What do you think?
Rate this book
A Faith That Is Never Alone: A Response to Westminster Seminary in California
A major response to Westminster Seminary in California by Reformed theologians on controversies surrounding the New Perspective of Paul, the Federal Vision, Law and Gospel, and the teachings of Norman Shepherd (a contributor to this work)
- GenresTheology
400 pages, Paperback
First published December 7, 2008
37 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
December 1, 2025
A collection of essays is often a mixed bag but the articles by Lusk are alone with the price.
August 14, 2013
This is a interesting book, but a divisive one. Obviously, these men had something to say, but they couldn't get a major publisher to print it, so they published it themselves. That's an inauspicious beginning.
I am a confused person, trying to write this review. I love a lot of TR (Truly Reformed) values, and this book is anti-TR. I have been at a loss about how to argue with the men currently at WTS and WSC, whose legacy I love. They have called the other men I love heretics, and I've been unsure how to respond. This book changed everything. Now, I have a book under my belt that does it far better than I could. As I read this, i was afraid i would become a straight-FV proponent myself. Fortunately, they let some NPP-proponents and dreamers in, so I was able to find stuff I could disagree with, but man! was that close! :-) Now I find I am a man without a home, eclectically taking bits of WTS theology ( they would claim the legacy of old Princeton) and some bits of the new theology ( I would say "progressive reformed"). There are good and bad bits to this book, but it is well worth struggling with. Perhaps I will end up rewriting this review a third time as my thinking develops further.
I am a confused person, trying to write this review. I love a lot of TR (Truly Reformed) values, and this book is anti-TR. I have been at a loss about how to argue with the men currently at WTS and WSC, whose legacy I love. They have called the other men I love heretics, and I've been unsure how to respond. This book changed everything. Now, I have a book under my belt that does it far better than I could. As I read this, i was afraid i would become a straight-FV proponent myself. Fortunately, they let some NPP-proponents and dreamers in, so I was able to find stuff I could disagree with, but man! was that close! :-) Now I find I am a man without a home, eclectically taking bits of WTS theology ( they would claim the legacy of old Princeton) and some bits of the new theology ( I would say "progressive reformed"). There are good and bad bits to this book, but it is well worth struggling with. Perhaps I will end up rewriting this review a third time as my thinking develops further.
September 2, 2009
This collection of essays shows the breadth and depth of the Reformed Faith. Although a response to Covenant, Justification and Pastoral Ministry, it is not only responsive but also constructive. There's not a bad essay in it and a few are outstanding. Leithart on covenant and Lusk on future justification are particularly well done.
February 5, 2024
I got this mainly for Rich Lusk's articles, and the book didn't disappoint.
October 3, 2024
A RESPONSE TO WESTMINSTER'S CRITIQUE OF SOME CURRENT VIEWS OF JUSTIFICATION
The Preface to this 2007 book states, “The present work is a targeted response to "Covenant, Justification, and Pastoral Ministry: Essays by the Faculty of Westminster Seminary California; CJPM”. [This book] does not profess to be a comprehensive response… but it does profess to address the leading lines of argument in the Westminster symposium, arguments representative of more widespread criticism of positions the contributors of the present volume embrace. We have chosen to interact with this work not because other works of similar conviction are unworthy but because CJPM so boldly articulates its position.
"The contributors to this volume do not profess to represent a single school of thought. Some contributors, for example, are sympathetic to the NPP [New Perspective on Paul] or FV [Federal Vision] and some are not. Instead, the contributors are united in their concern that the views expressed in CJPM not become identified as THE Reformed… paradigm for relations between faith and good works.” (Pg. xv-xvi)
One essayist suggests that CJPM “is misleading precisely because it misses the real heart of biblical Christianity by straining at some gnats and using categories that are strained by a very tight, and considerably debated, confessional position that is not PRECISELY biblical… What [CJPM] really does is lay out a case for correcting a number of perceived errors, mostly in other Reformed and evangelical theologies.” (Pg. 30) He adds, “several other authors of [CJPM] … should know that Reformed exegetes have openly raised these very same questions for several centuries now. The consensus they argue for simply does not exist, except in the circles of their own making.” (Pg. 35)
He concludes, “we are warranted to biblically distinguish between justification and sanctification… but we are also warranted to see more in biblical witness than these good Reformed men have actually seen… Put simply, those whom God justifies, or vindicates, He also changes… It may be helpful, at least for certain polemical reasons… to separate or distinguish justification and sanctification sharply… The problem with this is that we end up with a faith and a righteousness that have no direct link to obedience at all.” (Pg. 43)
In one of his essays, Norman Shepherd argues, “when Shepherd preaches the gospel he calls on sinners to believe in Jesus with a living and active faith… Even if we were to argue that James [ch. 2] it talking about justification in a demonstrative rather than in a forensic, soteric sense, we still have the question whether a faith that cannot save can nevertheless justify, and the answer is a resounding ‘no.’"
"What do works have to do with faith? The answer is that works demonstrate the genuineness of faith because of the indissoluble connection between faith and faithfulness to the commands of our Lord. You cannot really believe in Jesus without responding to his commands with obedience… Not only does Shepherd think that justifying faith is living and active faith, he also thinks that it is a penitent and obedient faith.” (Pg. 54-55)
Another essayist says, “The pure grace of the gospel is not threatened by a call to obedience. Indeed, the gospel, properly preached, understood, and embraced, demands AND PROMISES obedience… In the gospel, we find that God’s righteous requirements are not legalistic impositions, but gracious gifts he promises to work in us… The only kind of faith that justifies is a faith that lives---that is to say, a faith that loves, obeys, repents, calls, and seeks.
"Thus, faith can be SEEN… and DEMONSTRATED… it is embodied in outward action. True, at the moment of initial justification, faith has not yet done good works. But the kind of faith that lays hold of Christ for justification is a faith that will issue forth in obedience…” (Pg. 121-122)
Later, he adds, “there is NO TEXT in Scripture where imputation language is used to describe transfer of Christ’s righteousness from his account to ours. Instead Scripture says he IS our righteousness; thus, we are righteous IN HIM. Imputation simply means God counts us as we are in Christ.” (Pg. 131)
He states, “The CJPM authors repeatedly fail to define key terms, the definitions of which are EVERYTHING in the current debate. Surely the CJPM authors are aware of the fact that the meaning and (especially) the exegetical foundation of merit theology is hotly contested in the current (and historical) discussions. It is not something that can be taken for granted.” (Pg. 156)
The Preface to this 2007 book states, “The present work is a targeted response to "Covenant, Justification, and Pastoral Ministry: Essays by the Faculty of Westminster Seminary California; CJPM”. [This book] does not profess to be a comprehensive response… but it does profess to address the leading lines of argument in the Westminster symposium, arguments representative of more widespread criticism of positions the contributors of the present volume embrace. We have chosen to interact with this work not because other works of similar conviction are unworthy but because CJPM so boldly articulates its position.
"The contributors to this volume do not profess to represent a single school of thought. Some contributors, for example, are sympathetic to the NPP [New Perspective on Paul] or FV [Federal Vision] and some are not. Instead, the contributors are united in their concern that the views expressed in CJPM not become identified as THE Reformed… paradigm for relations between faith and good works.” (Pg. xv-xvi)
One essayist suggests that CJPM “is misleading precisely because it misses the real heart of biblical Christianity by straining at some gnats and using categories that are strained by a very tight, and considerably debated, confessional position that is not PRECISELY biblical… What [CJPM] really does is lay out a case for correcting a number of perceived errors, mostly in other Reformed and evangelical theologies.” (Pg. 30) He adds, “several other authors of [CJPM] … should know that Reformed exegetes have openly raised these very same questions for several centuries now. The consensus they argue for simply does not exist, except in the circles of their own making.” (Pg. 35)
He concludes, “we are warranted to biblically distinguish between justification and sanctification… but we are also warranted to see more in biblical witness than these good Reformed men have actually seen… Put simply, those whom God justifies, or vindicates, He also changes… It may be helpful, at least for certain polemical reasons… to separate or distinguish justification and sanctification sharply… The problem with this is that we end up with a faith and a righteousness that have no direct link to obedience at all.” (Pg. 43)
In one of his essays, Norman Shepherd argues, “when Shepherd preaches the gospel he calls on sinners to believe in Jesus with a living and active faith… Even if we were to argue that James [ch. 2] it talking about justification in a demonstrative rather than in a forensic, soteric sense, we still have the question whether a faith that cannot save can nevertheless justify, and the answer is a resounding ‘no.’"
"What do works have to do with faith? The answer is that works demonstrate the genuineness of faith because of the indissoluble connection between faith and faithfulness to the commands of our Lord. You cannot really believe in Jesus without responding to his commands with obedience… Not only does Shepherd think that justifying faith is living and active faith, he also thinks that it is a penitent and obedient faith.” (Pg. 54-55)
Another essayist says, “The pure grace of the gospel is not threatened by a call to obedience. Indeed, the gospel, properly preached, understood, and embraced, demands AND PROMISES obedience… In the gospel, we find that God’s righteous requirements are not legalistic impositions, but gracious gifts he promises to work in us… The only kind of faith that justifies is a faith that lives---that is to say, a faith that loves, obeys, repents, calls, and seeks.
"Thus, faith can be SEEN… and DEMONSTRATED… it is embodied in outward action. True, at the moment of initial justification, faith has not yet done good works. But the kind of faith that lays hold of Christ for justification is a faith that will issue forth in obedience…” (Pg. 121-122)
Later, he adds, “there is NO TEXT in Scripture where imputation language is used to describe transfer of Christ’s righteousness from his account to ours. Instead Scripture says he IS our righteousness; thus, we are righteous IN HIM. Imputation simply means God counts us as we are in Christ.” (Pg. 131)
He states, “The CJPM authors repeatedly fail to define key terms, the definitions of which are EVERYTHING in the current debate. Surely the CJPM authors are aware of the fact that the meaning and (especially) the exegetical foundation of merit theology is hotly contested in the current (and historical) discussions. It is not something that can be taken for granted.” (Pg. 156)
March 16, 2019
Another series of essays on the Federal Vision controversy
November 11, 2016
I recommend this book to anyone who would like to learn about more nuanced reformed positions on how perseverance, repentance and obedience fit into the process of salvation (justification, sanctification, etc).
bbq-steak-cookedThe book is quite dense and is a heavy read. It’s like going to a restaurant and ordering a 500g steak for dinner. Eating it is quite enjoyable. However eventually you will get full and might find it hard to finish and you’ll be digesting it for days afterward.
It contains extensive quotations from early and contemporary reformers. Without a doubt the contributors are competent scholars in the reformed faith and display a broad knowledge in their field.
The book demonstrates that within the reformed camp, there are many important aspects to faith, works and salvation that have not yet reached a consensus.
I found the book is a bit repetitive at times. This is to be expected because they are all responding in some way to a common argument about justification and works presented by CJPM.
http://thescripturesays.org/2016/10/2...
bbq-steak-cookedThe book is quite dense and is a heavy read. It’s like going to a restaurant and ordering a 500g steak for dinner. Eating it is quite enjoyable. However eventually you will get full and might find it hard to finish and you’ll be digesting it for days afterward.
It contains extensive quotations from early and contemporary reformers. Without a doubt the contributors are competent scholars in the reformed faith and display a broad knowledge in their field.
The book demonstrates that within the reformed camp, there are many important aspects to faith, works and salvation that have not yet reached a consensus.
I found the book is a bit repetitive at times. This is to be expected because they are all responding in some way to a common argument about justification and works presented by CJPM.
http://thescripturesays.org/2016/10/2...
December 13, 2013
Interesting, at times I thought I agree with their premise but wouldn't have said it that way. Other times I disagreed completely! Good read if you want to understand where some of these FV guys are coming from, but you need to read escondidos book they're responding too!
January 20, 2009
Marvellous and outstanding
December 19, 2012
One of my standard "go to" books on the Federal Vision and similar issues.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews