When I get the chance I'd like to listen to the rest of this lecture on What Paul Might Say Back to Tom on Justification given at Wheaton College, from the perspective of a systematic theologian. HT: Revd Dr Michael Jensen.
Dr Vanhoozer encourages peace talks between New Perspectives and Protestants. The legacy of the Reformation is at stake: is the Reformation something we must recover or something that we must recover from? Wright claims to be upholding the Reformation, of course.
Showing posts with label New Perspective. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New Perspective. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Individual Salvation a heresy?
US presiding "Bishop" Katherine Jefferts has lost the plot big time. What's new?
If the Church of England Newspaper is to be believed, the so-called Bishop has said that "personal salvation is a heresy." This is stupid madness.
Now, I'm all for emphasising the corporate and cosmic aspects of salvation. Glorious.
But the thing is, an "us" or a "we" always includes "I"s and "we"s. There is no corporate salvation without individual salvation and no individual salvation without corporate salvation (assuming more than one person be saved!). It is the One and the Many, again, or the Holy Trinity, as some traditionalists like to call it.
If all Ms Jefferts meant is that salvation is never merely private and personal then I think we could all agree. Salvation is individual but not individualistic, personal but not personalised or private.
As Rev'd Dr Mark Thompson said: the Presiding Bishop's "ignorance of the Bible and Christian theology is nothing short of breathtaking." Perhaps she is deliberately distorting.
What a silly mess.
If the Church of England Newspaper is to be believed, the so-called Bishop has said that "personal salvation is a heresy." This is stupid madness.
Now, I'm all for emphasising the corporate and cosmic aspects of salvation. Glorious.
But the thing is, an "us" or a "we" always includes "I"s and "we"s. There is no corporate salvation without individual salvation and no individual salvation without corporate salvation (assuming more than one person be saved!). It is the One and the Many, again, or the Holy Trinity, as some traditionalists like to call it.
If all Ms Jefferts meant is that salvation is never merely private and personal then I think we could all agree. Salvation is individual but not individualistic, personal but not personalised or private.
As Rev'd Dr Mark Thompson said: the Presiding Bishop's "ignorance of the Bible and Christian theology is nothing short of breathtaking." Perhaps she is deliberately distorting.
What a silly mess.
Monday, June 29, 2009
The New Perspective on Paul
Some of the comments I made below regarding the so-called Federal Vision (FV) could equally be made about the so-called New Perspective on Paul (NPP) with which FV has sometimes been associated.
We must distinguish between E. P. Sanders, Jimmy Dunn, Tom Wright and others, and them and FVers.
I hold firmly to, preach and regularly defend the Reformation and post-Reformation "sola"s of salvation in Christ alone, by grace alone, through faith alone, to the glory of God alone and to sola Scriptura, but I think there are things to learn from NPP, not least a more corporate understanding of salvation.
Go for the corporate and you get the individual thrown in. Stick with the individual and you may never get the corporate.
We may also distinguish:
(1) What Paul meant
(2) What Luther said
And debate whether or not (2) necessarily follows from (1). I think it does! But Luther was not Paul.
There is some value in trying the read Paul as a Jew against the background of Second Temple Judaism with reference to Inter-testamental and 1st Century literarture. But in so doing, no one need sell out on the Reformation, go over to Rome or give up on the gospel.
We must distinguish between E. P. Sanders, Jimmy Dunn, Tom Wright and others, and them and FVers.
I hold firmly to, preach and regularly defend the Reformation and post-Reformation "sola"s of salvation in Christ alone, by grace alone, through faith alone, to the glory of God alone and to sola Scriptura, but I think there are things to learn from NPP, not least a more corporate understanding of salvation.
Go for the corporate and you get the individual thrown in. Stick with the individual and you may never get the corporate.
We may also distinguish:
(1) What Paul meant
(2) What Luther said
And debate whether or not (2) necessarily follows from (1). I think it does! But Luther was not Paul.
There is some value in trying the read Paul as a Jew against the background of Second Temple Judaism with reference to Inter-testamental and 1st Century literarture. But in so doing, no one need sell out on the Reformation, go over to Rome or give up on the gospel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
