--------- Original Message --------- DATE: Thu, 29 May 2003 08:59:01 From: "Michael Ward" <mward@...> >I haven't read all of this book yet (nibbling three or four at the same time), but am wondering (Mark+): Saunders' premise was that the Jews worked to get into God's kingdom. Is Wright saying that Paul's position was not to work to get into the kingdom (the Covenant does that automatically) but to stay in the kingdom? > >MLW+ > ------------------------------------------ Fr. Mike+ I like the question, Mike. On a tangent from your question, but related, is one that came up in the study group at Good Shepherd regarding the 39 articles. In regard to the articles referring to salvation, two in our group whose backgrounds are heavily independent church Bible-fundamentalist, raised the old question of “eternal security.” They had been taught, “once saved, always saved” and had the proof texts for their position I put the quotation “once saved always saved“ on a black board, andthen asked what they meant by the first term “saved.” The answer was “Knowing and accepting Jesus as Lord and being forgiven of sins.” Then I asked what the second “saved” meant. The answers were “going to heaven” and “enjoying eternity with God.” Then, outlining it as a syllogism, I showed that a valid argument could not be developed because the statement used the term “saved” in two different ways. We would have to rephrase, redefining the terms more precisely, asking two questions and giving two answers. The answer to the second question, “How do I enjoy eternity with God”, reveals an on going life long process, beginning now and continuing into eternity, which in effect undermines the statement on one level. Also, the statement does not really deal with another use of the term “salvation” as a referent to the saving work of God through Jesus’ death on the Cross and inadequately describes salvation in the way it is used in the New Testament. (Wright elaborates this in many places and several books.) Furthermore the question of whether a person can reject the Lordship of Jesus, or elect to not be governed by the King is not straightforwardly addressed in the statement “once saved always saved”, because it uses the term “saved” in two different ways. I then gave them certain epistles and other readings in the New Testament to study that warn Christians not to accept false teachers who would lead them to lose their reward by turning to idols. Then I asked them to bring back answers as to why these sorts of warnings occupy such a large part of the New Testament. That was three weeks ago, and no answer has come back to that question. I realize I have gone a long way to reiterate Mike’s question, but here is the final question that had to be addressed in that study group. What do we do after, using their terminology, “being saved?” A naïve reading of the 39 articles, and a partial understanding of justification by faith had led some to conclude that in effect, we don’t have to do anything. Which of course, is what many nominal Christians do. A covenant theology implies citizenship in the Kingdom and a citizen’s responsibilities. Thus, staying in the Kingdom is a legitimate concern. A corrective to the Gospel song’s affirmation “Jesus paid it all” is found in the second line “All to Him I owe.” Please pardon the garrulousness. Charles+ ____________________________________________________________ Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail! http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005