How many good deeds is enough?

[Drew]

Please explain all the just people in the Old Testament if the purpose of the Law was to show man as condemned and damned before God. The Law was given with the understanding that it COULD be obeyed! Not to show how far man is below God.

Well, this may be the first time that I will disagree with you my distinguished fellow hockey fan. Well, perhaps, I am not sure.

Shamelessly stealing the thoughts of NT Wright, I will suggest that the law was given in order to "shine a light on human sin", concentrate all of humanity's sin onto the Jews, and then pass it onto Jesus shoulders, who alone bore the sin of all the world. Because of Adam's disobedience, human nature was fundamentally changed in such a way that obeying the law, at least to some reasonable degree of compliance, was rendered essentially impossible.

Having said this, I am not sure how what I have said is relevant to the subject at hand. Even though I think the primary function of the law is as I have described, I see no reason to conclude that the moral aspects of it are not still binding on us, and I still think that a person who makes no (or an insufficient) effort to keep the law (the moral elements, not the "ceremonial" elements) is in danger of the fire. I have always thought it rather odd that a person under grace would not see the law as a good thing, a standard to be pursued, even if he believes that his inability to keep it in its entirety has been covered by grace. If you do not try to keep the law, are you really under grace? Perhaps you never were or you have slipped away.

 

[francisdesales]

Well, this may be the first time that I will disagree with you my distinguished fellow hockey fan. Well, perhaps, I am not sure.

LOL! We'll see!

Shamelessly stealing the thoughts of NT Wright, I will suggest that the law was given in order to "shine a light on human sin", concentrate all of humanity's sin onto the Jews, and then pass it onto Jesus shoulders, who alone bore the sin of all the world. Because of Adam's disobedience, human nature was fundamentally changed in such a way that obeying the law, at least to some reasonable degree of compliance, was rendered essentially impossible.

I do not like arguing against Mr. Wright, he is highly respected and I admire some of his writings. However, I cannot help but think he is overly influenced by the classic Lutheran paradigm that man is a pile of manure. This anthropology, while it certainly seems to exist in some of the Psalms, is not the overriding view that the Bible has regarding mankind. Sure, we are sinners, we cannot help but sin, we are wounded... But the Law's purpose was to show man that he couldn't obey God? That would be strange and in contradiction to the many places where the Bible says man CAN obey God - with God's help. I would consider this purpose as secondary to the REAL purpose of the Law - to prepare men for the Law of Love.

I ask you to consider glancing at Psalm 119 and the praise of God's Law. After reading it, do you think that the sacred author thought that man COULD NOT obey God's Law, or that the just man considered it as something that showed how useless and a sinner he was? While this view has its proponents in Western Christianity, it is unheard of in the East, as far as I know from my experience with Eastern Orthodox Christians. Patristic thought in the East had a pretty high view of mankind. Thus, I believe this is more a Western phenomenom, one that probably took birth with Anselm's Atonement view. That is my hypothesis, although it is Luther who really pushed the issue.

Having said this, I am not sure how what I have said is relevant to the subject at hand. Even though I think the primary function of the law is as I have described, I see no reason to conclude that the moral aspects of it are not still binding on us, and I still think that a person who makes no (or an insufficient) effort to keep the law (the moral elements, not the "ceremonial" elements) is in danger of the fire. I have always thought it rather odd that a person under grace would not see the law as a good thing, a standard to be pursued, even if he believes that his inability to keep it in its entirety has been covered by grace. If you do not try to keep the law, are you really under grace? Perhaps you never were or you have slipped away.

Paul is adamant that the Law continues, that Christ did NOT come to destroy it, but to fulfill it. I think if we look at Romans 2, we might gain some insight here on the subject. Consider that God gave PAGANS the Law, written on their hearts. The written Law, given by Moses, was to be obeyed. Now, Paul does have negative things to say about the WRITTEN Law, but not the Law written on the heart. Jeremiah and Ezekiel also speak about this Law that would be written on our hearts, a new covenant. God's Spirit, then, is to be obeyed! We obey the Law, the Spirit, written on our hearts. At that point, we become spiritual Jews, circumcised in the heart.

Thus, the written Law was a teacher for the Jews so they would know God's will in a more decisive way, rather than relying on one's own personal conscience (clouded as it was by original sin). Through this Law, as Psalms 119 proposes, we please God. Through faith that was available even to pagans, but more formally, to the Jews, so as to form a people as a beacon to the world, one that would bring forth a savior. Thus, in my humble opinion, the Law was a preparation for the coming Messiah, a "proto-evangelium" that prepared mankind for the coming of the ultimate revelation of God's Will - Jesus Christ.

Jesus never mentions that the Law's purpose is to show man how lost he is. He tells us that this Old Covenant is NOT to be abrogated, not one dot. Thus, there is ANOTHER purpose, since it remains in effect even after Christ's death and resurrection.

Go Sabres!

Regards

 

[Guest]

Yes! Maybe you are starting to see it. God MAKES us righteous (positional) when we BELIEVE in Jesus Christ.

I have always been taught that we are made righteous, not just merely imputed righteousness, OR that Christ's righteousness covered me in such a way that I had no righteousness at all, even in Christ. The idea of "positional" righteousness I am not familiar with because we are either righteous or not. There is not two separate distinctions of righteousness. "Positional" seems to be an unnecessary adjective.

Regards

You see 'positional' as unnecessary and I see Praying to Mary as unnecessary - I guess we are even then.

 

[francisdesales]

You see 'positional' as unnecessary and I see Praying to Mary as unnecessary - I guess we are even then.

Well, I would like an explanation of the difference between "positional" and whatever other justification you have in mind. I am not familiar with this concept of different levels of justification. I understand "initial" and "final", and we can be pleasing or not pleasing to God in between, but what do you mean by it?

Regards

 

[Guest]

You see 'positional' as unnecessary and I see Praying to Mary as unnecessary - I guess we are even then.

Well, I would like an explanation of the difference between "positional" and whatever other justification you have in mind. I am not familiar with this concept of different levels of justification. I understand "initial" and "final", and we can be pleasing or not pleasing to God in between, but what do you mean by it?

Regards

As I have said before, there is a positional justification when we accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour. His righteousness is imputed onto us. Throughour our lives, Christ work in us is called 'sanctification' - becoming more and more like Christ - until that day when Christ returns to judge the living and the dead.

I am an amillielanist - so I believe there is one "rapture" of the living and the dead - one judgement: heaven or hell. But this is a side discussion.

When we get to heaven (depending on when or how you believe we get there) we will be resurrected with our glorfied bodies (final justification) And which point our 'works or deed' on earth will pass through the fire. Those thare are deemed good will be purified into gems/crowns of glory. those deemed bad will be burned away into ash. We will place the gems and crowns of glory at the feet of Christ and worship Him and God.

Somewhat simplied, but I really detest long posts. :o

 

[francisdesales]

As I have said before, there is a positional justification when we accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour. His righteousness is imputed onto us. Throughour our lives, Christ work in us is called 'sanctification' - becoming more and more like Christ - until that day when Christ returns to judge the living and the dead.

OK, we don't use that term, but it sounds familiar...

Can we lose this justification? Are we still "positionally justified" if we murder, or the other crimes that Paul describes in such places as 1 Cor 6:9-10? Are we "once justified, always justified"? That is my concern.

Catholics believe in a specific judgment upon our death and a general judgment at the end of time. The latter is not going to be different than the first, but it is to show all that God is indeed just.

When we get to heaven (depending on when or how you believe we get there) we will be resurrected with our glorfied bodies (final justification) And which point our 'works or deed' on earth will pass through the fire. Those thare are deemed good will be purified into gems/crowns of glory. those deemed bad will be burned away into ash. We will place the gems and crowns of glory at the feet of Christ and worship Him and God.

That's pretty much what we believe, upon preliminary examination. God will examine our lives, our deeds of love under the influence of Christ or under the influence of our selves without Christ - and the determination will then be made where our eternal destiny will be. However, if we remain in Christ, we can have confidence that we will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The Good News is that if we repent and transform our lives under the guidance of the Spirit, God has promised us heaven.

Regards