in discussing luther's doctrine of god, we focused a lot on bondage of the will, one of luther's writings that the professor actually doesn't like. in it, luther backs himself into a bit of a corner as he seeks to support the claim that "god's promises are trustworthy." in order to prove this, luther argues that god foresees everything by god's will, that is, god is noncontingent.
according to luther, in order for god's promises to be trustworthy, god must foreknow everything and if god foreknows everything, then (here luther falls into the double predestinarian trap, assuming that he knows god's hiddenness) god damns certain people and has mercy on others. for luther to state this makes luther a theologian of glory as he purports to reveal god's hiddenness.
the problem is that luther is pressing for certainty with respect to god. luther thinks that in order for god's promises to be trustworthy, god must be in total and complete control and therefore must be damning some and showing mercy to others. actually, god's promises can be trustworthy and we can trust in them and in god (luther's definition of faith) without certainty about god's foreknowledge and actions. as paul tillich would assert, doubt is a necessary part of faith. to state faith claims with certainty is to no longer have faith because faith is belief without certainty.
so, in luther's doctrine of god, the key part is that god's promises are trustworthy. the rest of it comes to be contradicted sooner or later (which is actually for the better for some of it). the best way for me to believe that god's promises are trustworthy is to go back to the bible. one of my favorite stories is the story of the israelites' exodus from egypt to the land of canaan. god hears god's people and rescues them.
as the israelites wander in the desert, god gives the ten commandments. in jewish numbering, the first commandment is god's fulfillment of god's promise. god promised land to abraham and to be god for his descendants and the first commandment is "i am the lord your god who brought you out of the land of egypt, out of the house of slavery." (i know, i've mentioned this before, but i really do love this!) god's first commandment is god fulfilling god's promise!!
this is only one of many times throughout the bible where god fulfills god's promise. this then informs my life as i work to trust in god's promises. since god is both hidden and revealed (revealed in christ, yet still hidden), the most i can ever do is trust.
i (and you, for that matter) don't need to work and reason my way to anything, i just need to trust that, as is written in john 3:17, "god did not send the son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him." god came to save. god came in human form to return us to right relationship with god's self. this frees me to live and to love in response to god's promises for me and my life, trusting that god is just, yet merciful.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Thursday, October 27, 2011
cross v. glory
a lot of luther's theology of the cross has to do with suffering. christ redeems us, but christ redeems us from death, not from suffering. in fact, for luther, suffering is to be expected. if we as a church are faithful to christ, then we as christ's body will suffer. jesus came to earth and in his faithfulness to god and his mission, he suffered to the point of death on a cross! god's relationship with humanity is important enough to god that god is willing to suffer humiliation and death to restore us to right relationship.
in luther's context as well as our context today, the church has become much more accepted and so the church actually has power in our cultures. this means that it is very easy--and very tempting--for the church to use or abuse that power both now and in luther's time. the church is tempted to view the world, not through the lens of christ, but through the lens of culture. instead of seeing christ in the "least" of these, the focus is on the powerful, the ones with the purse strings.
the question becomes: how is the body of christ being faithful to god as made known in christ? it is when we are faithful to christ that we will suffer in society. what does it mean to be faithful? where do we rest as a church when we are faithful to christ? what is our mission? how do we live as if the reign of god were already here, because, indeed, it is already a done deal.
the theology of the cross is, as paul stated, "god chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; god chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; god chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not, to reduce to nothing things that are, so that no one might boast in the presence of god." (1 cor. 1:27-29) god flipped our human understanding on its head, totally reorienting what is good and what is evil. this means that what we see as good (works, acts of kindness, etc.) really are not and what we see as bad (suffering, humbleness/humility, etc.) really are good.
a theology of glory is tempting. i certainly would like to do enough good to earn my way into heaven, to earn god's approval and love, but then there's the reality that i will never do enough good to earn my way. so, the theology of the cross is, indeed, the only option with hope. if i am to be in right relationship with god, i have to rely on god, recognizing that it is god's good and god's way of being that is good, not the surrounding culture's way.
in luther's context as well as our context today, the church has become much more accepted and so the church actually has power in our cultures. this means that it is very easy--and very tempting--for the church to use or abuse that power both now and in luther's time. the church is tempted to view the world, not through the lens of christ, but through the lens of culture. instead of seeing christ in the "least" of these, the focus is on the powerful, the ones with the purse strings.
the question becomes: how is the body of christ being faithful to god as made known in christ? it is when we are faithful to christ that we will suffer in society. what does it mean to be faithful? where do we rest as a church when we are faithful to christ? what is our mission? how do we live as if the reign of god were already here, because, indeed, it is already a done deal.
the theology of the cross is, as paul stated, "god chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; god chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; god chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not, to reduce to nothing things that are, so that no one might boast in the presence of god." (1 cor. 1:27-29) god flipped our human understanding on its head, totally reorienting what is good and what is evil. this means that what we see as good (works, acts of kindness, etc.) really are not and what we see as bad (suffering, humbleness/humility, etc.) really are good.
a theology of glory is tempting. i certainly would like to do enough good to earn my way into heaven, to earn god's approval and love, but then there's the reality that i will never do enough good to earn my way. so, the theology of the cross is, indeed, the only option with hope. if i am to be in right relationship with god, i have to rely on god, recognizing that it is god's good and god's way of being that is good, not the surrounding culture's way.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
law v. gospel...or is it all just grace?
so, according to martin luther sin separates us from god and separation from god is a killer (in the sense that living is being in right relationship with god and dying is being separated from god). the thing about sin is that we don't always know that we do it. it's easy to justify and excuse away our many sins. this is where law comes in. now, i differ a bit from luther on the purpose of the law. for luther, law is there so people know how we have sinned (a theological understanding) and to keep us from sinning more (a civil understanding).
in this day and age, it seems that the majority of us don't really need law to know that we are separated from god, to know that we have messed up. sin is everywhere we look and we are hurting far too well to be oblivious to it. throughout the bible, we read of god's grace coming before any judgment or law. the garden of eden exists far before humans eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. according to jewish numbering, the first of the ten commandments is "i am the lord your god who brought you out of the land of egypt, out of the house of slavery." only after those words of grace and salvation does the law come in.
so the purpose of the law is to help us understand the magnitude of god's grace rather than the magnitude of our sins and separation from god. this has a twofold implication:
1-it focuses on god's action rather than our (poor/in)action. god's already saved us from our sins. jesus took care of that. in this sense it further emphasizes that god is the acting agent, not humanity, in the relationship (which is something luther was pretty big on).
2-it leads to new life and renewal in relationship. instead of making us feel bad about ourselves and our hopeless situations of sin and destruction, it encourages us and propels us into joyful response to god's grace, renewing our relationship.
for luther law confronts humanity with the reality of sin, leading us to despair and death. then, when we realize that god is confronting us with the reality of sin, we distance ourselves from god. this allows for gospel to come in so that we might be in right relationship with God. luther basically separates them out into distinct categories/things, while i see law and gospel as god's means of grace. we receive god's grace and the good news is that we can't earn it and that it is huge!! that is conveyed by law (and gospel, because it is, indeed, good news).
so then the question (regardless of which side is taken) becomes: so what? what does that have to do with us now?
if we're taking luther's approach to law and gospel, then there seem to be quite a few politicians who might need to be told that taking funds from those in need to give to big companies is sin. or perhaps person who doesn't take no for an answer in a sexual encounter. but what about us "regular" folk? do i need to know every sin i commit? do i already know that i mess up...a lot? no, i already know that. but do i need to hear the good news that god has covered my bases for me? yes. is gospel the assurance that i can't be perfect and stressing out about it will not help? yes. is that also law? yes. so maybe it really does all just fit under grace.
in this day and age, it seems that the majority of us don't really need law to know that we are separated from god, to know that we have messed up. sin is everywhere we look and we are hurting far too well to be oblivious to it. throughout the bible, we read of god's grace coming before any judgment or law. the garden of eden exists far before humans eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. according to jewish numbering, the first of the ten commandments is "i am the lord your god who brought you out of the land of egypt, out of the house of slavery." only after those words of grace and salvation does the law come in.
so the purpose of the law is to help us understand the magnitude of god's grace rather than the magnitude of our sins and separation from god. this has a twofold implication:
1-it focuses on god's action rather than our (poor/in)action. god's already saved us from our sins. jesus took care of that. in this sense it further emphasizes that god is the acting agent, not humanity, in the relationship (which is something luther was pretty big on).
2-it leads to new life and renewal in relationship. instead of making us feel bad about ourselves and our hopeless situations of sin and destruction, it encourages us and propels us into joyful response to god's grace, renewing our relationship.
for luther law confronts humanity with the reality of sin, leading us to despair and death. then, when we realize that god is confronting us with the reality of sin, we distance ourselves from god. this allows for gospel to come in so that we might be in right relationship with God. luther basically separates them out into distinct categories/things, while i see law and gospel as god's means of grace. we receive god's grace and the good news is that we can't earn it and that it is huge!! that is conveyed by law (and gospel, because it is, indeed, good news).
so then the question (regardless of which side is taken) becomes: so what? what does that have to do with us now?
if we're taking luther's approach to law and gospel, then there seem to be quite a few politicians who might need to be told that taking funds from those in need to give to big companies is sin. or perhaps person who doesn't take no for an answer in a sexual encounter. but what about us "regular" folk? do i need to know every sin i commit? do i already know that i mess up...a lot? no, i already know that. but do i need to hear the good news that god has covered my bases for me? yes. is gospel the assurance that i can't be perfect and stressing out about it will not help? yes. is that also law? yes. so maybe it really does all just fit under grace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)