Galatians 1:11-17
11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. 14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
In today’s reading from Galatians, Paul finds himself on the defense. This is a far cry from being on the offense when he was persecuting the followers of Christ, before his own conversion. Paul had established the church in Galatia on his first missionary trip but now Paul’s authority is being questioned. The people have begun to follow a conditional grace theology. To be Christian, you must first be Jewish and follow all the Jewish requirements. This was in total contrast to what Paul taught. To top this all off, people were beginning to question where Paul had been taught the gospel of Christ.
In the scripture, Paul asserts that the gospel he proclaims does not come by any human source, such as other followers or the other Apostles. Paul’s proclamation comes directly from Christ. Paul received the gospel from Christ Jesus, while heading to Damascus. Paul does not confer with the other Apostles before proclaiming the gospel of Jesus the Christ. This is a story Christians are familiar with.
It is easy to overlook something here, since this story is in the Bible, it is well known, taken as fact by Christians not even given another glace for any doubt. What if tomorrow there was another person, who makes this same type of claim, to be appointed an Apostle by Christ to proclaim this gospel to another group of people? Maybe they decide to use the television to spread the message. They make claims to have spoken with the Son of God and tell us this “New Message” of salvation. What would you do with that message? Maybe even they have a couple of friends back them up and say, “Yea dude, I saw this flash of light and heard some noise…..our friend says he spoke with Jesus. We know and trust them and so if they say so, it must be…right? Both Paul and this other person have received a call from God to be a Apostle and proclaim the gospel. Not that we have ever heard of others making a claim of this magnitude, right…..?
All ELCA seminary students seeking a rostered position would have received a call by God. This call is evaluated by the entrance committee to determine that the call is beyond an internal call but can also be verified through external sources as well. There needs to be confirmation of what the potential student claims to have happened.
While preparing for a sermon one week, I had a dream where the Spirit spoke to me and even chided me for the way I was going about my interpretation of a passage of scripture. During the dream I was given a new sermon to write and upon waking up, I wrote what I was given. I can even say one time that I heard a voice to tell me the topic of an upcoming sermon. My daughter had been with me in the car at the time and she did not hear the voice. However the topic I was given was the next in line of a sermon series for where I was doing supply preaching at. I had not been aware of the series and could not have therefore been aware of the next topic.
Several years ago I would have poo pooed the idea of the Spirit coming to someone in a dream. Even though I had read about it in the Bible. I surly did not understand hearing the Spirit speak to someone either. However, now that I have experienced both for myself, how can I question someone else’s claims? These claims always need to be evaluated. We need to make sure that what we are being told, keeps to what the gospel of Christ is about and that the message is inclusive in nature, not selective, elusive or exclusionary.
Paul’s claim and message were….. radical! So would be someone else’s claim today! Paul does not seek approval by anyone to go spread the Good news to the gentiles. Prior to this, the gospel was being given primarily to the Jews. Paul is specifically called to proclaim, as Jew, to proclaim the gospel to the gentiles. His message is centered upon the grace of God in Christ. It is not through our own works that that grace is given, but instead it is freely given by God. Simply in God’s benevolence God has chosen…. because of Christ Jesus, to see us in a new light. Even though we are still sinful people, you me all of us, God chooses to see the followers of Christ, the ones to believe in God’s Son, to see past our sin and see as a righteous and justified because of our faith in Christ in what God has done for us in Christ Jesus.
Paul’s proclamation is what, we as Lutherans now have come to be known as, Grace by Faith. What makes this correct? During Luther’s time, the Roman Catholic Church did not take the stance of grace through faith alone. Luther broke with the traditional interpretations. Grace is not something we can earn but is something that is imparted upon us because of God’s work alone in becoming incarnate in the form of a man called Jesus, taking upon the sins of all of humanity dying on a cross and being raised from death.
Luther broke from tradition, Paul broke with tradition and so do others. Can we quantify these breaks as being what God wants for God’s people? Paul comes off arrogant and maybe even defensive in our text today. Later he confers with others about the gospel he has been preaching. It is determined that Paul truly had a call from God, in Jesus Christ to be an Apostle; an Apostle to the gentiles and his proclamation of Grace is true. Paul’s message is the same as the other Apostles essentially. The other Apostles agree with Paul in that Paul’s gospel does not make additional requirements of those that follow Christ, that the message is one of Grace, one that seeks to provide justice for the poor, the disadvantaged, the widows and the marginalized of society. Nothing in Paul’s gospel of Christ takes away from what the other apostles were teaching.
Breaking from tradition is a tricky thing. It means that sometimes we are going to have rogue people out there that believe they are doing the right thing in the name of the gospel. It also means that some my simply take advantage and intentionally corrupt the gospel. However at the same time, tradition, how we always have done it, it not necessarily correct either. God is active all the time in our lives. God is continually creating and in that, we must also be willing to change, question and confirm that if what we have been doing is still the will of God. Is what we want to do, the will of God? Just because someone says they were told to do something by the Spirit of God, does not mean we should always just go with it, without evaluation. Tradition is not the end all of evaluation. We must be willing to change and be active in adapting the gospel message today without compromise to what the gospel is. When we can do this, we can be inclusive, doing God’s work with our hands.
With charity, I must correct the inaccurate statement about Roman Catholic teaching in your message. The Roman Catholic Church has always taught that grace is a free gift of God, even in Luther’s time.
I agree with others who observe that a stumbling block to all Christians being united is the different ways in which we use language. Words like “grace,” “salvation,” “sanctification,” and “justification,” for example, are often used loosely and interchangeably. However, they really do convey different, even if sometimes overlapping, ideas. I’m still learning their nuances myself – and frequently fail to understand or communicate them well.
As regards grace, the Roman Catholic Church has always held, like you, that it is a free gift of God. That said, she also teaches that it does not follow that God’s free gift of grace automatically results in our salvation. That piece requires our cooperation. God does not force Himself on us. His gift of grace is freely given and it must be freely received for it to be efficacious for us.
Therefore, the Church teaches, and scripture supports, that we are not saved by faith alone. Both faith and grace are God’s gifts to us, unearned by us. The question is whether we accept the gifts.
It is interesting that you note that Paul’s teaching was affirmed by the early Church, not in opposition to it. The challenge of the Judaizers was met and defeated by a Church unified rather than splintered. I wonder what kind of impact we Christians could have on the world were we not so divided.
There is hope, of course. For that day is surely coming. “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!”
By the way, and I hope you don’t think this is condescending, in spite of whatever points of contention I may share with you from time to time, I do respect, appreciate, and indeed sometimes marvel at your growth in the Spirit. I pray that God continues the work He has begun in you.
Pax et Bonum
My brother in Christ, I always value your comments to my blog, even when you believe you are correct and I believe you are in error.
Although the reformation initially was first focused upon indulgences, which Luther viemtly opposed, it also was about how we as humans are justified before God. Luther’s stance was on faith alone in Christ through grace alone. This was not the stance as Luther and the other protestants saw the Roman Catholic Church take. There were conditions placed upon persons for salvation to be effective, even with grace from God. By these conditions, it negates the freely abundant grace that God imparts upon humanity and in such grace is no longer free because it not effective on its own. So, although the Roman Catholic Church in Luther’s time spoke of grace being free and unconditional, in practice it was not because other requirements for salvation were put in place, such as indulgences. There cannot be conditions placed upon salvation period. It is imparted upon us through the faith in Christ alone in grace alone, nothing more.
Salvation in grace requires cooperation, cooperation by us to receive the grace for it to be efficacious. This is again another sticking point where we, you and I brother, disagree on the nuance of what you say and what I say in my theology. It is not that we must freely receive, by receiving with cooperation, this in its self becomes a work. We are not saved in our works but through justification by God in faith of Christ alone in grace alone. It is better put that we do not resist what God imparts upon us through the Spirit, which is not only grace but faith. A lack of response against what God is doing and what God does puts less emphasis upon us and more upon God and removes the notion of works.
Hopefully you have continued to read so far. 🙂
The uniting of the multiple church bodies is a necessity. The ELCA has worked very hard on their ecumenism with other church bodies. The ELCA as part of the Lutheran World Federation along with the Roman Catholic Church reached a joint agreement regarding justification and both bodies signed this agreement in 2006. The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification has lead to a more unified understanding of the role of faith and grace. In this declaration, there is nothing that either parties dictates as cooperation by humans in receiving the gift of faith. The notion of works in such is removed.
Prior to the JDDJ, Luthers spoke of justification as:
[IV. Concerning Justification]
Furthermore, it is taught that we cannot obtain forgiveness of sin and righteousness before God through our merit, work, or satisfactions, but that we receive forgiveness of sin and become righteous before God out of grace for Christ’s sake through faith 46 when we believe that Christ has suffered for us and that for his sake our sin is forgiven and righteousness and…
http://biblia.com/books/klbcncrd/pp%2038-40
Shared from Logos Bible Software http://www.logos.com
Concerning Faith:
[V. Concerning the Office of Preaching]
To obtain such faith God instituted the office of preaching, giving the gospel and the sacraments. Through these, as through means, he gives the Holy Spirit who produces faith, where and when he wills, in those who hear the gospel. It teaches that we have a gracious God, not through our merit but through Christ’s merit, when we so believe.
Robert Kolb, Timothy J. Wengert and Charles P. Arand, The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2000), 40.
So as to make it clear, faith is the work of the Holy Spirit that produces faith where and when the Spirit wills from the hearing of the gospel. It is not a works of our own and cannot be looked at in any way shape or form that could be construed as works, cooperation or any other works that leaves someone to believe that humans have any part in the process of faith.
All this being said my brother, we again will have to agree to disagree in the nuance of the works and actions that take place. As I have tried to make clear in the past, faith cannot be seen in anyway being anything that we do. As for grace, I agree that the Roman Catholic Church in the 16th century that taught grace was free from God. In their practice however there was a price associated with receiving salvation and therefore grace was no longer effective on its own and that leads to a work/cost of another sort to go with in conjunction the grace of God and therefore negates the “freeness” of grace.
On another note since I brought up the JDDJ.
Since the signing of this declaration, in 2009 the Roman Catholic Church has unfortunately re-instituted Plenary indulgences.
We could debate the merit and use of these indulgences until we are blue in the face. However, this does not make it anymore clear for most people and there will be a belief that through indulgences even today, that sins can be removed and thus limit or remove purgatorial time. This again negates grace alone and faith alone. Yes, I am aware that they cannot be sold but can be received through donations. However I will say, it is not an issue with us Lutherans, since we do not believe that there is a purgatorial time anyway.
As always, love you my brother and love the conversation.
“faith cannot be seen in anyway being anything that we do.” I’m having trouble reconciling this with free will. (I confess, Doug, I only read your post – nothing preceding)
Roy, we all have free will. I am not trying to take away from that. What it really amounts to is yes, by our refusal to accept the faith that the Spirit is willing to give us, we make a choice one out of our free will. Yes also Ken, this in its self is cooperating in the sense that it is not un-cooperative with what the Spirit is doing.
It is a slight matter of semantics but I think important. At least to most so not to become a stumbling block to confuse works as necessary to receive grace. It is a fine line to walk explaining what cooperation or lack of un-cooperation is to many folks. This is not something that can be taught in a single session with someone. Over the course of time, and carefully I might add if teaching through sermons, the preacher can with the Spirit working on the those that hear the sermon, make inroads to deepen ones understanding of Faith in Christ Alone by Grace Alone.
If you go back to the original Greek, it even gets even more tricky when we examine Galatians 2:16. yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
http://biblia.com/books/nrsv/Ga2.16
Shared from Logos Bible Software http://www.logos.com
Both of the words that show in bold face of in can actually be translated as “of”. If it is faith of then what is it at all that humans take part in their salvation? Just to throw one at you. There are people too that believe this is a better translation to use of vs. in but words matter and that can change the meaning entirely.
Of course I’ve continued to read, my brother! I value your thoughts more than you know. If nothing else, after all, they encourage me to learn my own faith better. More importantly, I am hopeful that these explorations ultimately push us both ever onward toward holiness.
I always consider myself a neophyte in my study and understanding of theology and if ever I say or write something in conflict with actual Catholic teaching, I certainly defer to the Church. (Thomas Aquinas said as much regarding himself and I’m nowhere remotely close to his level!)
With that in mind, I really do need to better acquaint myself with the JDDJ – both its content and its standing with the Magisterium.
In the meantime, I am struggling a bit in following some of your logic. When you say, for example, that “it is better said that we do not resist what God imparts…” do you not see that “a lack of response” is itself a response? I believe we both agree that we were created with free will – please correct me if I’m not accurate on that — and in having free will, are we not free to choose to resist or choose to accept (or not resist) what God imparts? I call the choice not to resist “cooperation” and am somewhat vexed as to why that proves to be such a sticking point.
I affirm your concern that the emphasis be on what God does to make our salvation possible rather than on what we do in the sense that I absolutely agree with you that we cannot do anything that puts any obligation on God. For I know, as I know you know, Eph. 2-8-9 makes clear “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you. It is the gift of God; it is not from works, so no one may boast.”
Verse 10 continues “For we are his handiwork, created in Christ Jesus, for the good works that God has prepared in advance, that we should live in them.” If we should “live in them” doesn’t that suggest some action or attitude on our part?
This brings up another area where I struggle with understanding the logic of your position. I want to understand better what you mean by “the process of faith” and why humans have no part in it. By the phrase “process of faith” are you meaning also salvation, justification, sanctification and so on, or do you mean something more limited than that? Please elaborate (if inclined to do so). Perhaps in your elaboration I will better understand, and potentially even agree with you.
Think of me as a student, for truly I am that. Please help me work through these questions.
Do we have free will or only the illusion of free will?
If we have free will, can we choose to resist God’s grace?
If free will is an illusion, is it a capricious God that won’t allow us to accept his grace? (Or to “not resist” His grace if you prefer.)
Can we willfully live in opposition to the moral law, remain unrepentant, and still presume to attain eternal beatitude with God? (For clarity’s sake, I am not referring here to the ceremonial, ritual, Mosaic law but rather such things as contained in the 10 commandments.)
Jesus often faced questions meant to trap him. It is not my interest to do so here. Like you, I am an earnest seeker.
By the way, you have made some comments about indulgences that are inaccurate but it is not clear to me entirely whether you hold this inaccurate understanding yourself or are merely observing that others do (even some, perhaps many Catholics). Without getting into a “blue in the face” discussion about the entire topic, suffice it to say for now simply that indulgences, whether plenary or partial, do no remit (or remove) sin. Nor does it make sense to apply the concept of time, as we earthly inhabitants understand it, to the realm of Purgatory. (And by the way,that word “merit” has different meanings too. See, language stumbling blocks strike again.)
As always, Pax et Bonum