This volume advocates that “a doctrine of justification by faith was preserved and propagated in the second century, despite the near ubiquitous claim that those in the second century made a decisive turn to works righteousness” (183). In demonstration of this conclusion, Arnold reviews a handful of Christian literary sources, including 1 Clement, the letters of Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Diognetus, Odes of Solomon, and Justin's Dialogue with Trypho. He indicates how these works reflect the study's thesis against the position that the Apostle Paul's “faith righteousness” view was quickly diverted by subsequent sub-apostolic Christian believers in favor of “works righteousness.” Arnold provides a quick analysis of how this position has developed within early Christian studies in recent decades, offering a brief review of scholarly literature during the last sixty years, followed by a cautious investigation of his chosen texts. The published volume is a revision of his 2013 PhD dissertation, “Justification One Hundred Years after Paul.” Directed by Michael Haykin at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, that manuscript is readily accessible online at https://repository.sbts.edu/handle/10392/4527.

In his opening consideration of the status questionis, Arnold first engages the 1959 study of T. F. Torrance, whose slim, ground-breaking volume argued that Paul's original doctrine of grace was soon lost to the next generation of his followers. Arnold finds this thesis to be highly overstated and, giving a nod to ensuing studies by Thomas Oden, Nick Needham, D. H. Williams, Eric Osborn, and Thomas Scheck, he suggests how it has misled scholarship during recent research. He suitably identifies the limitations of Torrance's vision and investigation, which itself is chiefly reliant on evidence drawn from the apostolic fathers. All this is stated rather quickly by way of introduction and is followed thereafter (18) by the bulk of the volume, which is an examination of his ancient sources contoured to dismiss Torrance's argument as wholly inadequate. The review of literature itself finds firm footing, introducing what may be known about each author and the view of justification expressed by that source. With respect to format, Arnold essentially mimics the model first offered by Torrance himself. While Arnold makes limited use of non-English speaking commentators, he satisfactorily reviews his cadre of selections with appropriate comments on each work. By way of argument, one might find him to be essentially effective in his aim to refute Torrance, his approach being undertaken with care. His conclusions will primarily draw criticism mostly by those who do not endorse his own view of “righteousness/justification.”

With this having been said, Arnold's study might benefit from several further considerations. Firstly, he takes little time to establish what “righteousness/justification” actually meant for Paul (see, for example, Romans 6), whose original views are tainted in later doctrine by a certain Western orientation toward categories of standards and law that likely betray the apostle's more Semitic “verbal” consideration of faith as a dynamic (versus static) activity. Indeed, for Paul the issue is principally about “right relationship” to God. In this context, later Reformation attempts to differentiate between faith and works as demarcations of what “righteousness/justification” was in early Christian literature often ring false and force an unnecessary dichotomy into Pauline thought. The apostle himself clearly considers “faith” and “obedience” to be one and the same (cf. Rom 1:8 and 16:19). In his mind, faith and works are in fact two sides of the same coin. They can hardly be divided.

Second, Arnold's choice of second-century literature is perhaps a bit limited, following basically Torrance's own sources from the apostolic fathers and supplemented by additional entries from the Odes and Justin's writing. His study is a noble effort to explain how such authors demonstrate his case, his choices doubtless serving as manageable items in terms of the nature of his investigation. One wonders, though, why further sources with more contentious assessments are not included; texts such as Barnabas, whose author observes “righteousness” to be one of the so-called “doctrines of the Lord” (1.6), as well as Shepherd of Hermas, which contains numerous allusions to “righteousness/justification” that permeate the lengthy presentation of the narrative. These and other texts, such as Didache, 2 Clement, and Polycarp, were included by Torrance yet are omitted by Arnold. One might imagine their inclusion in the earlier study would necessarily demand reconsideration here, if for no other reason than to provide a platform by which to attack the earlier thesis. Beyond this, numerous other authors from the second century are available for review—most noteworthy of which is no less than Irenaeus—but likely an expansion of literature would provide too broad a framework for such a limited study.

In conclusion, these considerations are by no means meant to be fatal detractions to Arnold's perspective. He has masterfully corrected Torrance's misleading suggestion and offers what might be seen as the leading statement on the topic to date. Indeed, his exploration is a clear advancement with respect to comparative research in the field. At the same time, in certain respects Arnold may similarly exaggerate his case on behalf of “justification by faith” in the early church contra Torrance, resulting in further misunderstanding of that doctrine as originally conceived both within Paul's own framework and ultimately in later Christianity's own vision. This is for each reader to decide, of course, which likely will be guided by already entrenched perspectives on the topic as determined largely by religious background and knowledge of ecclesiastical history and theology. In sum, Arnold's work is a worthy exercise and it is welcomed. At the same time, there no doubt remains much to be done.