17.01.2015 Views

November 2007 - Protestant Reformed Churches in America

November 2007 - Protestant Reformed Churches in America

November 2007 - Protestant Reformed Churches in America

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Book Reviews<br />

ber of respects, they both deny torically used to teach the imputation<br />

of the righteousness of<br />

justification by faith alone.<br />

Five chapters deal with the Jesus Christ. In addition to<br />

issue of justification, the righteousness<br />

of Christ, which is zealously defend<strong>in</strong>g this doc-<br />

these exegetical reasons for<br />

imputed <strong>in</strong> justification, and the tr<strong>in</strong>e, he f<strong>in</strong>ds another: “the<br />

legal aspect of the imputation. honor and glory of the Lord<br />

The first two chapters deal Jesus Christ” (p. 97).<br />

particularly with N. T. Wright’s C. FitzSimons Allison demonstrates<br />

that Anglicanism has<br />

teach<strong>in</strong>g regard<strong>in</strong>g justification.<br />

Cornelis Venema summarizes<br />

N. T. Wright’s view re-<br />

imputation that it once held; ar-<br />

lost the right understand<strong>in</strong>g of<br />

gard<strong>in</strong>g the NPP and his doctr<strong>in</strong>e<br />

of justification. He then tr<strong>in</strong>e proceed from a fear of<br />

gues that objections to the doc-<br />

demonstrates from the New ant<strong>in</strong>omianism; and <strong>in</strong>dicates<br />

Testament, and especially that our culture, which speaks<br />

Paul’s epistles, that Wright’s of God’s love at the expense of<br />

view is wrong. Then T. David God’s justice, rather than see<strong>in</strong>g<br />

God’s love <strong>in</strong> proper rela-<br />

Gordon deals more specifically<br />

with Wright’s view of the term tion to His justice, fosters a disregard<br />

for the idea of imputa-<br />

“the righteousness of God.”<br />

Whereas Wright argues that the tion. In defense of imputation,<br />

term is not to be understood <strong>in</strong> he notes: “Imputation is the<br />

a forensic sense, but refers to unanimous testimony of sa<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

the faithfulness of God, Gordon<br />

argues from Paul’s epistles pleads one’s own <strong>in</strong>fused righ-<br />

on their death beds. None<br />

that the term must be understood<br />

<strong>in</strong> a judicial sense. the mercy of Christ” (p. 103).<br />

teousness before God but only<br />

The next two chapters deal To skip chapter 5 for the<br />

with the doctr<strong>in</strong>e of the imputation<br />

of Christ’s righteousness. VanDrunen defends sola fide <strong>in</strong><br />

moment, <strong>in</strong> chapter 6 David<br />

Review<strong>in</strong>g the Arm<strong>in</strong>ian challenge<br />

to this doctr<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> decades of Christ. VanDrunen argues<br />

relation to the active obedience<br />

past, Richard Phillips shows that the idea of Christ’s active<br />

that the NPP denies it today. He obedience is basic to a <strong>Reformed</strong><br />

understand<strong>in</strong>g, and that<br />

defends the doctr<strong>in</strong>e by exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

several texts that <strong>Reformed</strong><br />

theologians have his-<br />

both of the NPP and the Federal<br />

the idea is dismissed by men<br />

<strong>November</strong> <strong>2007</strong> 105

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!