Justification Research Papers - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

This paper was originally presented at the Oxford Patristics Conference in 2019, and is being published in Studia Patristica in 2021. It has been commonly held by Pauline scholars and theologians -- myself included! -- that the factitive... more

This paper was originally presented at the Oxford Patristics Conference in 2019, and is being published in Studia Patristica in 2021. It has been commonly held by Pauline scholars and theologians -- myself included! -- that the factitive understanding of justification (i.e. being "made righteous") originated with Augustine’s Latin misreading of the underlying Greek verb. This paper presents a brief overview of the the conception of justification in Greek and Latin patristic sources prior to Augustine, which surprisingly finds the factitive understanding to be widely attested in earlier centuries.

This chapter is a contribution to the philosophy of human rights and in particular to the vital issue of how to justify them. In the first and second part, I give a brief depiction of the nature of human rights and examine four different... more

This chapter is a contribution to the philosophy of human rights and in particular to the vital issue of how to justify them. In the first and second part, I give a brief depiction of the nature of human rights and examine four different approaches to justifying human rights: the natural rights approach, the divine rights approach, the fundamental interests approach, and the personal autonomy approach. The third part broadly outlines and examines a novel approach, which can be called the rational rights approach to human rights, and is based on a modified version of Kant’s notion of rationality and Rawls’ idea of the veil of ignorance. The final part defends the rational rights approach against some main objections.

On reproche souvent au référendum d'être très peu délibératif. En opposition avec la « force non coercitive de l'argument meilleur » qui habite l'idéal délibératif, le vote sanctionne un rapport de force : la loi du plus grand nombre. Le... more

On reproche souvent au référendum d'être très peu délibératif. En opposition avec la « force non coercitive de l'argument meilleur » qui habite l'idéal délibératif, le vote sanctionne un rapport de force : la loi du plus grand nombre. Le secret du vote n'incite pas non plus à une attitude délibérative. Cet article met en avant une pratique – le vote justifié – susceptible de rendre l'acte de vote et les référendums plus délibératifs en promouvant une attitude plus délibérative dans l'isoloir et en stimulant le débat public. Combinée à l'usage de mini-publics, elle ouvre des perspectives nouvelles à la participation démocratique référendaire.

I Januar 2016 vedtog Folketinget lovaendringen L87, som indebar en stramning af Udlaendingeloven. L87 indeholder 34 tiltag, der på en raekke områder begraenser og besvaerliggør flygtninges adgang til asyl i Danmark. Der herskede stor... more

I Januar 2016 vedtog Folketinget lovaendringen L87, som indebar en stramning af Udlaendingeloven. L87 indeholder 34 tiltag, der på en raekke områder begraenser og besvaerliggør flygtninges adgang til asyl i Danmark. Der herskede stor uenighed om retfaerdigheden af disse tiltag, og den offentlige debat om lovaendringen var ophedet og polariseret. Men hvilke moralske overbevisninger ligger til grund for de forskellige argumenter i debatten? Hvilke forestillinger om retfaerdighed bygger stemmerne i debatten deres udsagn på? Igennem en analyse af kronikker, debatindlæg og læserbreve i danske aviser om stramningen af Udlændingeloven med udgangspunkt i Luc Boltanski og Laurent Thévenots sociologiske teori om kritik og retfærdiggørelse, forsøger kapitlet at besvare dette spørgsmål og herved bidrage til at skabe overblik over de modsatrettede retfærdighedsforståelser, der præger Danmarks indre splittelse i spørgsmålene om flygtninge- og asylpolitik.

In this article I provide the first systematic investigation of the justification of Somali pirates. Drawing on a practice theoretical perspective I show how piracy is justified by a grand narrative that projects piracy as quasi-state... more

In this article I provide the first systematic investigation of the justification of Somali pirates. Drawing on a practice theoretical perspective I show how piracy is justified by a grand narrative that projects piracy as quasi-state practice of the protection of sovereignty against foreign intruders. Paying attention to narrative provides an explanation for the persistence of piracy and assists us in understanding the phenomenon. Relying on publicly available interviews with pirates, I deconstruct this grand narrative, show which elements are aligned and detail the different functions of the narrative in the light of the situation in which it is told. The article develops an alternative perspective on piracy based on the study of practice, narrative and situation which will also be useful to understand other forms of illicit or violent practices.

This is an author-approved manuscript (AAM) of the article published in Intertexts. Please contact the author with questions or requests. Like the unmapped globe, the individual has no borders until identity categories delineate... more

This chapter provides a descriptive and analytical examination of the requirement for lay jurors to give reasons for their decisions. In the 2010 case of Taxquet v. Belgium, the European Court of Human Right announced a new right for... more

John Calvin’s understanding of works-righteousness is more complex than is often recognized. While he denounces it in some instances, he affirms it in others. This study shows that Calvin affirms works-righteousness within the context... more

John Calvin’s understanding of works-righteousness is more complex than is often recognized. While he denounces it in some instances, he affirms it in others. This study shows that Calvin affirms works-righteousness within the context where faith-righteousness is already established, and that he even teaches a form of justification by works. Calvin ascribes not only a positive role to good works in relation to divine acceptance, but also soteriological value to believers’ good works. This study demonstrates such by exploring Calvin’s theological anthropology, his understanding of divine-human activity, his teaching on the nature of good works, and his understanding of divine grace and benevolence. It also addresses current debates in Calvin scholarship by exploring topics such as union with Christ, the relation between justification and sanctification, the relation between good works and divine acceptance, the role of good works in the Christian life, and the content of good works. https://www.vandenhoeck-ruprecht-verlage.com/themen-entdecken/theologie-und-religion/systematische-theologie-religionsphilosophie/56952/john-calvin-and-the-righteousness-of-works

El CO2 acumulado en la atmosfera ha ocasionado un desequilibrio en la entrada y la salida de radiación solar al planeta, esto ocasiona un calentamiento provocando un cambio climático, debido a esto surge una necesidad de reducir la... more

El CO2 acumulado en la atmosfera ha ocasionado un desequilibrio en la entrada y la salida de radiación solar al planeta, esto ocasiona un calentamiento provocando un cambio climático, debido a esto surge una necesidad de reducir la cantidad de

L’objectif de cet article est de clarifier les relations qu’entretiennent trois théories de la justification des croyances, toutes considérées comme des théories internalistes 1 : la conception déontique (le déontologisme), la conception... more

L’objectif de cet article est de clarifier les relations qu’entretiennent trois théories de la justification des croyances, toutes considérées comme des théories internalistes 1 : la conception déontique (le déontologisme), la conception accessibiliste (l’accessibilisme) et la conception mentaliste (le mentalisme). Nous expliquerons qu’en dépit de ce que l’on pourrait penser à première vue l’adoption de l’accessibilisme n’implique pas celle du mentalisme. Dans un second temps, nous montrerons pourquoi on ne peut être un défenseur de la conception déontique de la justification sans être également un partisan de l’accessibilisme.2 L’intérêt de ces démonstrations réside principalement dans le fait qu’elles nous permettent de délier —ou, au contraire d’unir— le sort de ces différentes conceptions de la justification vis- à-vis des objections qui leur sont adressées. Faire la preuve de l’autonomie du mentalisme vis- à-vis de l’accessibilisme, par exemple, c’est établir l’immunité du premier vis-à-vis des objections que l’on peut faire au second.
L’examen proprement dit des relations qui rattachent ces trois conceptions internalistes de la justification occupe les sections 4 et 5. Les sections 1, 2 et 3 sont des sections introductives. Elles sont, pour leur part, consacrées à la description de ces conceptions.

Most scholars have contended that early Catholic responses to the Reformers showed deep misunderstandings. In this essay, I examine More's reading of Luther, as can be gleaned through his subtle "Dialogue Concerning Heresies," and contend... more

Most scholars have contended that early Catholic responses to the Reformers showed deep misunderstandings. In this essay, I examine More's reading of Luther, as can be gleaned through his subtle "Dialogue Concerning Heresies," and contend that More substantially gets Luther right. I make one major qualification that only redounds to a further critique of Luther, while appreciating the loftiness of his vision that nonetheless founds his own misconceptions.

In a time characterized by wars, students and employees being shot at their desks, and corporate executives raiding pension funds, aggression has taken on considerable prominence in our society. Aggressive people capture our interest... more

In a time characterized by wars, students and employees being shot at their desks, and corporate executives raiding pension funds, aggression has taken on considerable prominence in our society. Aggressive people capture our interest because they are the ones who desire to harm others. Considerable progress has been made in recent years in understanding the aggressive personality. Psychology now has a much better idea of the defensive cognitive processes that aggressive people use to create a false sense of rationality for their aggressive acts. This knowledge of defensive processes was used to design a new measurement system to identify aggressive individuals. The new measurement system is based on a ‘‘cover’’ task in the form of an inductive reasoning problem. The use of reasoning to cover the measurement of aggression is made possible because aggressive people use the illusion of rational analyses to create defenses for their harming of others. The measurement system builds on this process by constructing answers to inductive reasoning problems that are grounded in the same defensive, self-illusionary thinking that aggressive people use to rationalize harming others. Aggressive people tend to be drawn to these answers (the answers in the previous sentence). This is because people who habitually engage in creating falsely rational defenses find reasoning based on the same types of protective thinking to be logically compelling.

Axel Honneth draws a distinction between three types of recognition: (1) love, (2) respect and (3) social esteem. In his The Struggle for Recognition, the recognition of cultural particularity is situated in the third sphere. It will here... more

Axel Honneth draws a distinction between three types of recognition: (1) love, (2) respect and (3) social esteem. In his The Struggle for Recognition, the recognition of cultural particularity is situated in the third sphere. It will here be argued that the logic of recognition of cultural identity also demands a non-evaluative recognition, namely a respect for difference. Difference-respect is formal because it is a recognition of the value of a particular culture not ‘‘for society’’ or ‘‘as such’’, but for the social group involved. Yet, although it is formal, difference-respect cannot be reduced to respect for personal autonomy and its preconditions, as Honneth wrongly suggests in Redistribution or Recognition? It is argued here that difference-respect is oriented towards another dimension of the person, namely social attachments. This kind of respect entails a separate register of formal recognition with a corresponding concept of personal identity and a parallel category of social disrespect. What morally justifies difference-respect from a recognition-theoretic approach is the practical relation-to-self that thus becomes possible, namely self-respect as a sense of belonging. The formal conception of the good life that Honneth articulates should include the insight that this sense of belonging is as much a necessary condition for the good life as is personal autonomy.

In this paper I will discuss the problem of justification in moral particularism. The first part is concerned with Jonathan Dancy's account of justification, which is a narrative one. To justify one's choice is to present a persuasive... more

In this paper I will discuss the problem of justification in moral particularism. The first part is concerned with Jonathan Dancy's account of justification, which is a narrative one. To justify one's choice is to present a persuasive description of the context in a narrative fashion, not to subordinate singular cases to universal rules. Since it dismisses arguments and employs persuasiveness, this view seems irrational, so the second part of my paper will consist of a personal reconstruction and reformulation of Dancy's account that will aim at defending particularist justification from being labeled as "irrational".

The standard view of reasons for action, commonly called the guise of the good thesis, is that they count in favor of an action by highlighting the good there is in performing it. In recent decades, attempts to reject the view have... more

The standard view of reasons for action, commonly called the guise of the good thesis, is that they count in favor of an action by highlighting the good there is in performing it. In recent decades, attempts to reject the view have focused largely on counter-examples. I argue that in order for a genuine alternative to the standard view of practical reasons to emerge, the view must meet two criteria, derived from the virtues of the standard view. I suggest that an explanation based view of practical reasons is the most viable alternative, and use two incomplete versions to develop lessons for a filled out view. I conclude by using these lessons to outline how a pragmatic account of explanation can serve as a genuine alternative to the standard view, going beyond the placeholders that have thus far overly focused on rejecting rather than replacing the status quo.

This study is a response to a colleague's paper comparing the published views on Justification by John Piper and Tom Wright. It outlines the key feature of Paul's doctrine before treating briefly the views of the two writers concerned,... more

This study is a response to a colleague's paper comparing the published views on Justification by John Piper and Tom Wright.
It outlines the key feature of Paul's doctrine before treating briefly the views of the two writers concerned, especially on those points where they differ significantly from Paul.

Biblical Theology Bulletin 41 (2011): 93

This paper provides a typology of the main interpretations of Romans 10:4 ("Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes") and argues for a teleological interpretation. On this view, Christ is the one in whom... more

This paper provides a typology of the main interpretations of Romans 10:4 ("Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes") and argues for a teleological interpretation. On this view, Christ is the one in whom the law's aim is realized, resulting in a legal status of righteousness for all who believe.

Free sample! Available from Brazos (http://bakerpublishinggroup.com/books/gospel-allegiance/395830) or Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1587434296/)
Is faith in Jesus enough for salvation? Perhaps, says Matthew Bates, but we're missing pieces of the gospel. The biblical gospel can never change. Yet our understanding of the gospel must change. The church needs an allegiance shift. Popular pastoral resources on the gospel are causing widespread confusion. Bates shows that the biblical gospel is different, fuller, and more beautiful than we have been led to believe. He explains that saving faith doesn't come through trust in Jesus's death on the cross alone but through allegiance to Christ the king. There is only one true gospel and one required response: allegiance. Bates ignited conversation with his successful and influential book Salvation by Allegiance Alone. Here he goes deeper while making his acclaimed teaching on salvation more accessible and experiential for believers who want to better understand and share the gospel. Gospel Allegiance includes a guide for further conversation, making it ideal for church groups, pastors, leaders, and students.

Analytic philosophy has seen a surge of interest in the relationship between reasons and responsibility. Against the bulk of this literature Emmanuel Levinas raises a cutting and comprehensive critique: The orthodox explanatory order,... more

Analytic philosophy has seen a surge of interest in the relationship between reasons and responsibility. Against the bulk of this literature Emmanuel Levinas raises a cutting and comprehensive critique: The orthodox explanatory order, which explains our responsibility to one another in terms of normative reasons, is backwards. For while such such reasons may explain what we are responsible for in a given case, they do not explain why we are responsible to begin with. Worse: we seem to have a standing responsibility to have reasons with which to justify our acts and attitudes. But the general responsibility to have justificatory reasons isn’t itself something reasons could justify. Levinas’s suggestion: Stop trying to explain interpersonal responsibility in terms of reasons. Start explaining reasons-giving as an expression of a responsibility-relation. We will then see we are not, first, responsible to others because of reason, or because there are we have reasons we ought to be. On the contrary: we are first responsible to others one another, and only this explains why and how we have reasons.
Levinas’s insistence on the primacy of responsibility with respect to reasons is clear. Less clear is his argument for this primacy. I will here attempt to re-construct Levinas’s argument, such that it is at once plausible in its own right and also plausibly his. The heart of the argument is a Strawson-inspired analysis of reasoning, consistent with the idea that, before and beneath the particular reasons we give, there is a prior responsibility-relation Levinas calls facing. I will conclude that it is plausible to suppose our responsiveness to reasons is what Levinas says it is: a disguised and derivative form of responsibility to persons-- and that Levinas’s unusual account of reasoning recommends an equally unusual answer to the question “What is a reason?”

Karl Popper lamented the prevalence of dogmatic argument in philosophy and commended the kind of critical argument that is found in the sciences. David Miller criticises the uncritical nature of so-called critical thinking because of its... more

Karl Popper lamented the prevalence of dogmatic argument in philosophy and commended the kind of critical argument that is found in the sciences. David Miller criticises the uncritical nature of so-called critical thinking because of its attachment to dogmatic arguments. I expound and clarify Popper’s distinction between critical and dogmatic arguments and the background to it. I criticise some errors in Miller’s discussion. I reaffirm the need for philosophers to eschew dogmatic arguments in favour of critical ones.

Few issues have been as divisive for the contemporary church as the doctrine of irre- sistible grace. In the debates surrounding this doctrine, there has been an overwhelm- ing tendency for theologies of grace to focus on the effects that... more

Few issues have been as divisive for the contemporary church as the doctrine of irre- sistible grace. In the debates surrounding this doctrine, there has been an overwhelm- ing tendency for theologies of grace to focus on the effects that grace has on particular human beings. Alongside this tendency, there has arisen a danger that we forget that God’s grace is God’s grace; that it is God’s free, personal, and beneficent disposition and action. In this article, I turn to Karl Barth to consider a way forward for interpreting the irresistible nature of grace that does not focus on its effectuality but on its theocentric, participative, and covenantal character.

This paper describes some of the most important theological distinctions of the so-called "New Perspective on Paul" drawn from the writings of three of its most well-known advocates: E. P. Sanders, James D. G. Dunn, and N. T. Wright.... more

This paper describes some of the most important theological distinctions of the so-called "New Perspective on Paul" drawn from the writings of three of its most well-known advocates: E. P. Sanders, James D. G. Dunn, and N. T. Wright. After this summary, each of these distinctives is critiqued, with special attention paid to how the "New Perspective" threatens the centrality of the traditional Reformation doctrine of justification.

Celem badań było wstępne zbadanie związków między deklarowaną częstością oszukiwania podczas sprawdzianów wiedzy a samooceną i tendencją do usprawiedliwiania zachowania. Badanie objęło 141 studentów, wykorzystano w nim skalę SES... more

Celem badań było wstępne zbadanie związków między deklarowaną częstością oszukiwania podczas sprawdzianów wiedzy a samooceną i tendencją do usprawiedliwiania zachowania. Badanie objęło 141 studentów, wykorzystano w nim skalę SES Rosenberga oraz własną ankietę i zadania w których studenci oceniali zachowania ściągającego studenta oraz przedstawiali swoją propozycję reakcji wykładowcy w sytuacji przyłapania studenta na ściąganiu. Wyniki badań nie potwierdziły związku pomiędzy samooceną a tendencją do usprawiedliwiania oszukiwania. Ze względu na ograniczenia dotyczące możliwości uogólniania wyników przeprowadzonych prób konieczne wydają się dalsze, pogłębione badania. Jest jednak możliwe, że ogólna samoocena nie odgrywa w procesach związanych z usprawiedliwianiem i samousprawiedliwianiem nieuczciwego zachowania kluczowej roli. Stwierdzono natomiast istotne statystycznie korelacje dotyczące związku między częstością ściągania a usprawiedliwianiem tego zachowania (wraz ze wzrostem częstości ściągania zwiększa się tendencja do usprawiedliwiania ściągania), oceną szkodliwości ściągania (wraz ze wzrostem częstości ściągania zmniejsza się ocena szkodliwości ściągania), dotkliwością sankcji proponowanych wobec ściągających (wraz ze wzrostem częstości ściągania zmniejsza się dotkliwość sankcji proponowanych dla osób przyłapanych na ściąganiu) oraz oceną własnej uczciwości (wraz ze wzrostem częstości ściągania obniża się samoocena w aspekcie związanym z uczciwością).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The research project was conducted in order to preliminarily probe into possible relations between the declared frequency of cheating during knowledge tests, self-esteem levels and the propensity to justify own behaviors. It covered 114 students, was based on Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale, the questionnaire developed by the author and tasks deployed for students to assess the behavior of those who cheated and to present the suggested response to be adopted by the lecturer who spotted cheating. Research results have not confirmed that there might be a relation between the self-esteem levels and the propensity to justify cheating. Considering the limited possibility of generalizing the results obtained on the said study sample, it would seem advisable to conduct further, more in-depth studies. However, it may also be possible that the general self-esteem levels do not impact significantly the process of justification and self-justification of dishonest behaviors. At the same time, the study has shown some statistically significant correlations between the frequency of cheating and the justification of such behavior (the more frequent the cheating behavior, the higher the propensity to justify the behavior), the assessment of cheating as harmful (the more frequent the cheating behavior, the less frequent assessment of cheating as harmful), the severity of sanctions suggested for individuals caught cheating, and the assessment of own honesty (the more frequent the cheating behavior, the lower levels of honesty self-assessments).

This select bibliography on the evangelical doctrine of salvation is a work in progress. It lists key works, mostly by evangelicals, that are generally representative of a broad cross-section of evangelicalism or traditional, conservative... more

This select bibliography on the evangelical doctrine of salvation is a work in progress. It lists key works, mostly by evangelicals, that are generally representative of a broad cross-section of evangelicalism or traditional, conservative Protestantism. This bibliography does not give attention to issues disputed within evangelicalism, such as debates between Arminians and Calvinists over predestination and election (though a few works here do have some relevance to such debates). Rather, the purpose here is to identify key publications that represent evangelical thinking about the doctrine of salvation in contrast to views taught in non-evangelical traditions in Christianity.

Recent theorizing suggests that the 4Ns -that is, the belief that eating meat is natural, normal, necessary, and nice -are common rationalizations people use to defend their choice of eating meat. However, such theorizing has yet to be... more

Recent theorizing suggests that the 4Ns -that is, the belief that eating meat is natural, normal, necessary, and nice -are common rationalizations people use to defend their choice of eating meat. However, such theorizing has yet to be subjected to empirical testing. Six studies were conducted on the 4Ns. Studies 1a and 1b demonstrated that the 4N classification captures the vast majority (83%-91%) of justifications people naturally offer in defense of eating meat. In Study 2, individuals who endorsed the 4Ns tended also to objectify (dementalize) animals and included fewer animals in their circle of moral concern, and this was true independent of social dominance orientation. Subsequent studies (Studies 3-5) showed that individuals who endorsed the 4Ns tend not to be motivated by ethical concerns when making food choices, are less involved in animal-welfare advocacy, less driven to restrict animal products from their diet, less proud of their animal-product decisions, tend to endorse Speciesist attitudes, tend to consume meat and animal products more frequently, and are highly committed to eating meat. Furthermore, omnivores who strongly endorsed the 4Ns tended to experience less guilt about their animal-product decisions, highlighting the guilt-alleviating function of the 4Ns.

SEKOLAH TINGGI FILSAFAT JAFFRAY MAKASSAR 2019 PENDAHULUAN Latar belakang masalah Alkitab ditulis oleh kurang lebih 40 pengarang dari latar belakang yang berbeda-beda, ditulis dalam kurun waktu lima belas abad, dalam tiga bahasa (Ibrani,... more

SEKOLAH TINGGI FILSAFAT JAFFRAY MAKASSAR 2019 PENDAHULUAN Latar belakang masalah Alkitab ditulis oleh kurang lebih 40 pengarang dari latar belakang yang berbeda-beda, ditulis dalam kurun waktu lima belas abad, dalam tiga bahasa (Ibrani, Aram dan Yunani), di tiga benua yang berlainan. 1 Walaupun demikian, tiap-tiap kitab tersebut memiliki kesesuaian satu sama lain, saling berpautan dan isinya berkembang menuju kepada satu kebenaran. 2 Faktafakta ini menunjukkan bahwa Alkitab bukan sekadar karya sastra kuno tetapi merupakan firman yang diilhamkan Allah. Namun demikian, tidak sedikit kritik yang diberikan pada Alkitab. Salah satunya adalah tuduhan bahwa doktrin justifikasi dalam surat Yakobus 2:14-26 bertentangan dengan teologi Paulus. Untuk itu dalam makalah ini penulis menyajikan pembahasan mengenai topik tersebut diatas, bukan saja untuk menunjukkan keserasian berita Alkitab tetapi juga mengedukasi pembaca (khususnya orang-orang percaya) tentang identitas sejati komunitas umat Allah.

Since the Reformation, James 2:24, ‘justified by works and not by faith alone’, has been the source of special controversy within an already contested epistle. But in the patristic and medieval period it was almost entirely unemployed and... more

Since the Reformation, James 2:24, ‘justified by works and not by faith
alone’, has been the source of special controversy within an already contested
epistle. But in the patristic and medieval period it was almost
entirely unemployed and ignored, despite the widespread use, both approvingly
and critically, of the expression sola fide. This article offers a
pre-Reformation reception history of James 2:24. It begins with Origen
and Augustine’s broader interpretation of James 2, then turns to the key
pre-Reformation references to James: the earliest references (fifth–seventh
century), Bede the Venerable (eighth), the Glossa Ordinaria (twelfth),
Nicholas of Gorran (thirteenth), John Wyclif and Ps-Jan Hus (fourteenth),
and Dionysius the Carthusian (fifteenth). Surprisingly, James 2:24 is at
times explicitly harmonized with the expression sola fide, and only rarely
used to critique it, because most read the Vulgate’s language in James
2:24 (non ex fide tantum) to refer solely to the need for later good
works. At the same time, ‘justified by works’ was generally interpreted as
referring to a confirmation or manifestation of justification until the scholastic
period, when we find the earliest instances of interpreting ‘justified
by works’ as a further justification. These results provide a theologically
rich historical perspective on the reception of James 2:24 with respect to
the development of sola fide and the scholastic interpretation of ‘justified
by works’ as a subsequent increase in justification.

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please... more

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

While there is no shortage of philosophical literature discussing knowledge by acquaintance, there is a surprising dearth of work about theories of epistemic justification based on direct acquaintance. This paper explores a basic... more

While there is no shortage of philosophical literature discussing knowledge by acquaintance, there is a surprising dearth of work about theories of epistemic justification based on direct acquaintance. This paper explores a basic framework for a thoroughly general account of epistemic justification by acquaintance. I argue that this approach to epistemic justification satisfies two importance aspects (objective and subjective) of justification. After sketching how the acquaintance approach can meet both objective and subjective aspects for epistemic justification, I will outline how this general account of justification by acquaintance can be applied to the analysis of justification for many types of beliefs (e.g., non-inferential, inferential, a priori, empirical justification, etc.). Finally, some of the objections to the acquaintance approach will be considered and answered.

The modern Protestant Christian trusts in personal faith rather than Christ for the impetus of justification. Reformed Theology has influenced Protestantism in defining both justification and faith in such a way as to implicitly teach... more

The modern Protestant Christian trusts in personal faith rather than Christ for the impetus of justification. Reformed Theology has influenced Protestantism in defining both justification and faith in such a way as to implicitly teach fideism. An understanding of this claim will be demonstrated through a survey of books on systematic theology, topical books relating to justification and faith, and commentaries on supporting proof texts. This paper will include the historical development of understanding the relationship of faith to justification. Focus on the language and expansion of the doctrine of justification by faith in John Calvin’s 1536 Institutes and his 1559 final version will be compared. Examining the major confessions and catechisms of Reformed Theology will demonstrate what is presently taught is consistent with the modern understanding of justification by trusting in one’s faith. Finally, this paper will articulate the doctrine of justification by faith in light of the research.