John Murray: Why is justification by faith alone?

John Murray brilliantly summarizes why justification is by faith alone:

There are apparent reasons why justification is by faith and by faith alone. First, it is altogether consonant with the fact that it is by grace. “Therefore it is of faith, in order that it might be according to grace” (Rom. 4:16). Faith and grace are wholly complementary. Second, faith is entirely congruous with the fact that the ground of justification is the righteousness of Christ. The specific quality of faith is that it receives and rests upon another, in this case Christ and his righteousness. No other grace, however important it may be in connection with salvation as a whole, has this as its specific and distinguishing quality. We are justified therefore by faith. Third, justification by faith and faith alone exemplifies the freeness and richness of the gospel of grace. If we were to be justified by works, in any degree or to any extent, then there would be no gospel at all. For what works of righteousness can a condemned, guilty and depraved sinner offer to God? That we are justified by faith advertises the grand article of the gospel of grace that we are not justified by works of law. Faith stands in antithesis to works; there can be no amalgam of these two (cf. Gal. 5:4). That we are justified by faith is what engenders hope in a convicted sinner’s heart. He knows he has nothing to offer. And this truth assures him that he needs nothing to offer, yea, it assures him that it is an abomination to God to presume to offer. We are justified by faith and therefore simply by entrustment of ourselves, in all our dismal hopelessness, to the Saviour whose righteousness is undefiled and undefilable. Justification by faith alone lies at the heart of the gospel and it is the article that makes the lame man leap as an hart and the tongue of the dumb sing. Justification is that by which grace reigns through righteousness unto eternal life; it is for the believer alone and it is for the believer by faith alone. It is the righteousness of God from faith to faith (Rom. 1:17; cf. 3:22). (John Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955), 130-131; quoted by Brian Schwertley in his refutation of the Auburn Avenue theology)

Gordon Clark: Justification is acquittal (pardon) and acceptance (active favor) before God

Gordon Clark explains that justification is more than pardon or acquittal; it involves acceptance or adoption by God, a declaration that we are not merely "innocent" but, indeed, "righteous" by the imputation of Christ's righteousness through faith:

It has been necessary to insist that justification is a judicial act of acquittal, for only so can salvation be by grace. However, the ordinary idea of acquittal does not exhaust the Biblical concept of justification. Section I also says that God pardons the sins of those who are justified and accepts their persons as righteous. Perhaps the idea of pardon needs no explanation, for its meaning is easily understood; but the idea of acceptance needs to be distinguished from both pardon and acquittal. The governor of a state may pardon a convicted official without restoring him to favor and to his previous office. Appointments to office, if honest, would depend on the future conduct of the pardoned man. But it is otherwise with Biblical justification; for if favor with God depended on our future conduct, eventual salvation would be based on our works—clearly contrary to Scripture—and we could never have an assurance of success. When our position depends on Christ’s merits instead of our own, we need have no fear. [Gordon Clark, What Do Presbyterians Believe? The Westminster Confession Yesterday and Today (Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1965), 124-125; quoted by Brian Schwertley in his refutation of the Auburn Avenue theology]

John Calvin: Keeping the law perfectly is impossible

The following helps to demonstrate, in the words of Brian Schwertley, that "Both Calvin and Luther believed that personal obedience has nothing to do with our justification":

With regard to the Ten Commandments we ought likewise to heed Paul’s warning: “Christ is the end of the law unto salvation to every believer” [Rom. 10:4p.]. Another: Christ is the Spirit [II Cor. 3:17] who quickens the letter that of itself is death-dealing [II Cor. 3:6]. By the former statement he means that righteousness is taught in vain by the commandments until Christ confers it by free imputation and by the Spirit of regeneration. For this reason, Paul justly calls Christ the fulfillment or end of the law. For it would be of no value to know what God demands of us if Christ did not succor those laboring and oppressed under its intolerable yoke and burden. Elsewhere he teaches that ‘the law was put forward because of transgressions’ [Gal. 3:19]; that is, in order to humble men, having convinced them of their own condemnation…..At this point the feebleness of the law shows itself. Because observance of the law is found in none of us, we are excluded from the promises of life, and fall back into the mere curse. I am telling not only what happens but what must happen. For since the teaching of the law is far above human capacity, a man may indeed view from afar above human capacity, a man may indeed view from afar the proffered promises, yet he cannot derive any benefit from them. Therefore this thing alone remains: that from the goodness of the promises he should the better judge his own misery, while with the hope of salvation cut off he thinks himself threatened with certain death…We have said that the observance of the law is impossible. (John T. McNeill, ed. Ford Lewis Battles, trans. of Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion [Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960], 1:351-353; quoted by Brian Schwertley in his refutation of the Auburn Avenue theology)

Brian Schwertley: Faith is self-renouncing and must look to Christ alone and therefore be alone, apart from works, regarding justification before God

Brian Schwertley explains why faith alone is so important -- because faith cannot receive and rest in Christ alone unless it is self-renouncing, that is, unless it rejects all attempts at inherent righteousness through good (i.e., covenantally faithful or law-keeping) deeds:

Paul teaches that only faith in Christ obtains the perfect righteousness we need for salvation because faith rests on and receives another—Christ and His righteousness. Saving faith is self-renouncing because it looks away from ourselves and our own works and obtains everything in Jesus. Therefore, faith, as it relates to our justification before God, must stand alone. If the faith that justifies is not held in a strict isolation from our own works then it is not a self-renouncing faith. This means that our good works which come after faith must always be viewed as fruits of faith, as demonstrative of saving faith. (Brian Schwertley, A Refutation of the Auburn Avenue's Rejection of Justification by Faith Alone)

Thomas Boston: Law-keeping will never avail as a ground for justifying righteousness before God

Thomas Boston explains, as summarized by Brian Schwertley, "why personal law-keeping or covenant faithfulness can have nothing to do with our justification":

1. Thy obedience must be perfect, in respect of the principle of it; that is, thy soul, the principle of action, must be perfectly pure, and altogether without sin. For the law requires all moral perfection; not only actual, but habitual: and so condemns original sin; impurity of nature as well as of actions. Now, if thou canst bring this to pass, thou shalt be able to answer that question of Solomon’s, so as never one of Adam’s posterity could yet answer it, ‘Who can say, I have made my heart clean?’ Prov. xx. 9. But if thou canst not, the very want of this perfection is sin, and so lays thee open to the curse, and cuts thee off from life. Yea, it makes all thine actions, even thy best actions, sinful: ‘For who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?’ Job xiv. 4. And dost thou think by sin, to help thyself out of sin and misery? 2. Thy obedience must also be perfect in parts. It must be as broad as the whole law of God: if thou lackest one thing thou art undone; for the law denounces the curse on him that continues not in every thing written therein, Gal 3:10. Thou must give internal and external obedience to the whole law; keep all the commands in heart and life. If thou breakest any one of them, that will ensure thy ruin. A vain thought, or idle word, will still shut thee up under the curse. 3. It must be perfect in respect of degrees; as was the obedience of Adam, while he stood in his innocence. This the law requires, and will accept of no less, Matt. Xxii. 37, ‘thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.’ If one degree of that love, required by the law, be wanting; if each part of thy obedience be not brought up to the greatest height commanded; that want is a breach of the law, and so leaves then still under the curse. A man may bring as many buckets of water to a house that is on fire, as he is able to carry; and yet it may be consumed, and will be so, if he bring not as many as will quench the fire. Even so, although thou shouldest do what thou art able, in keeping the commands, if thou fail in the least degree of obedience, which the law enjoins, thou art certainly ruined for ever; unless thou take hold of Christ, renouncing all thy righteousness, as filthy rags. See Rom. x. 5; Gal. iii. 10. Lastly, It must be perpetual, as the man Christ’s obedience was, who always did the things which pleased the Father; for the tenor of the law is, “Cursed is he that continueth not in all things written in the law, to do them.” Hence, though Adam’s obedience was, for awhile, absolutely perfect; yet because at length he tripped in one point, viz. in eating the forbidden fruit, he fell under the curse of the law. If a man were to live a dutiful subject to his prince, till the close of his days, and then conspire against him, he must die for his treason. Even so, though thou shouldst all the time of thy life, live in perfect obedience to the law of God, and yet at the hour of death only entertain a vain thought, or pronounce an idle word, that idle word, or vain thought, would blot out all thy former righteousness, and ruin thee; namely, in this way in which thou art seeking to recover thyself.

Now such is the obedience which thou must perform, if thou wouldst recover thyself in the way of the law. (Thomas Boston, Human Nature in Its Fourfold State [Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication, n.d.], 120-121; quoted by Brian Schwertley in his refutation of the Auburn Avenue theology)

William Hendricksen on the purpose of God's Law: To Show Man His Inability

William Hendricksen asserts that the Law was given to set forth God's unchanging, perfect requirements that must be fulfilled in exhaustive detail -- ultimately, to demonstrate to man his total inability and his absolute need to rely upon Christ and His righteousness alone for right standing before God:

Now what was really the purpose of God’s law? God gave his law in order that man, by nature a child of wrath, and thus lying under the curse (Gal. 3:13), as definitely declared in Deut. 27:26; John 3:36; Eph. 3:2, might be reminded not only of his unchanged obligation to live in perfect harmony with this law (Lev. 19:2), but also of his total inability to fulfill this obligation (Rom. 7:24). Thus this law would serve as a custodian to conduct the sinner to Christ (Gal. 3:24; cf. Rom. 7:25), in order that, having been saved by grace, he might, in principle, live the life of gratitude. That life is one of freedom in harmony with God’s law (Gal. 5:13, 14). However, the Judaizers were perverting this true purpose of the law. They were relying on law-works as a means of salvation. On that basis they would fail forever, and Deut. 27:26, when interpreted in that framework, pronounced God’s heavy and unmitigated curse upon them; yes, curse, not blessing. The law condemns, works wrath (Rom. 4:15; 5:16, 18). (William Hendricksen, Galatians and Ephesians (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1967, 68), 1:126-127; quoted by Brian Schwertley in his refutation of the Auburn Avenue theology).

John Stott: We only have two options for righteous standing before God

John Stott explains the two options -- our righteousness, which is like filthy rags; or God's imputed righteousness -- for the ground upon which to stand before Him:

All human beings, who know that God is righteous and they are not (since ‘there is no-one righteous, not even one’, 3:10), naturally look around for a righteousness which might fit them to stand in God’s presence. There are only two possible options before us. The first is to attempt to build or establish our own righteousness, by our good works and religious observances. But this is doomed to failure, since in God’s sight even ‘all our righteous acts are like filthy rags’. The other way is to submit to God’s righteousness by receiving it from him as a free gift through faith in Jesus Christ. In verses 5-6 Paul calls the first the righteousness that is by the law and the second the righteousness that is by faith. (John Stott, Romans: God’s Good News for the World (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1994), 281; quoted by Brian Schwertley in his refutation of the Auburn Avenue theology)