Reformed faith. Neither Martin Luther nor John Calvin nor any other Protestant Reformer summarized his teachings in a tidy list including Scripture alone, Christ alone, faith alone, grace alone, to the glory of God alone. Taking flight in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, this fivefold summary became the shorthand version of what is known as Reformed theology. While this description of the Reformed faith came later, it still captures well the core of the gospel in all its graciousness and Christ-centeredness, just as it is revealed in the Scriptures. These five solas show the glory of God’s gracious way of salvation in a way that sets the tone for true theology, resounding in how we think and live in this world. [Ligonier Ministries] (What Are the Five Solas? (ligonier.org))
Overview
"Faith Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine of Justification" by R.C. Sproul is a robust theological treatise that revisits the foundational Christian doctrine of justification by faith, a principle that was central to the Protestant Reformation. Sproul, a renowned theologian and founder of Ligonier Ministries, delivers a compelling argument in defense of this doctrine, addressing both historical and contemporary challenges.
Content Summary
The book is structured in a way that methodically examines the doctrine of justification by faith alone (sola fide), making it accessible for both theologians and lay readers interested in deepening their understanding of Reformation theology. Sproul begins with a historical overview, highlighting key figures like Martin Luther and John Calvin, who were instrumental in articulating and defending the doctrine against the Roman Catholic Church's teachings.
Sproul then delves into a biblical exposition of justification, meticulously analyzing relevant scriptural passages. He argues that justification is a forensic declaration by God, where sinners are declared righteous through their faith in Jesus Christ, not by their works. This section is rich with theological insights, showcasing Sproul's deep engagement with the Bible and Reformed theology.
In the latter part of the book, Sproul addresses contemporary debates and misconceptions about justification. He critiques modern theological movements that, in his view, undermine or obscure the doctrine of sola fide. Sproul defends the Reformed perspective against these challenges, reinforcing the necessity and sufficiency of faith for salvation.
Strengths
One of the book’s primary strengths is Sproul’s ability to present complex theological concepts in a clear and engaging manner. His writing is both scholarly and pastoral, making it accessible to a wide audience. Sproul's passion for the subject is evident throughout the book, and his arguments are well-supported by biblical references and historical context.
Another strength is the book's relevance. Even though it was published in 1995, the issues Sproul addresses remain pertinent as debates over justification continue within various Christian circles. Sproul’s defense of traditional Reformed theology provides a valuable resource for those seeking to understand or teach the doctrine of justification by faith alone.
Weaknesses
Some readers might find Sproul’s Reformed perspective to be limiting if they come from different theological backgrounds. His critiques of opposing views, particularly those of the Roman Catholic Church and certain modern theological trends, are rigorous and sometimes polemical, which could be off-putting to those who hold different beliefs.
Additionally, while the book is thorough in its treatment of justification, some readers might desire a more extensive exploration of how this doctrine intersects with other aspects of Christian living and practical theology. This is something I noticed, but really didn't hinder my enjoyment!
Conclusion
"Faith Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine of Justification" by R.C. Sproul is an essential read for anyone interested in Reformed theology and the doctrine of justification. Sproul's clear exposition, historical awareness, and passionate defense of sola fide make this book a significant contribution to evangelical scholarship. Whether you are a theologian, pastor, or layperson, this book offers valuable insights into one of Christianity's core doctrines.
August 18, 2017
This book was informative and entertaining at the same time. Sproul aimed to address the rise of ecumenism which aims to unite evangelicals with Catholics. Sproul's main premise is that this cannot happen because if (a) evangelicals and the Catholic Church disagree on the doctrine of sola fide (faith alone), and (b) the doctrine of faith alone is central to the gospel, then (c) evangelicals and the Catholic Church cannot unite because each group preaches a different gospel. The first chapter talks about trends such as Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT), an ecumenical document which prominent evangelicals such as JI Packer signed. Then, Sproul dedicates the second chapter on Luther and the Reformation before moving onto explain sola fide and what Catholics and evangelicals believe about justification (Catholics believe infused righteousness whereas traditional evangelicals believe imputed righteousness).
This book was a great read overall. It was hard to read at parts because of the level of detail Sproul goes into in explaining these concepts. I can tell that unlike his other books that I read (such as Knowing Scripture or Essential Truths), this book is not mainly targeted at lay people, although as a layman, I would still recommend this book as it was an enjoyable, although quite challenging, read.
This book was a great read overall. It was hard to read at parts because of the level of detail Sproul goes into in explaining these concepts. I can tell that unlike his other books that I read (such as Knowing Scripture or Essential Truths), this book is not mainly targeted at lay people, although as a layman, I would still recommend this book as it was an enjoyable, although quite challenging, read.
December 20, 2013
I found this book to be good and helpful. It proved to be an understandable treatment of this important doctrine for a layperson. Though, Sproul's vocabulary is perhaps initially intimidating to someone who is unaccustomed to using words like "vitiates" and "condign" in regular conversation, if read with a dictionary handy, it really is quite clear. Considering that it is a study of carefully argued historic doctrine, one could hardly expect him to use inexact language.
The first couple of chapters deal very closely with the document Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT), and the book was written in response to this document, so Sproul continues to refer to it throughout. However, this does not take away from his clear presentation of the doctrine of Justification, and the book is useful even if you are not particularly interested in ECT.
The best summary of the book is in it's concluding quote from John Calvin:
"Let it therefore remain settled that this proposition is exclusive, that we are justified in no other way than by faith, or, which comes to the same thing, that we are justified by faith alone"
The first couple of chapters deal very closely with the document Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT), and the book was written in response to this document, so Sproul continues to refer to it throughout. However, this does not take away from his clear presentation of the doctrine of Justification, and the book is useful even if you are not particularly interested in ECT.
The best summary of the book is in it's concluding quote from John Calvin:
"Let it therefore remain settled that this proposition is exclusive, that we are justified in no other way than by faith, or, which comes to the same thing, that we are justified by faith alone"
December 13, 2016
"Does saving faith require a trust in the righteousness of Christ alone as the grounds of our justification? Or may a person have a different view of the gospel and still be a Christian?" Mmmm...good question. Thus opens Dr. RC Sproul's excellent book on sola fide, the doctrine of salvation by faith alone. Sproul is graciously and firmly precise about what scripture really says. To reject this doctrine is to change the gospel and invite the curse of the first chapter of Galatians.
Not everyone needs to read this book. You don't have to understand sola fide to be saved any more than you have to know how a watch works in order to tell time. But I DO recommend it to three groups: those involved in apologetics or conservative politics or home schooling, as we tend to blur the line when we pursue some similar temporal goals. Faith Alone will remind us to think crisply about our communities, about the gospel, and about who still needs to hear it.
Not everyone needs to read this book. You don't have to understand sola fide to be saved any more than you have to know how a watch works in order to tell time. But I DO recommend it to three groups: those involved in apologetics or conservative politics or home schooling, as we tend to blur the line when we pursue some similar temporal goals. Faith Alone will remind us to think crisply about our communities, about the gospel, and about who still needs to hear it.
May 12, 2017
With the anniversary of the Reformation coming up later this year and after being at Men who Rocked the World Convention with Dr Steven Lawson. I was challenged to read once again about the Reformers and why the Reformation took place. I decided to read Dr Sproul's book Justification Alone.
I was really challenged why reading this book.
I did find at times that sections of the book where difficult to read as I was reading some of the points for the first time. I did however listen to Dr Sproul on the subject along side reading the point and it did help to understand certain points.
It was interesting to read Dr Sproul's insights into ECT when it came onto the scene.
I would recommend reading this book to those who are interesting in learning more depth of the Reformation and the whole subject of being Justification by Faith alone.
I was really challenged why reading this book.
I did find at times that sections of the book where difficult to read as I was reading some of the points for the first time. I did however listen to Dr Sproul on the subject along side reading the point and it did help to understand certain points.
It was interesting to read Dr Sproul's insights into ECT when it came onto the scene.
I would recommend reading this book to those who are interesting in learning more depth of the Reformation and the whole subject of being Justification by Faith alone.
August 17, 2011
Hit and miss. If 'sola fide' could be built up as a doctrine solely from the historic confessions and the writings of Luther & Calvin, Sproul has written the greatest book of the bunch. Unfortunately, it leaves a lot to be desired exegetically; scripture seems to be unknowingly ignored for most of the book. Still, the chapter on what constitutes saving faith is, itself, worth purchasing and reading the book for.
July 19, 2015
This book explains every reason why I'm going for a Masters in church history. Most books by members of the refund movement concentrate on those like Spurgeon Edwards and Calvin. But I am and it seems like he sparked the Reformation gets left out. Here Luther and Calvin are exchanging ideas from what would form movement since. I want to be a writer and the funny thing is I voice said I want to write a book that is exactly what this book is!
August 7, 2017
Prompted by the Evangelical and Catholics Together document of the mid-90s, Sproul looks at the fundamental, foundational difference in Evangelical and Catholic theology: the doctrine of salvation. By way of context, both Evangelical and Catholics Together and the Reformation are examined, setting the stage for a detailed, in-depth treatment of justification by grace alone, through faith alone.
(full disclosure: the agency I work for represent this author and book)
(full disclosure: the agency I work for represent this author and book)
September 5, 2017
Interesting book that explores the differences today between evangelicals compared to Catholics. The main point of the book is exploring the recent document evangelicals and catholics together. In this document sola fide is reduced and pushed to the side. This book explores is that correct, is sola fide a secondary concern of critical to the gospel.
As is typical for R.C. Sproul the book is well written and well argued.
As is typical for R.C. Sproul the book is well written and well argued.
November 15, 2017
This was a good listen. Kind of neat that I listened to this over the 500th anniversary of the reformation in October. I really like Sproul. He brings seminary level understanding to lay people. I will admit that a few small sections in this book were a bit technical, but nothing that the lay person could not listen to and benefit from. It is worth your time to go through to understand the doctrine of faith alone.
April 28, 2011
WOW ! I love this guy and this book. All I can say is that R.C. Sproul ROCKS! He's the best reformed teacher alive. He never teaches above people yet all his teachings are action packed full of theological terminologies that would easily go right over most peoples heads. He is a true teacher. Love Love Love Him!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 88 reviews