. And the second will be about Tom Wright's new book, Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision
. Last week's post about the New Perspective sets some of the context of Tom Wright's debate with John Piper, who has been interviewed about it here. Here is how John Piper defines justification in that interview: "In the New Testament, justification is the moment or the event when you
put your faith in Jesus Christ and at that moment God is no longer
against you--he's for you, and he counts you as acceptable, forgiven,
righteous, obedient because of your union with Christ. You are
perfectly acceptable to God and he is totally on your side."
Piper goes on: "Justification, I believe, is the way the Bible describes that moment..
Justification is the act by which God says, "I no longer count you
guilty. I count you as righteous with the righteousness of my son."
That's a saving moment, clustered with the call. Wright sees our call
as the only decisive saving moment. And I want to put with the call the
work of God in justifying me."
And: "I think the New Perspective on Paul and other kinds of theologies flowing from it are giving God only part of the glory he deserves. They are missing the glory of Christ as our substitute obedience and our substitute sacrifice and punishment, and the glory that on the basis of those two things, we have God totally on our side." [I quibble here with the tacit implication that NT Wright's version of the New Perspective is "the" New Perspective, but double imputation is central to how Piper understands the gospel and justification. Tom doesn't think the NT teaches either gospel or justification in those terms.]
And one more concluding comment by Piper: "I want to prevent the reality of justification from moving off of the point where I become a Christian. I want to keep it right there, because that's where I believe the Bible locates it. I become a Christian by what happens in the event of justification. That's the first thing. I want to keep justification from moving off of the basis of Christ's death and obedience. And I want to keep the doctrine of justification from moving off of the imputation of that obedience to me by faith alone in union with Jesus Christ, so that my confidence in God being totally for me is resting not in what I do, but in what Christ did."
For Piper, justification refers to the moment of conversion/becoming a Christian. It comes by way of double imputation. Wright does not see things that way. Join us next Monday as we dip into this conversation.
And: "I think the New Perspective on Paul and other kinds of theologies flowing from it are giving God only part of the glory he deserves. They are missing the glory of Christ as our substitute obedience and our substitute sacrifice and punishment, and the glory that on the basis of those two things, we have God totally on our side." [I quibble here with the tacit implication that NT Wright's version of the New Perspective is "the" New Perspective, but double imputation is central to how Piper understands the gospel and justification. Tom doesn't think the NT teaches either gospel or justification in those terms.]
And one more concluding comment by Piper: "I want to prevent the reality of justification from moving off of the point where I become a Christian. I want to keep it right there, because that's where I believe the Bible locates it. I become a Christian by what happens in the event of justification. That's the first thing. I want to keep justification from moving off of the basis of Christ's death and obedience. And I want to keep the doctrine of justification from moving off of the imputation of that obedience to me by faith alone in union with Jesus Christ, so that my confidence in God being totally for me is resting not in what I do, but in what Christ did."
For Piper, justification refers to the moment of conversion/becoming a Christian. It comes by way of double imputation. Wright does not see things that way. Join us next Monday as we dip into this conversation.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Thanks Scot, I'll add it to the list!
Dan S. hello! I will stop by your blog again next. Your post about how to continue in the conversation rocked! I shared it on facebook and elsewhere and highly admire you. I am sorry you are taking heat! I get heat over this subject as well, and I know there has to be a better way. I think that better way looks like your post.
Scot,
Two excellent choices. I'm looking forward to the Jesus Creed virtual discussions.
I find Piper's statement "at that moment God is no longer against you—he’s for you" to be very odd. I am not sure the witness of the scriptures is that God was ever "against" us. In fact, the focus of Paul's statments in Romans 1:16-17 is that God has always been for us and that the Christ event is one more demonstaration (albeit a very important one) of how God has always be for us. I can't see why some insist on the judical view of Romans and Justification when such an understanding of Righteousness was NOT a part of Early Jewish perceptions of God.
Looking forward to the discussion on justification. I can't help wondering if Piper and Wright have ever sat down together to dialogue? Would be interesting.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.