One of the stickiest points in all of this new perspective vs. old perspective discussion is what to make of Romans 2:1-16, and Wright makes it clear that he thinks Paul means exactly what he says (Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision
,). [I posted the text at the bottom of this post.]First, he says this is no charade -- no pretending someone can be justified by works so we can set them up for the hammer in chp. 3.
Second, doers of the Torah will be justified. That's what Paul says in 2:13. (It's in your Bible too.) Wright argues that one does the Torah through the Spirit. But this is not the synergism that says "I do part" and "God does part."
Third, the scene is the great assize -- last judgment -- and Jesus is the judge. The judgment is based on works -- and Paul says that in Romans 2 and 2 Cor 5:10 and it is implicit in Rom 14:10-12. And Wright enters here into a clear set of lines about how important works is in the Pauline sense of judgment.
All this stuff, fourth, about pleasing God is not the logic of merit but the logic of love and relationship.
Fifth, this again makes the Holy Spirit important -- more important than in the old perspective.
2 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?
5 But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6 God "will give to each person according to what he has done."a 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8 But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9 There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11 For God does not show favoritism.
12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15 since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
David (#34) -- Wright does discuss the negative side (the passage that talks about coming through fire), but there isn't really a negative side beyond that description, in his view, because there is the assurance that the Holy Spirit will complete the required work in us. (So the end result for Wright isn't that different from Piper, in some respects; they both agree re: assurance.)
I've had another read of the relevant bits in 'Justification' (though I might be a poor reader). I don't think Wright manages to say the following:
If you don't have faith, whatever you do, even if some of it looks like good things, those apparently good things won't count in your favour, and you will do at least one bad thing, and you will be condemned. If you do have faith, you will do some things that both look good and count as good, and the bad things you do won't count against you then being not condemned.
If that's what Wright was trying to say, then I have two main comments:
This doesn't look to me like something that can illuminatingly be called judgment according to works.
A bit more needs to be said about if there are rewards and punishments for relative amounts of good and bad things those with faith do (and maybe about degrees of condemnation for those without faith).
david,
It seems you are fixed on this issue for Wright, and my reading of Wright is that he really doesn't say that much about it, and neither does he spell out what he says, which tends to be summary statements. If you stick to what Wright actually says, on texts he is summarizing, what does he say that you don't agree with?
Scot (#37) My problem with Wright is that he doesn't spell out here what a responsible exegete should. Waffling won't do. If you are engaged (as Wright is) in making a very big point of Christians also being judged according to works, then something substantial needs to be said not only about the judgment of Christians' good works but about the judgment of Christians' bad ones. One issue is that if, in effect, Christians' bad works are not judged, then the notion of 'judgment by works' empties of meaning.
David,
OK, but you are presuming that what you think should be discussed in fact should be discussed. The plain evidence is that every judgment scene where the criteria for that judgment comes up says the criteria are works ... that is not disputable. What is there to spell out? Doesn't 1 Cor say our bad works will be burned up by fire?
In my estimation, you want him to address the theological problems you think he has, but you have them because of a tradition of interpretation that is not the interpretation Tom has. So, there is no need for him to address issues that are not even on the table.
Anyway, I hope this makes sense brother. I'm trying to see things as a mediator here.
Scot
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.