A common critique is that this doctrine makes for lazy Christians. The objection goes something like this: If I am justified merely by faith and not works, then there is no need for me to do good works. But the Reformers scoffed at that notion, because it misinterprets what God is doing for us through faith in Christ! Since our salvation is secured by a gracious gift of saving belief in Christ’s works, then that will stir us up to love and good works.

To understand the importance of the statement “faith alone,” we need to remember why the Reformers sought to recover the doctrine of God’s grace. They wanted to emphasize the fact that we are made right with God not through any merit of our own but rather through God’s own free grace. In Christ, we receive unmerited favor from God.
The Roman Catholics in the sixteenth century would have agreed with this to some extent. They indeed believed we needed God’s grace to get to heaven. But how do we get the grace? Here’s what they said at the Council of Trent in 1547 (which is still Roman Catholic doctrine today):

If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be accursed. (Sixth Session, Canon IX)

Faith is the gift of God.
This is very strong language. What Rome is saying is that if you believe that it is purely by faith that you receive God’s grace, you will be accursed—that is, damned to hell. What’s the problem with this? It’s the very teaching of Scripture that they are condemning! Paul could not be clearer:

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. (Eph. 2:8-9)

Rome wanted to say that we are saved by God’s grace in cooperation with faith and works. In fact, it even saw faith itself as one of the works that earns us God’s grace. But you can’t earn grace—otherwise, it’s not grace, not a gift. Rome taught a theological contradiction, one that Paul warned against in Ephesians 2.
In response to Rome’s perversion of biblical doctrine, the Reformers returned to the Scriptural truth that nothing we do can earn favor with God.
Read More
Related Posts:

The gospel and law work in tandem, bringing people to Jesus (and ultimately salvation) and helping Christian ambassadors bring about a more just society. We need to abandon the justice vs. gospel extremes. Our focus as Christians is not “We just need to preach the gospel.” It’s also not “Social justice is the gospel.” Instead, we partner with Jesus to preach the gospel, make disciples, and teach them to obey biblical principles in all areas of life. 

There are two misunderstandings about justice that have led to confusion in the Christian community.
First, there’s often not a clear distinction between the law of God and his gospel, especially in discussions related to justice. These two aren’t the same thing. The gospel literally means “good news.” It’s the good news that “while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son” (Romans 5:10). The gospel is good news when we understand that we do not and cannot earn our salvation. The work of redemption and justification has been finished by Christ, on the cross, at Calvary.
The gospel is not the law. Many Christians misunderstand the law. Some think that when Jesus died on the cross, he did away with all our moral obligations. This not the case.
Remember, the law of God gives us our moral standard in life, including the standard of justice. Of course, Jesus is the only man who ever lived up to that standard, but—with God’s help—we still need to pursue a holy life. Peter said, “Be holy yourselves also in all your behavior.” He then quoted the Law: “Because it is written, ‘You shall be holy, for I am holy’” (1 Peter 1:15–16).
Think about what Jesus said in Matthew 22. A lawyer asked, “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” Notice the question is about law, not the gospel. This is really important. Jesus answered, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’” Now listen to his summary statement: “On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.” Christians miss this here. Notice our obligation to love is not the gospel. Loving God and loving your neighbor is law.
Here’s why I bring this up: The gospel is about God’s love for us. It’s his rescue plan for sinners. The law is about our love for God and others.
Read More
Related Posts:

Transferring human obedience, creaturely obedience, into the life of God implies his creaturehood. That implication must be rejected. As the Bible tells us and consent of the church has confirmed, the Father and Son are distinguished by Fatherness and Sonness. Their relation is one of Fatherness and Sonness. 

In 2016 Evangelicals debated about the best way to affirm that God is one and yet Father and Son. The old answer is: the Father begets the Son eternally; the Son is eternally begotten. Beget and begotten are old words to describe how fathers generate children. A mother births them; a father begets.
In recent years, evangelicals attempted to find a new way to talk about Father and Son. They said that the Father relates to the Son because he has paternal authority; the Son relates to the Father in a mode of submission. Authority and submission distinguish Father and Son.
For the most part, people found the new approach insufficient. It implied eternal inferiority of the Son, implied two wills, and inserted the human life of Jesus where he obeyed the Father into God. It unintentionally implied a creaturely characteristic in God since Jesus’s creaturely obedience to the Father gets imported into how God is eternally!
Recently, however, a theologian reaffirmed that the Father eternally has authority over the eternally submissive Son. Interestingly, the theologian cited Augustine and Hilary of Poitiers as proponents of his position. 
Two Reasons Why Eternal Submission Does Not Work
First, Jesus submits to the Father in his role of Mediator, one who became obedient to the point of death in the form of a slave (Phil 2:7). But he was equal to the Father in the form of deity (Phil 2:6).
To transfer submission into God as the way the Father and Son differ is to transfer a creaturely characteristic into God. Because Jesus took on humanity, he obeys the Father vicariously in his role of Mediator for our sake.
Second, the church Fathers such as Augustine and Hilary made the above distinction clearly. They affirmed the obedience of the Son according to his humanity. But they did not pass through this obedience into God to explain how the Son and Father eternally related.
Just one example. Augustine in The Trinity writes: “In the form of a servant which he took he is the Father’s inferior; in the form of God in which he existed even before he took this other he is the Father’s equal.” Elsewhere, he says “the Father is greater than is the form of the servant, whereas the Son is his equal in the form of God.”[1]
Read More