(no subject)

From: Robert Schneider (rjschn39@bellsouth.net)
Date: Thu May 02 2002 - 12:44:10 EDT

  • Next message: Don Perrett: "RE: Black Sea Flood"

    <3CD13C33.3E3D29F6@raex.com>
    Subject: Re: justification (was Re: Adam and Eve)
    Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 11:55:40 -0400
    Sender: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
    Precedence: bulk

    My further comment follows George's response below.

    Bob Schneider
       ----- Original Message -----=20
       From: george murphy=20
       To: Robert Schneider=20
       Cc: asa@calvin.edu=20
       Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 9:16 AM
       Subject: justification (was Re: Adam and Eve)

       Robert Schneider wrote:=20
         See my remark below:=20
         ----- Original Message -----=20
         From: "george murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>=20
         To: "JW Burgeson" <hoss_radbourne@hotmail.com>=20
         Cc: <rjschn39@bellsouth.net>; <asa@calvin.edu>=20
         Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 1:38 PM=20
         Subject: Re: Adam and Eve=20

    > JW Burgeson wrote:=20
    >=20
    > > Robert wrote: "If Christianity is the Way, it is a way of good =
    works."=20
    > >=20
    > > OPosted o my PC monitor I have a quotation=20
    > > from Leonardo Boff which reads:=20
    > >=20
    > > "The eternal destiny of human beings=20
    > > will be measured by how much or how little solidarity=20
    > > we have displayed with the hungry, the thirsty,=20
    > > the naked, and the oppressed.=20
    > > In the end, we will be judged in terms of love."=20
    >=20
    > This kind of thing is why the Reformation was necessary.=20
    > =
    George=20
    >=20

         It sounds as if Boff was commenting on Matt. 25:31-41. Did the =
    Reformers=20
         decide that that parable has nothing to do with the Christian life, =
    and that=20
         one is not to take literally the judgments given by the Son of Man? =
    Did=20
         they decide that one should only read Eph. 2:8-9 and ignore 10? Are =
    we to=20
         say, "Lord, Lord" and "well, I'm saved and that's all that matters" =
    like the=20
         Lutheran minister in the joke? I can't put my hands on my copy of =
    the Joint=20
         Roman Catholic-Lutheran Statement on Justification, but I believe =
    there is a=20
         statement in it to the effect that failure to show works of mercy to =
    others=20
         would call into question whether the person is really living a life =
    of faith=20
         and has been saved. George, do you have it handy and can look that =
    up and=20
         get the accurate wording?=20

              I cannot imagine that we ought not to take seriously the =
    message in the=20
         Parable of the Coming of the Son of Man, or the message in Eph. 2:10 =
    that=20
         God has prepared beforehand a way of good works to be our way of =
    life--and=20
         embark upon it. I agree with Boff that in the end, we will be =
    judged in=20
         terms of love. Thank God, we shall be shown mercy as well as =
    judgment.

               The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification does =
    not contain the statement you make.=20
       What it says (para.37) is:=20
               "We confess together that good works - a Christian life lived =
    in faith, hope, and love - follow justification and are its fruits." =
    When the justified live in Christ and act in the grace they receive, =
    they bring forth, in biblical terms, good fruit. Since Christians =
    struggle against sin their entire lives, this consequence of =
    justification is also for them an obligation they must fulfill. Thus =
    both Jesus and the apostolic Scriptures admonish Christians to bring =
    forth the works of love."=20
               & in fact Luther & the Lutheran tradition generally (in spite =
    of my earlier joke) have always taught that good works are a consequence =
    of living faith & are expected of Christians. What we have argued =
    strenuously against is the notion that good works themselves justify. & =
    in fact anyone can see the elementary error in the following argument:=20
               Those who have a living faith are saved.=20
               Those who have a living faith do good works.=20
               Therefore we are saved by doing good works.=20
               Good works are, if you will, a symptom of living faith, & one =
    can understand the parable of the last judgment in this sense. While =
    one has to be careful about harmonizing Paul & Matthew, it is really =
    necessary to read Mt.25:31-46 in the light of Romans & Galatians, not =
    the other way around.=20
       You can do justice to the Matthean text in that way, but if you =
    interpret the Matthew text as teaching salvation by works & then try to =
    make sense of Paul in that light you have to distort or mutilate Paul.=20
               Your rhetorical questions envision a straw man, an =
    understanding of "justification by faith" in which one is saved by mere =
    historic faith, assensus, or by reciting the Apostle's Creed. That is =
    of course a complete misreading. & this straw man is able to maintain =
    some semblance of life only because you ignore what I said earlier about =
    the relationship of Eph.2:10 to 8-9. I am not ignoring v.10 but am =
    understanding it in relationship with 8-9. You, on the other hand, seem =
    to want to downplay 8-9.=20
               I realize that this has a somewhat polemical tone but in this =
    case I won't apologize for that. There is good reason why the doctrine =
    of justification has been called articulus stantis et cadentis =
    ecclessiae.=20
                                                                              =
      Shalom,=20
                                                                              =
      George=20
       George L. Murphy=20
       http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/=20
       "The Science-Theology Interface"=20
               =20
       Bob's comment:

       Perhaps the statement I was trying to reproduce from memory came in =
    one of the accompanying documents to the final Joint Declaration.=20

       To repeat Paragraph 37 of the Joint Declaration:

       37.We confess together that good works - a Christian life lived in =
    faith, hope and love - follow justification and are its fruits. When the =
    justified live in Christ and act in the grace they receive, they bring =
    forth, in biblical terms, good fruit. Since Christians struggle against =
    sin their entire lives, this consequence of justification is also for =
    them an obligation they must fulfill. Thus both Jesus and the apostolic =
    Scriptures admonish Christians to bring forth the works of love.=20

            I wonder if George and I are in part talking past each other. I =
    have been emphasizing the notion in this statement that "this =
    consequence of justification is also for them an obligation they must =
    fulfill" but I seem to be misunderstood as saying that I think works can =
    justify, period. I don't believe that. Nor am I trying to interpret =
    Eph. 2:10 apart from 2:8-9, just the opposte: I am criticising those =
    who interpret 2:8-9 apart from 2:10. I think that walking the way of =
    good works is the heart of the Christian life and that it is simply =
    wrong to downplay them. So much of the polemic regarding justification =
    by faith, in my view, has resulted, perhaps as an unintended =
    consequence, in that very consequence. That is the point I am making.

           As for interpreting Matt. 25:31ff in the light of Romans and =
    Galatians and not the other way around, I reject as a hermeneutical =
    principle that the gospels should be interpreted as a matter of course =
    in the light of Paul's gospel. Sorry, the NT is multivalent, in my =
    view, and I don't think we should reduce its theology to Paul on any =
    question, including justification and salvation. While it is too =
    sweeping an assertion, I think there is some justice to John Dominick =
    Crossan's remark that "If you come to Jesus through Paul, you will =
    understand Jesus incorrectly; if you come to Paul through Jesus, you =
    will understand Paul differently." I find the remark fits so many of my =
    former students who always read Jesus through the lens of Paul, and so =
    often do understand Jesus incorrectly. Perhaps, George, what is going =
    on here, is that I am writing in terms of those experiences, and you are =
    writing in terms of your strong convictions about the Lutheran =
    interpretation of Paul. Do forgive me if I am misreading you. I =
    respect your convictions and don't mind a little polemic.

           If there is a misreading of my thinking, it is in your thinking =
    that I am treating faith as "assensus." I would rather say that it =
    seems at times that many Protestants treat "justification by faith" as =
    "assensus": all you have to do is believe that, and no works, please. =
    In fact, the notion of faith as "assensus" is a point of view that I =
    often challenge, because, while it is not absent from the notion of =
    "faith" in its broader sense, the primary and guiding meaning of "faith" =
    ("pistis") is trust. The question I think needs to be asked, and I =
    think it is a valid one, is that if good works are absent, and granted =
    that they are the fruit of faith, then where is the faith? or what kind =
    of "faith" is it? If a Christian believer has no sense of obligation to =
    do good works, where does the problem lie? In a lack of faith (trust)? =
    In a lack of responding to the kind of exhortation to the Christian life =
    that Eph. 2:10 gives? In a notion of faith as "assensus" to the =
    doctrine of justification by faith, as stated above? Elsewhere? =20

       A NOTE TO ALL: I'll wait a day in case anyone wants to reply to this, =
    but I'm am overwhelmed with other responsibilities right now and intend =
    to go off the list for a while.

       Bob Schneider



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 02 2002 - 12:44:11 EDT