# Is There Anything More Important Than Justification By Faith Alone?



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Apr 20, 2008)

I have been having quite an argument on my blog concerning controversial statements I made about the Pope. Well some have criticized my stance by saying that JBFA should not be the "only thing that matters". Often citing any number of social/ethical issues as being equally important and then quoting from some part of ECT.

What say you?


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Apr 20, 2008)

*articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae*

Luther called it:

"The article upon which the church stands or falls." 

Social and ethical issues and Evangelicals and Catholics Together is NOT the Gospel.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Apr 20, 2008)

*Luther again...*



Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> I have been having quite an argument on my blog concerning controversial statements I made about the Pope. Well some have criticized my stance by saying that JBFA should not be the "only thing that matters". Often citing any number of social/ethical issues as being equally important and then quoting from some part of ECT.
> 
> What say you?



Luther:

"All heretics have continually failed in this point, that they do not rightly understand or know the article of justification. If we had not this article certain and clear, it were impossible we could criticize the Pope's false doctrine of indulgences and other abominable errors, much less be able to overcome greater spiritual errors and vexations."

Conversely, in my opinion-- because we do have the article of justification "certain and clear" we are not bamboozled by popish mythologies or the wishful musings of ECT or FV or any of the other doctrinal deviations we have floating about us.

Thomas Watson in A Body of Divinity wrote:

"It was a saying of Luther, that after his death the doctrine of justification would be corrupted."
Indeed the emphasis on social and ethical issues is part of that corruption.


----------



## RamistThomist (Apr 20, 2008)

Christology, the Trinity--that would be more important, because God is more important than me. I wouldn't want to make my soteriology subservient to my Trinitarianism. Of course, I don't deny JBFA.


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Apr 20, 2008)

Hi Sterling,

As far as I know, this saying belongs to the Reformed theologian, J. H. Alsted, at least in this form. I think this is significant because it suggests the falsehood of the claim that justification is the "Lutheran" (central) dogma and predestination is the "Reformed" (central) dogma.

rsc



Presbyterian Deacon said:


> Luther called it:
> 
> "The article upon which the church stands or falls."
> 
> Social and ethical issues and Evangelicals and Catholics Together is NOT the Gospel.


----------



## Jon Peters (Apr 20, 2008)

Ivanhoe,

I think I know what you're saying, but JBFA is about God. Also, did you mean to say that you don't want your trinitarianism subservient to soteriology? If so, I think you are correct. Our soteriology can only be understood in light and on the foundation of a robust, orthodox view of God.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 20, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> Christology, the Trinity--that would be more important, because God is more important than me. I wouldn't want to make my soteriology subservient to my Trinitarianism. Of course, I don't deny JBFA.



Jacob,

This assumes that the two are in competition. Don't forget that the RCC affirms Nicene Orthodoxy and even recites it every week in Church.

In my estimation, however, they deny what they cite because it is the Trinity that has decreed that men would be saved by the righteousness of Christ.

In my estimation, an argument to place other issues before the nature of justification end up being problematic because it assumes a man can bend the knee and worship God before he has been born from above and trusted in God. The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom and that fear of God is found by faith alone that is born from above. We can talk all day long about other doctrines being more central but a man won't even begin to comprehend those things until he has an Evangelical fear.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Apr 20, 2008)

R. Scott Clark said:


> Hi Sterling,
> 
> As far as I know, this saying belongs to the Reformed theologian, J. H. Alsted, at least in this form. I think this is significant because it suggests the falsehood of the claim that justification is the "Lutheran" (central) dogma and predestination is the "Reformed" (central) dogma.
> 
> ...



Dr. Clark:

That's interesting. I have seen it attributted to Luther many times. 

Tell me about Alsted. I'm not familiar with the name. Who was he? When did he write? Where did he say it?

Thanks.

sh


----------



## MW (Apr 20, 2008)

From an early meeting of Presbytery:



> Acts 20:20-28, "And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house, Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, *repentance toward God*, *and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ*. And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there: Save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me. But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God. And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more. Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. *For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God*."


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 20, 2008)

1 Cor 15:1-8


> 1Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3For I delivered unto you *first of all* that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.


----------



## KMK (Apr 20, 2008)

Is There Anything More Important Than Justification By Faith Alone? 

If you are referring to the preaching that goes on in the church, then I would have to say no. Is there a sermon preached in the NT with any other theme?

I have been preaching forever (it seems like) through Romans and keep expecting the sheep to tire of the message of JBFA but they do not. As I creep closer to chapter 12 and anticipate a change, I realize more and more that chapter 12 is so dependant on chapters 1-11 that I cannot cease preaching the message of JBFA. The words "I beseech ye _therefore_" require the message of JBFA before any preaching can be done concerning an acceptable walk before God. Our acceptable walk is our 'reasonable service' only when we fully realize what has been done on our behalf.

The more I preach (around 150 sermons) the more I realize there is nothing more important than JFBA when it comes to preaching.



> 1 Cor 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.



Sorry for rambling but there was a very positive response to my sermon on JFBA for the elect remnant in Rom 11 this morning. I am still on a 'high'.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Apr 20, 2008)

R. Scott Clark said:


> Hi Sterling,
> 
> As far as I know, this saying belongs to the Reformed theologian, J. H. Alsted, at least in this form. I think this is significant because it suggests the falsehood of the claim that justification is the "Lutheran" (central) dogma and predestination is the "Reformed" (central) dogma.
> 
> rsc



Dr. Clark:

I did a google search on Alsted. I found this from an article you wrote:



> When in 1618 the Reformed theologian J. H. Alsted (1588-1638) declared that the Protestant doctrine of justification is that "article of faith by which the church stands or falls" (articulus stantis et candentis ecclesiae), he was only repeating what all Protestants had learned from Martin Luther and what all true Protestants and evangelicals still believe.



Westminster Seminary California clark
I found it quite helpful. Thanks.


----------



## servantofmosthigh (Apr 20, 2008)

Presbyterian Deacon said:


> R. Scott Clark said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Sterling,
> ...



Even R.C. Sproul credits Luther with this famous slogan. Now I'm intrigued to find out who REALLY originated this statement. Luther was 50 years prior to Alsted, so my initial leaning is Luther, but that could be wrong.


----------



## HaigLaw (Apr 20, 2008)

It is the first of many important issues.


----------



## beej6 (Apr 21, 2008)

My former pastor pointed out that many doctrinal errors can be traced to an error in, or confusion of, justification and/or sanctification.

When reading through churches' "statements of faith," I always look for the one word "alone" - justification by faith *alone*, etc.


----------



## Barnpreacher (Apr 21, 2008)

T4G

If you click on Dever's message, he deals with liberalism's social/ethical additives to the gospel.


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 21, 2008)

Nothing is more important than the Gospel. And, at the heart of the Gospel (at least as it is being attacked today) stands justification by faith alone.


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 21, 2008)

I could not find any place where the phrase appears in the 55 volume English *Luther's Works*, other than in the introduction to the 1536 _Disputation on Justification _by Lewis W. Spitz.



> Though Luther was not a theological systematizer in the manner of Melanchthon or Calvin, he recognized that all aspects of evangelical theology were related to the one article of faith by which the church stands or falls.
> Luther, M. (1999, c1960). Vol. 34: Luther's works, vol. 34 : Career of the Reformer IV (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (34:147). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 21, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> I have been having quite an argument on my blog concerning controversial statements I made about the Pope. Well some have criticized my stance by saying that JBFA should not be the "only thing that matters". Often citing any number of social/ethical issues as being equally important and then quoting from some part of ECT.
> 
> What say you?


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 21, 2008)

With regard to ECT, I stand with R.C. Sproul, not Packer and Mouw. Actually, the list for ECT II includes some very surprising names, beyond these two.

Chris, am I to suppose that you didn't go to the east coast to be blessed by the pope this weekend? A radio show today quoted a woman as saying that it is "just like having Jesus come visit us."


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Apr 21, 2008)

Alsted was a significant German Reformed theologian in the early 17th century. For more on Alsted see, Howard Hotson, Johann Heinrich Alsted 1588-1638 (Oxford: OUP, 2000). 

It's out of print but you can get it via inter-library loan.

McGrath quotes Alsted using this phrase in _Theologia Didactica Scholastica_ (Hanover, 1618), 711. I'm still looking for a copy of this text. 

rsc



Presbyterian Deacon said:


> R. Scott Clark said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Sterling,
> ...


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Apr 21, 2008)

Thanks for all your posts.


----------



## Stephen (May 6, 2008)

Jon Peters said:


> Ivanhoe,
> 
> I think I know what you're saying, but JBFA is about God. Also, did you mean to say that you don't want your trinitarianism subservient to soteriology? If so, I think you are correct. Our soteriology can only be understood in light and on the foundation of a robust, orthodox view of God.




Absolutely, justification is all about God! This is why Biblical and Systematic theology are so important, because it is all important and you cannot isolate any doctrine. There is a connection between each point of doctrine. All of our doctrine is founded or rooted in the Biblical view of God and how He has revealed Himself in His word. All heresy can be traced back to a faulty view of God. Yes, Luther's classic statement is correct, it is the doctrine on which the church stands or falls, but Luther was battling for the gospel, not the Trinity or Person of Christ.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (May 6, 2008)

Amen, as usual, Stephen!!!


----------



## ADKing (May 6, 2008)

As important as justification by faith alone is (it is certainly a necessary and fundamental doctrine) I think we need to put it in its proper place as did many of the reformed divines in even in the 16th and 17th centuries. _The_ singularly most important thing is the glory of God. Everything God himself does is towards this end. That means that even justification by faith alone is ultimately subservient to the glory of God.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 6, 2008)

Presbyterian Deacon said:


> R. Scott Clark said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Sterling,
> ...



Don't forget to search the Puritan Board threads too. 

http://www.puritanboard.com/f18/johann-heinrich-alsted-15657/


----------



## py3ak (May 6, 2008)

Isn't saying that justification by faith alone is the most important doctrine rather invidious? Obviously as Rich has shown soteriology is absolutely vital: without it, there is no knowledge of God. At the same time, to _claim_ justification and yet not believe in the God of Abraham, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is quite pointless. In one sense the doctrine of Scripture is the most fundamental, because it is the sole authoritative source of our knowledge about any of the other loci of theology. Obviously history has shown us that errors in Christology (often linked to errors in either theology or anthropology), errors in soteriology, and errors in bibliology have all destroyed particular churches.


----------



## Pilgrim (May 7, 2008)

But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. Heb. 11:6


----------



## py3ak (May 10, 2008)

I found a short piece by Al Mohler on ranking the importance of controversies.


----------



## jambo (May 10, 2008)

All scriptural doctrines are important and they are all interlinked. However some may argue the doctrine of scripture is the most important as that contains God's revelation and the only source of instruction into godliness etc. Some may argue the doctrine of God or the Trinity is the most important as this concerns the character and nature of God. Others may say the doctrine of Christ is the most important as it is vital to know Christ's person and work. The doctrine of justification however really is the most important doctrine. It touches the holiness, righteousness and justice of God. It relates to the sinful nature of man in his state of rebellion against God and his utter helplessness. Then it speaks of how a man can be declared righteous and be transformed from being a rebel against God to a child of God. Justification relates to Christology and the accomplishment of the atonement and all its benefits. Evangelism and pastoral care are rooted in justification whilst the church is made up of the elect, those whom God has justified. All other religions seek to devise their own vain system of works to follow in order to try and make a person right with God or at least a god. But at the heart of Christianity is the declaration that the just shall live by faith alone in Christ alone. 

The glory of God is also bound up in justification. The justified are the only ones who can give God the glory due to his name. They are the only ones who have the Holy Spirit indwelling them, the only ones can who worship God, pray to God, glorify God, live for God and the only ones who can carry out the great commission to make disciples of the nations. What do those disciples do? They too glorify God.

All that I am and ever will be, I will be because of the Holy Spirit and the grace of God. But justification is the result of that grace.


----------



## KMK (May 10, 2008)

py3ak said:


> I found a short piece by Al Mohler on ranking the importance of controversies.



Mohler wrote this:



> Third-order issues are doctrines over which Christians may disagree and remain in close fellowship, even within local congregations. I would put most of the debates over eschatology, for example, in this category. *Christians who affirm the bodily, historical and victorious return of the Lord Jesus Christ may differ over timetable and sequence without rupturing the fellowship of the church.* Christians may find themselves in disagreement over any number of issues related to the interpretation of difficult texts or the understanding of matters of common disagreement. Nevertheless, standing together on issues of more urgent importance, believers are able to accept one another without compromise when third-order issues are in question.



He doesn't mention it specifically, but Mohler obviously believes the bodily, historical and victorious return of Christ must be either a second or first order doctrine. I would say it is a first order doctrine because to deny it leads to many other first order problems.

What would you do with a man who denies the bodily, historical and victorious return of Christ in the future? Is that someone you can call a Christian but you just can't have fellowship with? (a second order doctrine) Or do you stand in doubt of their salvation at all? (a first order doctrine?)


----------



## ADKing (May 10, 2008)

jambo said:


> The glory of God is also bound up in justification. The justified are the only ones who can give God the glory due to his name..



But _why_ does God justify the ungodly? Your second sentence above implies that you recognize that justification is not an end in itself but is unto something else...giving glory to God. If the glory of God is the end then it has the greater importance. 

I say this not at all to detract from the doctrine of justification by faith alone but only to indicate that its greates value lies not in itself but the glory it brings to God.


----------



## Arch2k (May 11, 2008)

I've actually researched the quote discussed above a bit in the past and thought I would share some references:



> ...Hence his well-known assertion that _sola fide_ is "the article with and by which the church stands, without which it falls" (_articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae_).1 Luther said of justification: "The article of justification is the master and prince, the lord, the ruler, and the judge over all kinds of doctrines; it preserves and governs all church doctrine and raises up our concience before God. Without this article the world is utter death and darkness."2
> 
> 1. Martin Luther, What Luther Says: An Anthology, ed. Ewald M. Plass, 3 vols. (St. Louis: Concordia, 1959), 2:704 n.5
> 2. Ibid., 2:703.
> ...


 
However, in the Anthology listed above the quote is as follows:



> 2195 *This Doctrine the Life of the Church*
> This doctrine is the head and the cornerstone. It alone begets, nourishes, builds, preserves, and defends the church of God; and without it the church of God cannot exist for one hour....For no one who does not hold this article-or, to use Paul's expression, this "sound doctrine" (Titus 2:1)-is able to teach aright in the church or successfully to resist and adversary....This is the heel of the Seed that opposes the old serpent and crushes its head. That is why Satan, in turn, cannot but persecute it.5
> 
> 5 In Luther's theology and in Lutheran circles this teaching is, in consequence, the _articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae, _the article with and by which the church stands, without which it falls.


 
So it appears that the quote that Sproul attributes to Luther is actually a footnote from Plass's Anthology. If Luther is the author of this quote, apparantly Sproul had trouble finding its reference too.


----------

