|
The way of salvationThe role of Christian obedience in justificationAdding confusionTHE WAY OF SALVATION Here is a book that sets out to challenge the great Reformation principle of sola fide (‘by faith alone’). The author is a New Testament lecturer at North America Baptist Seminary and he uses his biblical expertise to argue for two justifications, an initial one based on Christ’s righteousness and a second one based on a Christian’s good works. The works of a non-Christian contribute nothing to salvation, but the works that follow faith, which God enables a believer to perform, what the Puritans called ‘evangelical obedience’, these do, according to Rainbow, contribute to a Christian’s final justification on the day of judgment. Good works of believers, he maintains, will not be seen as the evidence of faith but the basis for final justification. He regards faith as ‘the ultimate condition’ for both events but considers that deeds are ‘proximately conditional in their own right’ for final justification. The author builds up his case with references from Paul that he suggests support James’s conclusion that justification is by works and not by faith alone. Sentences from Luther, Calvin and Jonathan Edwards, among others, are used to strengthen his argument but he adds that they were hampered in expressing their biblical convictions concerning a twofold justification due to their subservience to the faith alone slogan. He has no qualms about accusing Calvin of being shifty and of refusing to come to grips with the actual grammar of James. Although the author has little time for the new perspective on Paul he does find some of the statements of Tom Wright and Don Garlington useful in support of his thesis. He does not contemplate the idea that genuine believers can lose their salvation. Those whom God justifies by faith in Christ alone are the ones who will in fact be justified by their evangelical obedience. A Christian’s good works add nothing to the perfection of what Christ accomplished, nevertheless, the last judgment will be the final justification of believers on the basis of works and not just the receiving of rewards for faithful service. The author has read widely in the areas of systematic, historical and biblical theology. He has much sympathy for the Regensburg Statement of 1541 on justification that had the initial support of Protestant and Roman participants. Though he is as eager as any ecumenist to bring Protestants and Roman Catholics together on this topic of justification, to be fair to him, he is not interested in those who suppress difficulties or settle for ‘convergence’ or ‘fundamental consensus’ and fail to touch the real issues. While the author is to be applauded for seeking to oppose antinomianism and to emphasise both the indissoluble link between justification and sanctification and the tension between our present position in Christ and the future state, he has brought, not clarity, but further confusion. Most of the references from Paul that he marshals to prove his case for a second justification are hardly supportive and the remaining two or three are well-known instances where scholarly opinion is divided. To contend that only at the last judgment will a person be justified ‘in the full sense’ or that God needs our good works for ‘solemnising’ his initial verdict is most un-Pauline. This is a scholarly work that is presented in a readable and orderly way. It is certainly the best treatment to date of the case for a twofold justification and will need to be taken seriously by theologians of all persuasions. Philip H. Eveson, © Evangelicals Now - February 2006 |