I have not blogged in a little while because I have been having discussions with some of my friends in Colorado Springs. It has been a sad, painful experience to say the least. Some, who formerly believed, now no longer do. Others seemed more and more confused on the gospel by the minute. They freely and quickly spout justification by faith and works.
It began with a group email conversation with former co-workers, one of whom attends an Emergent Church, or a church affiliated with the movement or whatever they want to call it. It is obvious the doctrine of justification by works must be taught or at least allowed to grow in that congregation. I protested and pointed to Scripture, but to my horror, other former co-workers jumped in siding with justification by works. These were members of mainline denominations, non-denominational churches and they all had no clue about the doctrine of justification. Upon hearing the traditional Protestant exegesis of James 2 and the belief that works flow from thanksgiving for salvation, they pronounced it “full of crap.” By the way, I used to work at a Christian ministry in Colorado Springs that had weekly chapels that apparently do not bother with salvation either.
It is one thing to know that evangelical churches out there are not doing a good job of proclaiming the gospel, but it is another to be hit right in the face with it. It was a good reminder to why I became a minister in the first place. It also reminded me not to take even the most basic doctrines for granted. The gospel must be proclaimed or people will revert to trusting in themselves. May God strengthen His church to boldly proclaim his message once more.
Your second point is an untrue statement, I am afraid. It took me all of about thirty seconds to find Augustine saying, “works proceed from faith” and teaching justification is of grace and not of works. Calvin himself, discussing the relation between faith and works, quotes Augustine, Chrysostom, and Bernard all denying works add to justification. Yes, Luther thought that James should be thrown out, but the rest of the Reformers simply used the analogy of Scripture and of faith to understand the Bible. And they were able to show their view to be the view of the Church Fathers. Hardly something that begins with Luther.
ReplyDeleteConsidering you think the supposed newness of Luther’s view of faith and works makes it repugnant, it is funny that you now argue in the rest of your points for a 1960’s view of Paul. I am afraid that you miss the flow of Paul’s argument in Romans. In chapter 2 he lays out principles of justice applied to those who look to the law, to their own works. The conclusion of this matter is that no one is righteous, no not one. To make Paul claim that justification is possible by works in Romans 2 and Galatians is to make his arguments descend into lunacy. Even more honest New Perspectives advocates like Sanders claim that Paul is inconsistent and the Bible is full of errors because elsewhere Paul argues for justification by faith alone.
Most of those arguing for the New Perspectives or Federal Vision admit to a belief in Theological Development similar to Philip Schaff. It helps explain their desire to follow a new system. I wonder, Fred, do you believe in Schaff’s Theological Development?
Fred,
ReplyDeleteI have not labeled you as outside the faith. We are just two guys having a conversation.
We could argue about who is a part of Protestantism and whether or not Geneva broke from Rome or Rome broke from the faith, but it seems pointless. I don’t think the exegesis of James has a sordid history from the beginning. I think Luther made a mistake that is not repeated by any other Reformer.
It appears we disagree about the nature of justification. You say it is continuous and on-going, while I would argue justification is forensic act of God. Feel free to correct me if I am misreading you. I think you have raised some good issues worthy of discussion. If you don’t mind, I think it would be better served under a new post or posts, which I will try to begin putting up tomorrow. We can continue the discussion under that post.
By the way, I would like to read that book by Lillback, do you have the title handy?