First of all, I would like to make an obvious remark. Through such an age old debate as Calvinism vs. Arminianism, I find that the issue is not a neglect or disregard for Scripture (for proponents on both sides of the debate seem to have a high view of Scripture and just like there are those that do not on either side), but an issue of interpretation. Moreover, it should be noted here that a high view of Scripture has not led to a consensus concerning the understanding of interpretation and meaning of relevant texts. This goes without saying, but there are considerable differences on “how” to interpret certain texts; however, the positive side of such a debate is that either persuasion feels that they must take texts and apply them to their life. In other words, what both seem to do is actually defining the Christian life as a result of God’s revelation.
With that said, let’s seek to unpack and define this issue. First, here’s a quick statement regarding the hinge of the Gospel: The Gospel refers paradigmatically to the death of Christ on the cross. This is the focal point of all of salvific history in that it (salvific history) is illuminated by the death of Jesus. It is a climatic and theologically episode that holds the Gospel together. However, such a paradigm still leaves us with questions to answer: What is it that Christ has done for us? What does it mean that we are justified? How does our understanding of Christ’s work on the cross help us understand what justification means? The questions on the meaning of the Atonement and Justification is one that I will visit more fully in future post, along with the question regarding their relationship, but hear I desire to focus on one question raised as a result of the paradigm above (and stated in the first paragraph): What role to we play in the Gospel?
From the paradigm above, if such the statement is true, then does the Gospel claim that Jesus is solely sufficient for our salvation? Is there nothing leftover to do for salvation? How do you interpret Christ’s claim on the cross that "it is finished"? What is finished? Then, if Christ has done “everything”, what is left for us to do? Do we add anything to salvation? What would you (Arminians) and you (Calvinists) say to such a statement? We are saved by grace alone through faith alone apart from works, but in what way is “faith” not a work? Or is it a work?
Lastly, have I perhaps stated with a wrong paradigm in seeking to answer these questions? Is there a better way of looking at and ascribing meaning to salvific history? How should be better define our role as a result of Christ’s role?
Well, since my first class for Theology of the Pentateuch was canceled, due to a huge snow storm, and my Greek homework is finished even though we will not have class tomorrow (again the storm), I am going to make an effort and give you some answers of these questions I’ve set forth.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I understand faith as being the gift and the enabling result of God choosing or electing and regenerating his people. Correct me if I wrong, but I believe that everyone is one the same page here. Therefore, the faith that one exercises is not a direct act they do (or apart from some other necessary or as I am prone to say sufficient cause), but our faith is exercised as a result of someone else, Jesus, and his direct fulfillment of the Law. In this way, we have fulfilled the Law; not directly but indirectly through the faithfulness of Jesus who is our representative.
Moreover, if God has enabled us to believe, trust, or have faith in him, and Jesus has done for us what we were unable to do on our own, then how is this act of faith seen as a work if we don’t do it on our own? That is, one cannot have faith unless God enables him to have faith. Highlighting our defectiveness, keep in mind our inability to fulfill the Law from the get go, and as a result God’s people needed the sacrificial system and ultimately Christ to completely satisfy God’s wrath and fulfill his requirements. Therefore, how is man now capable of doing something on their own or according to their own will that was never possible from the beginning?
Also, I’m not for sure here so correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe that it’s the work of Christ on the cross which enables us to believe, but the regeneration from the Father that does so. All that Christ did was completely, supremely, and sufficiently fulfill God’s requirements and satisfy his wrath. Again, is Christ’s work on the cross that has enabled someone to believe, and if so, then what or who enabled Abraham to believe?
At this point, I would like to share with you my interpretation of Jesus’ last words on the cross, “It is finished.” (Jn. 19:30). It seems that what Jesus finished was his fulfillment what the Scriptures had foretold he would do (v.28). However, what had Scripture foretold? Was it not to some degree that God’s promise to his people was to someday bring them back to him? How does God provide or fulfill such a promise? Was it not Jesus? Did not Jesus on some primary level accomplish such a task? As a result, Jesus has finished salvation. Therefore, I find Jesus’ words on the cross to refer to the very topic we have been discussing in this post: Nothing else needs to been done concerning salvation because Jesus has done it all. Therefore, it seems that just saying that Jesus has necessarily provided one with a choice does not fully address the implications of those words on the cross. Now this does not mean that we don’t do something, but we definitely don’t do it or are able to do it without something else being done first.
I hope I’ve given you something to work with as you think about my opinions on these matters. Am I correct in my thinking? What comments or suggestions do you have? How do you understanding Christ’s work and final saying on the cross in John’s gospel?