17 - John MacArthur: Servant of the Word and Flock, Iain Murray, 264 pages

It's about time I start updating my ever growing book list.. again. I've read about 33 books putting me on track for the year, but have yet to write all my reviews.

I read "Servant of the Word and Flock" a couple of months ago but this book still sticks out in my mind. I have long associated with John MacArthur with a kind of spiritual father: it was through his ministry at Grace to You that led to my belated salvation. So I'm very grateful for him and his ministry but also incredibly impacted by his teaching. I took up this book with interest to understand why this man has become so influential in modern day Evangelical Christianity.

That being said, several things stick out right away. Something about reading biographies of great Christian men help spurn on enthusiasm for radically altering your own life's routine. What struck me about Dr. MacArthur was his personal study. Before becoming the pastor of Grace Community Church, he told the elders he needed at least 30 hours a week of preparation time for his sermons. One of the most stunning moments of his career, I think, was the completion of his sermon series on Mark where he preached through the entire New Testament in a 30+ year time period. Obviously this man knows his bible.

Another defining moment in the book was the vast maturation of his radio ministry. Admittedly, this resonates particularly strong with me because I was impacted by the huge resource library available at Grace to You. Apparently, Dr. MacArthur was receiving letters from all over the world about how his sermons helped them in their spiritual life.

There are really many topics I could choose to talk about that make John MacArthur a great man: the building up his church from a few dozen people to over a thousand; the inception of Masters Seminary and it's growth; the focus on international missions, where John took an extended survey of South East Asian Churches in the 70's, among others.

When observing the massive legacy John MacArthur has imprinted on Evangelical Christianity in America, I believe he will be remembered as one of the great theologians of our time. For years he has faithfully built a reputation that is based on the inerrant word of God, the Bible, and has never caved to the pressures of modernity in our ever changing world. I definitely recommend Iain Murray's book to everyone interested in reading about this great man of the faith!

16 - Rainbow 6, Tom Clancy, 912 pages

I got onto a serious fiction kick in June and July. And that's ok. What I am discovering about fiction is that it doesn't all have to be a fantasy that serves no purpose but to quench your desire for adventure and excitement amidst the mundane: rather it can serve a specific function that addresses and serious issue in society or tackle a taboo topic through a series of convoluted plot twists and character development.

And sometimes a fiction book is just for fun.

And that is what Rainbow 6 was. "6" is a call sign that designates the commanding officer of different units/commands. The group "Rainbow" was formed by John Clark (or, Rainbow 6) formerly of the CIA, to be a counter terrorist operations group that responds to various threats around the world. Based in England, Clark and his team of the best warriors from special forces units around the world train under the guise of secrecy to be an autonomous cohesive group that surpasses even the elite.

There are several storylines that occur that don't make sense at first in this book and becomes clearer as it progresses. There is a story arch about a ex-KGB intelligence officer that recruits terrorists for certain missions in Europe; the selection and training of Rainbow is a story in itself; a group of scientists gather bums off the street for some secret tests in New York; a mysterious pharmaceutical company is planning something interesting among others. Without giving away too much of the plot, these more informative sections are interlaced between the response of Rainbow to a terrorist threat where they kick some serious tush.

All in all, this is a pretty good read for those who just need an escapist fantasy read. I enjoyed the intertwining of the stories (even though it might have been a little confusing at first) that climaxed into an intelligent conclusion that was really quite satisfying. I suppose you can't go wrong with Tom Clancy

15 - First to Fight: An Inside View of the U.S. Marine Corps, Victor Krulak, 272 pages

I remember at the School of Music during my training early on in my Marine Corps career, this guy in the Army asked me why we needed a Marine Corps. He said something like, "We [the Army] can do everything the Marine Corps does.." First to Fight is an inside look at the reason we have a Marine Corps.

At the end of World War II, there was a downsize of the military and with good reason: the over-burgeoning weight of men and women who joined the war efforts was staggering; as it came to a close, there was no need to continue the excessive size that ballooned during the global conflict. I suppose that the Marine Corps mission has been different throughout history: in it's early days, Marines would hang from the rigging of ships and distinguished themselves as expert marksman as they protected against the assault of men onto their ship; In the 1920's and 30's, the Marine Corps adopted a doctrine on beach landings and assaults that drastically changed their purpose and intent. With the onset of WWII and the island hopping campaigns, this provided the Marine Corps with a lot of work. But during those years of excess directly after the war the Marines did nothing extraordinary, in the eyes of congress and top military leaders, that the Army could not do also. And thus the battle for the Marine Corps' life had again come into jeopardy.

The first half of this book is, frankly, a dry read. The author, retired Major General Krulak discusses those early years after WWII and the struggle to get the Commandant in on the board of the Joint Chief of Staff, which includes the top Generals from the Army, Navy and what was to become the Air Force. He talks about court hearings and a lot of legal mantra that I just didn't understand. I got the point though: saving the Marine Corps was tough and a lot of people were against it.

He then breaks down the Marine Corps from specific angles that isolate it's strengths and how it is different and unique from other services. Examples from these chapters (the most interesting, by the way) are things like how thrifty and inventive Marines are. He uses anecdotes from his many years of service as illustrations of these traits that make Marines superior and builds an argument of why we need a Marine Corps.

Ultimately, he concludes that the purpose of the todays Marine Corps is a response force that can amass a great deal of proficient warriors in little time in order to "police" the world and it's atrocities. It is because of this reason that Marines need to be ready to fight at any time. I remember hearing a story of the 31st MEU in Okinawa, Japan that was told to prepare during a typhoon to board a ship soon after it had passed in response to the 9/11 attacks. The Marine Corps survives today because it's mission is made flexible to suit the needs of this great nation and we will continue in this manner until the fight for the Marine Corps life is put on the chopping block again.

14 - The Japanese and Christianity: Why is Christianity not widely believed in Japan?, Samuel Lee, 294 pages

I was introduced to some startling statistics while I was in Japan. Here is one for you: there are about 500,000-1,000,000 Protestant Christians in Japan. In the greater Tokyo-Metropolitan area, there are over 13 million people. This is shocking to me. I quickly learned that Japan is the most secular nation that is open to Christianity in the world. So the question we must ask is why? What is it about Japanese culture that does not allow Christianity to thrive as it is in the East in places like South Korea and China?


That is the question Samuel Lee asks in his book, "The Japanese and Christianity." The are a plethora of reasons why, maybe too many to answer here, but I will highlight a few. In Japan, there is something called the "wa." The "wa" is the harmony of everything around you but in this case, it is the harmony of social dynamics. In this way, the idea is to not let ripples interrupt the harmony of social relationships by introducing tension or nonconformity. This poses a huge problem to the spread of Christianity because Jesus talks very frequently about the truth being divisive and the division it will cause within your family and friends.


The Japanese are also incredibly tolerant of spiritual ideas but less thrilled about organized religion or commitment. It seems that what is attractive is an amalgamation of several different religious ideas combined into a unique melting pot instead of a verified pronunciation of one particular belief. For example, it is said that the Japanese have Shinto births, Christian weddings, and Buddhist deaths.


One of the sharpest points of contention to the author in the book is about ancestor worship. The Japanese have a very high view of their ancestors and in some cases worship them. When Christian missionaries (as the author explains) have come to Japan and told the people about Christianity, they are sometimes willing to change their ways… until they mention they must give up the worship of their ancestors. The author brings up an interesting (although perhaps misguided) point about cultural Christianity. Cultural Christianity reflects that in any system of Christianity, it inherently and unapologetically adopts certain qualities of the culture. For example, Americans are very materialistic and our churches reflect that materialism: flat screen TV's line our churches which are enormous buildings that would dwarf the humble churches in African or South America while our coffee bar could probably support two missionaries for a year. In the same way, many Americans would become defensive at such accusations much like the Japanese would become defensive about their ancestors. The question the author poses is, is it right for us to be critical about cultural Christianity?


I may not have an answer for that at the moment, but this book provides an interesting dialogue on why Christianity has not become popular in Japan. There are many other reasons but if you are interested in the others, I would encourage you to buy the book!

13- Strange Glory: A Life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Charles Marsh, 528 pages

Dietrich Bonhoeffer continues to be a controversial character among evangelicals, and others, even into the 21st century. Some praise the 20th century German theologian for his contribution to "neo-orthodoxy" while others are harshly critical of both Bonhoeffer and friend Karl Barth, condemning both for their intrusion on traditionalism. Regardless what presuppositions you may have on Bonhoeffer (or Barth for that matter), "Strange Glory" was a deep, rich (and quite frankly, most enjoyable) read that solidified in my mind how we should view Bonhoeffer.

I must start off by saying that this book is not without controversy. Indeed, I originally found it on Al Mohler's summer reading list, where I had recently read an article he wrote called, "Baptist Polity and the Integrity of the Southern Baptist Convention," which was about the intrusion of homosexuality threatening to split the convention. As I was reading the comments for Marsh's book on Amazon, I saw a comment condemning the book for the accusation that Bonhoeffer was gay. I have never been one to shy away from controversy, so I read the book anyway and would recommend (and have recommended) for other Christians to read it. So here is what I will say on the subject: do I think Bonhoeffer was gay? No (not only did he die a virgin, but he was engaged to a young woman for some years). And in fact, the Gospel Coalition wrote a fantastic article recently called, "Was Bonheoffer gay? And other adventures in missing the point!" I thought the most striking feature of this article was the obsession our culture has with not just sex but gender and sexual orientation. In our day-to-day lives we are saturated with themes that are sexual-centric and it becomes the pivotal point in determining what is important in the biographies of today (As a side-note, in the book I read earlier this year, "Washington" by Ron Chernow, he is convinced that George Washington was having affairs with various women). If this is the central point in the book (it's not) to you or the only reason you won't read it, then you are certainly missing out.

With that out of the way, Marsh is a beautiful writer. The imagery that he writes with made me feel like I was sitting with Bonhoeffer in the mountains as he read a book in the cool of the morning, or inside his childhood home having a most clear picture of what it would have looked like. Marsh explores several very interesting ideas regarding Bonhoeffer, particularly his theological convictions in the "revival" of the Lutheran church. Just like context is key when studying scripture, the same is true in looking at a man such as Bonhoeffer: we must look at neo-orthodoxy and view it through the lens of the early 20th century Lutheran Church to fully understand the perspective in which Bonhoeffer swore his allegiance to.

Justification By Faith

I know it's been awhile since I've posted anything on here. I think you will be happy to know that I am still reading consistently. I have about four books I still need to write about. I know. I always say I'll get back on track but I haven't seem to get caught up. I'll be taking a break from school in the coming week so I'll have lots of time to devote to catching up on everything I shouldn't be doing while I'm at school.

In the meantime, I wrote a paper I was really proud of last semester in my "Romans" class called "Justification By Faith." I wanted to post it here because I think the message is important enough to be read. Enjoy.

         The phrase that defined the movement known as the Reformation was “justification by faith.” In the fallout of the Reformation, this phrase became the central component to Christianity, being ever tied to Christianity as a doctrine that is unmovable and one in which many lost their lives defending. One commentator went, as far as to say, “No doctrine of Scripture is more important than that of justification It involves the whole method of the salvation of sinners. It is vitally connected with all other fundamental doctrines. A correct conception of it cannot exist when other truths are ignored, or only partially received.”^[1] The importance of such a vital piece in the great puzzle of Christianity cannot be over exaggerated or overemphasized.

            But what exactly is Justification by Faith, and why is it important to the Christian Church? Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, often hailed as a theological bombshell that is unsurpassed by any other book in the New Testament, contains within it the most central truths regarding Justification by Faith. With this basis, this writer will attempt to utilize the book of Romans to help the reader understand the concept of this most important doctrine, beginning with an introduction on what “justification” is and how to attain it (by means of faith and how this is worked out in the redemptive plan), an analysis of Romans 1:17 and how Paul’s thesis begins the book-long argument of Justification by Faith, and finally, how Christians should act out Justification by Faith in their lives. 

            On its most superficial level, the root word of “justification” is “justice” and this is most often used in a judicial sense. This correlates with the popular, “court room scene:” As a man stands trial for his wrongdoings, he is given justice by way of the judge who declares him either guilty or not guilty. But in the Christian sense, the act of Justification is not a term that emphasizes the guilty verdict: rather the opposite effect is necessitated upon the recollection of this word. Succinctly, Weirsbe says “Justification means that God declares believing sinners righteous in Christ and never again keeps a record of their sins.”^[2]  Further, John Stott says, “Justification is a legal or forensic term, belonging to the law courts. Its opposite is condemnation. Both are the pronouncements of a judge.”^[3]

            Therefore, the scene that perfectly accentuates this concept of Justification is, again, the court scene where the judge (the most Holy God of the Bible) reigns. The sinner is on trial. The crime is his life full of wickedness against the judge. But instead of being guilty for his evil, Jesus is able and willing to take the punishment for the sinner’s wrongs, making him, as the old hymn puts it, “white as snow.”

            This is accomplished because of Jesus’ act on the cross. In his book, “The Cross of Christ,” John Stott quotes Anselm, the Archbishop of Canterbury, about the efficacy of Jesus’ death on the cross: “‘there is no-one...who can make this satisfaction except God himself.... But no-one ought to make it except man; otherwise man does not make satisfaction…. It is needful that the very same Person who is to make this satisfaction be perfect God and perfect man, since no-one can do it except one who is truly God, and no-one ought to do it except one who is truly man.’”[4] This delivers a key piece of information regarding Justification: a guilty man cannot in himself cannot save himself from his sentence. Rather, he must rely on someone who is without wrong who must be God (but representative of man, as Anselm points out) to live the perfect life we are unable to live in order to fulfill the law and it’s requirements. Therefore, when Jesus died on the cross, his sacrifice was sufficient as Romans 3:21 says, “But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the prophets bear witness to it.” This righteousness was the righteousness of Christ in His perfect life that fulfilled that law.

            Further, the righteousness of Christ (to be discussed in more detail later) now dwells in the justified one: “the righteousness of Christ is set to the believer’s account as though it were really and inherently his own.”^[5] One man said about this scene, “When you study Romans, you walk into a courtroom. First, Paul called Jews and Gentiles to the stand and found both guilty before God. Then he explained God’s marvelous way of salvation—justification by faith.”^[6] This can be seen evidentially in Romans 3, verses 23-25a: “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood…”

            The second part of Romans 3:25 contains the answer to how one is able to receive this justification: “…to be received by faith…” From this, it is obvious how one attains justification: by faith. But this process is more complex than first read would allow us to believe. If we sustain that through our own good works we cannot be made right with God because the the law demands perfection and our fallible nature is unable to achieve perfection, then we must infer that there is another way to be justified in God’s sight. This is the argument in Romans 4, where Paul turns to Abraham to illustrate that the way people are made right or “justified” in God’s sight is by faith.

            The most momentous verse in Romans 4 has to be verse 3, where Paul quotes Genesis 15:6 to prove that Abraham was not justified by works, but rather by faith: “For what does the Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.’” Mounce says of this event, “For Paul, Abraham was credited with righteousness when he believed God’s promise of an offspring.”^[7] But as no Christians were ever promised offspring by God, this statement begs the question, how does this apply to the modern day person? The answer is contained in the example of Abraham as a free gift that requires no works but rather faith. The one whom we put our faith into now is Jesus Christ and his work on the cross. As Hastings says so eloquently, “According to this passage, therefore, the faith that justifies is not simply faith in God, or faith in God’s grace, or faith in the truth that Jesus is the Christ, but faith in Jesus as one who gave Himself to death for man’s redemption, and so became the channel through which God’s grace flows to sinners. Following out this idea of faith, justification might be defined as a judicial act, whereby God regards as righteous those who trust in His grace as manifested in the atoning death of Christ.”^[8]

            With this foundation laid, we now turn to the thesis of Paul’s letter to the Romans in chapter 1:17: “For in [the Gospel], the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “the righteous shall live by faith.” As Paul uses this one verse to turn from his introduction into the establishment of what the “Gospel” is and to further his argument that justification comes by faith (the correlation between the two we will discuss later), we must now turn our attention to understanding this thesis.

            The phrase “the righteousness of God” has mystified theologians for centuries. The key point we must take into consideration in an attempt to understand this sentence: what righteousness is. As we turn to this, there are three basic views to consider what “righteousness” Paul is speaking of: 1) an attribute of God, 2) God’s activity where he declares those who turn to Him righteous, 3) humans’ righteous status that is a result of God’s justifying activity.[9] While all these have merit, this writer believes the most convincingly argument of what Paul is meaning here is in the third option. However, Mounce comments, “It may be, however, that the three positions are not mutually exclusive. There is no question that righteousness is an attribute of God, and God clearly is actively involved in declaring righteous those who turn to him in faith. The result is that people of faith are declared to be righteous. They have laid hold of the ‘righteousness from God.’ With the major emphasis remaining on the status of the one declared to be righteous, there is no reason to deny that the other two aspects are integrally related and should not be excluded from the larger view of the issue.”[10]

            Regardless, the importance of the third option grows as one considers the Greek word associate with “righteousness.” The root word here is the verb “dikaioo,” the same word in the Greek for our word, “justify.”[11] About the construction of this word, Utley says, “Paul, being a trained rabbi, uses the term dikaiosunē in its Hebrew sense of the term SDQ used in the Septuagint, not from Greek literature. In Greek writings the term is connected to someone who conformed to the expectations of deity and society. In the Hebrew sense it is always structured in covenantal terms.”^[12] This reinforces what has already been established, that righteousness is apart from our actions but a manifestation of Jesus’ righteousness that is transferred to us by way of faith. As Moo says, “When God ‘justifies’ the sinner, God gives that person a new legal standing before him - his or her ‘righteousness.’”[13] Godet spells out exactly what this means in the most practical sense: “The notion of the righteousness of God, according to Paul, embraces two bestowals of grace: man treated—(1) as if he had never committed any evil; (2) as if he had always accomplished all the good God could expect from him. The sentence of justification which puts man in this privileged state in relation to God is the δικαίωσις, the act of justification. In virtue of this act “man has henceforth,” as Hofmann says, “the righteousness of God for him, and not against him.”^[14]

            Therefore, we establish that the righteousness here is the result of God’s justifying activity (the imputation of perfection into believers) and Paul says further, “…Revealed by faith to faith.” The word “revealed” here could mean “unveil,” as Moule says, “So the Gospel “unveils God’s righteousness”; it draws the curtains from His glorious secret. And as each fold is lifted, the glad beholder looks on ‘from faith to faith.’^[15] In the time of the Romans and before as today, men are convinced that the way to being right with God is by the good works that they do. What Paul clarifies here is that God has spoken through Jesus Christ about His redemptive plan; through that revelation, we find a difficult message that strays away from normalcy and enters into the unorthodox (to men, at least). In addition, Mounce says, “This radical departure from conventional wisdom had to be “revealed.” It runs contrary to all the basic instincts of fallen human nature. Virtue has, since the beginning of time, been thought of as an achievement by human endeavor. But God’s righteousness is a right standing he freely gives to those who trust in him.”^[16]

            Concerning the phrase, “from faith to faith,” John Stott lists four possible conclusions: 1) faith’s origin, meaning God’s faithfulness is first His, and our faith is merely a response, 2) the spread of faith by way of evangelism, 3) he could be referring to faith’s growth (from one degree of faith to another), 4) it may be faith’s primacy and purely rhetorical, as one translation puts “by faith from first to last” or “faith faith through and through.”^[17] This writer believes the most comprehensive view as summed up by Beet: “In order that faith in Him may be the abiding state of His servants, God proclaims, 'He that believes shall be saved;’ and thus makes known to all believers a state in which God’s, favour is enjoyed. The revelation is by faith, that it may lead to faith.^[18] This correlates with the first view Stott provides and similarly echoes the subject of faith discussed earlier. Moreover, it is in direct alignment with the idea of righteousness that proceeds it, as explained by Lange: “The idea of faith appears here in accordance with the comprehensive idea of righteousness, and therefore as a hearty, trustful self-surrender, which includes both knowledge and belief, assent and surrender, appropriation and application.” ^[19]

            In the next section, Paul quotes a verse from the Prophet Habakkuk, chapter two verse four. It is imperative that we understand the original context of this passage before we determine its place in Romans. An analysis of the background is succinctly provided by one commentator: “First, wickedness was rampant in Israel and God seemed oblivious to it, moving Habakkuk to rail against God in a series of complaints (Hab. 1:2–4). Second, when God said he was going to use a nation more wicked than Israel (the Babylonians) to punish Israel, this produced cries and complaints of injustice from the prophet (Hab. 1:12–2:1). It might be said that Habakkuk was embarrassed, ashamed of God’s inaction and his choices.”^[20] As a way of “clearing” God’s name from the accused injustice, He gives Habakkuk the fourth verse of chapter two as a way to show him there is nothing to be done to fix the situation but that he needs to live by faith.[21]

            Moving to the time the Epistle to the Romans was written, this verse is a perfect example of the human condition: so often we are inclined to work out our salvation on our own terms, by what we do, rather than by accepting the gift God has graciously given us. The juxtaposition between the time of Habakkuk and the time of the Romans (even to an extent our present situation) contains very little differences. Lange says, “The use, which the Apostle Paul makes of these words (Rom. 1:17; comp. Gal. 3:11), is authorized, since there as here the antithesis, by which the idea broad in itself is distinctly sketched, is the haughty boast of his own power entangled in sin.”^[22] The obvious conclusion is that one is not justified by the pride in the things he does, but rather through faith.

            As Paul ends his thesis and begins what most consider a new section of Romans, we find a somewhat abrupt shift in his emphasis. Just two verses before, Paul is speaking about the “Gospel,” or “good news,” which is in contrast to verse 18: “For the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men…” While this may seem a blunt transition, the fact of the matter is it is coherent with Paul’s message of Justification by Faith he has just explained in the previous verse. The next section (from 1:18-3:20) deals with the incapability of man to save himself and the indictment upon humanity dealing with sinfulness. As Sproul says, “How do we receive righteousness by faith, rather than by meritorious works? Paul expands on this theme, beginning in verse 18.”^[23] Paul is going to explain what Romans 3:19-20 summarizes: “Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.”

            The Gospel is the good news, the “cure” if you will, to our sinful state. When one goes to the doctor, he does not prescribe a treatment without a diagnosis of your condition. It is only by analyzing your symptoms that he can determine what is wrong with you and then give you a prescription for medicine that will cure your ailment. In the same way, Paul does not want the Romans (and therefore mankind) to be confused on their state before God. He does not offer a cure without a diagnosis of their condition. This is an integral part of understanding the doctrine of Justification: without the doctrine of Sin, there is nothing to be saved from and therefore no need for the act of making right. Paul understands that the primary understanding one must have in order to respond to the gift of making right (or Justification) is the knowledge of his fallen state. In the former of the two Epistles, in which ‘justification’ was regarded from a somewhat narrower standpoint, there was no development of any doctrine of Sin. In the section that follows here we find such a doctrine. The Gospel reveals to men the method of redemption, the means whereby they shall be ‘righted’ with God. Corresponding to this revelation there is another… the “Wrath of God…”^[24]

             As the reader now has a basic understanding of the doctrine of Justification, it is important to comment on the response of the Christian to this most wonderful doctrine. The phrase, “how shall we now live?” is often attributed to theology in the sense that is it extraordinary to learn about these truths, but how should the Christian apply them to their lives? The great English preacher, Martyn Llyod-Jones said, “Faith is not passive, it is very active. We must, it is true, always be aware of the danger of relying upon our own activity, but the opposite of that is not just to do nothing! Faith is active. The first step in the life of faith is the constant application of the truth which we have believed, the bringing to bear upon our daily lives of these great doctrines which we have been studying.”^[25]

            There are two essential truths we must apply to Justification by Faith: it does not make Christian infallible even though, as we established, in the sight of God we are made perfect, and it does not Christians license to continue sinning. In understanding the former, Justification by Faith is an act that is primarily heavenly, meaning that the perfection we have received is not necessarily manifested in us in this life. Rather it is a judiciary pronouncement that seals our souls for the eventual eternity in Heaven. However, God does send his Spirit as a “helper” to sanctify us in this life. Jones clarifies this: “We have been at pains to remind one another that we must never separate justification by faith from sanctification. You can distinguish between them but you must never separate them. What I mean by separating is this: there are people, as we have seen, who will tell you that you can be justified without being sanctified, and then they say that as you have received your justification by faith, you now go on to receive your sanctification by faith. That is patently false teaching because it is pressing the distinction into something that separates. You cannot be justified without the process of sanctification already having been started.”^[26]

            In the same sense, Romans 6 denies that we should continue in our lifestyle as if nothing has changed, being unchanged because of the doctrine of Justification by Faith. In the most famous passage (6:1-2), he says, “What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?” The Apostle Paul implores us to be sanctified (set apart) in this world and not to engage in licentiousness because of our Justification. Jones says again, “In the previous chapters he has been laying down his great doctrine of justification by faith only. He has been demonstrating it from the Scriptures, making it perfectly plain and clear. So he has stated the doctrine, but, wise teacher as he is, he knows that men and women in a state of sin and under the influence and at the suggestion of the devil, are liable to fail to apply it at all, or to apply it in the wrong way.”^[27]

            There should be little doubt in the reader that the doctrine of Justification by Faith is an incredible important subject in the annals of time from Jesus’ death on the cross to the present. It is no wonder that the reformers took upon their shoulders the responsibility of putting to death the teaching that one is saved by his works. Rather, they expounded the only way to a right relationship with God was through Jesus’ completed work on the cross, accepted by faith to faith. It is this writers burden that the reader has understood the doctrine of Justification by Faith in its essence as espoused by the book of Romans, by the exposition of Romans 1:17, and how it must be properly applied in the Christian life. Through this doctrine, it is the writer’s hope that our Christian lives may be enriched by the continuous study of this subject as well as held in awe each and every day of the great sacrifice and subsequent gift of Justification by our Lord and savior, Jesus Christ.

           

Bibliography

1) Beet, Joseph Agar. A Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. New York: Thomas Whittaker, 1901.

2) Boa, Kenneth, and William Kruidenier. Romans. Vol. 6. Holman New Testament Commentary. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.

3) Boyce, James Petigru. Abstract of Systematic Theology. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010.

4) Godet, Frédéric Louis, and Alexander Cusin. Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. Vol. 1. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890.

5) Hastings, James. The Christian Doctrine of Faith. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1919.

6) Kauffman, Daniel, ed. Bible Doctrine: A Treatise on the Great Doctrines of the Bible, Pertaining to God, Angels, Satan, the Church, and the Salvation, Duties and Destiny of Man. Scottdale, PA: Mennonite Publishing House, 1914.

7) Lange, John Peter, Philip Schaff, F. R. Fay, J. F. Hurst, and M. B. Riddle. A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Romans. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008.

8) Lange, John Peter, Philip Schaff, Paul Kleinert, and Charles Elliott. A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Habakkuk. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008.

9) Lloyd-Jones, David Martyn. The Assurance of Our Salvation: Exploring the Depth of Jesus’ Prayer for His Own: Studies in John 17. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2000.

10) Moo, Douglas J. Romans. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000.

11) Moule, Handley. The Epistle to the Romans. Fort Washington, PA: Christian Literature Crusade, 1975.

12) Mounce, Robert H. Romans. Vol. 27. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995.

13) Sproul, R. C. The Gospel of God: An Exposition of Romans. Great Britain: Christian Focus Publications, 1994.

14) Stott, John R.W. The Cross of Christ. 20th ed. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2006.

15) Stott, John R. W. The Message of Romans: God’s Good News for the World. The Bible Speaks Today. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001.

16) Utley, Robert James. The Gospel According to Paul: Romans. Vol. Volume 5. Study Guide Commentary Series. Marshall, Texas: Bible Lessons International, 1998.

17) Westcott, Frederick Brooke. St. Paul and Justification. London: Macmillan and Co., 1913.

18) Wiersbe, Warren W. Be Comforted. “Be” Commentary Series. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996.

---

^[1] James Petigru Boyce, Abstract of Systematic Theology (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010), 394.

^[2] Warren W. Wiersbe, Be Comforted, “Be” Commentary Series (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), 140.

^[3] John R. W. Stott, The Message of Romans: God’s Good News for the World, The Bible Speaks Today (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001), 110.

[4] John R.W. Stott, The Cross of Christ, 20th ed. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2006), 253.

^[5] J. E. Hartzler, “Justification,” in Bible Doctrine: A Treatise on the Great Doctrines of the Bible, Pertaining to God, Angels, Satan, the Church, and the Salvation, Duties and Destiny of Man, ed. Daniel Kauffman (Scottdale, PA: Mennonite Publishing House, 1914), 234.

^[6] Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), 517.

^[7] Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 122.

^[8] James Hastings, The Christian Doctrine of Faith (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1919), 361.

[9] Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 73.

[10] Ibid, 73.

[11] Douglas J. Moo, Romans (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000), 52.

^[12] Robert James Utley, The Gospel According to Paul: Romans, vol. Volume 5, Study Guide Commentary Series (Marshall, Texas: Bible Lessons International, 1998), Ro 1:17.

[13] Ibid, 52.

^[14] Frédéric Louis Godet and Alexander Cusin, Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890), 159.

^[15] Handley Moule, The Epistle to the Romans (Fort Washington, PA: Christian Literature Crusade, 1975), 34.

^[16] Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 73.

^[17] John R. W. Stott, The Message of Romans: God’s Good News for the World, The Bible Speaks Today (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001), 64.

^[18] Joseph Agar Beet, A Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (New York: Thomas Whittaker, 1901), 50.

^[19] John Peter Lange et al., A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Romans (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 76.

^[20] Kenneth Boa and William Kruidenier, Romans, vol. 6, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000), 31.

[21] Ibid, 31.

^[22] John Peter Lange et al., A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Habakkuk (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 23.

^[23] R. C. Sproul, The Gospel of God: An Exposition of Romans (Great Britain: Christian Focus Publications, 1994), 28.

^[24] Frederick Brooke Westcott, St. Paul and Justification (London: Macmillan and Co., 1913), 131.

^[25] David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Assurance of Our Salvation: Exploring the Depth of Jesus’ Prayer for His Own: Studies in John 17 (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2000), 509.

^[26] Ibid, 547.

^[27] Ibid, 508.