corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Corpus-Paul
List archive
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Paul and the Divine Justice: Anslem of Canterbury
- From: "Rabbi Saul" <tim AT rabbisaul.com>
- To: "Corpus-Paul" <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Paul and the Divine Justice: Anslem of Canterbury
- Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 23:23:25 -0600
John, I am in agreement with the Heidelberg (which
I think is an improvement on Anselm) on this point. (No huge surprise
there; as you can see, I am a Reformed pastor.) I admit its particular
*angle of approach* is not entirely Paul's (since its purpose is
catechetical in a manner quite unlike his own exposition), but a necessary
derivative (as I think) from his position.
It is clear enough that Paul understands Christ's
sacrifice as a sin-offering (Rom 8.3), which is no surprise, given that his
gospel is largely an exposition of Isaiah; Is. 53.10-12 identifies the
Servant as a sin-offering and sin-bearer (as cf 53.4-6, 8). It should be stressed that the forensic background to Paul's
thought is of course not identical to the Roman juristic categories presupposed
by Anselm.
I should note that I take Paul's appeal to Gen 15.6
in Rom 4 (and Gal 3.6) as establishing that God accounts faith as
righteousness; it is the righteous response that God in His own pistiV (faith[fulness]) seeks from His covenant
partner. Hence: the righteousness of God is revealed from pistiV to pistiV (Rom
1.17). PistiV on both the divine and human
side maintain the covenantal bond. (I won't elaborate here, but this also
underlies the entire subsection Rom 3.1-8, with its tangle of God's
faith/faithfulness, righteousness, and truth [and the logia which
express it]; and Israel's apistia
[unbelief/unfaithfulness], unrighteousness, and "lie." Note the
proliferation of pist- roots in 3.2.3 and dik- roots in 3.4-5.)
But I would also add that I hold that
faith-as-righteousness view *in connection with* the view that Christ was
raised because of our justification (Rom 4.25) - i.e. our justification is
a participation in His justification, so that it is also completely true to
Paul to identify the believer's righteousness as Christ's righteousness.
(One might say that I hold to the substance of the "imputation" view,
without acknowledging that that is what Paul is precisely doing with the
imputation language in Rom 4.)
FWIW.
tim
Tim Gallant
Pastor, Conrad Christian Reformed Church Conrad, MT Biblical Studies Center
http://www.timgallant.org/center.htm Pauline studies:
http://www.rabbisaul.com |
-
[Corpus-Paul] (no subject),
Jim West, 08/12/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] (no subject),
Rabbi Saul, 08/12/2004
-
[Corpus-Paul] Paul and the Divine Justice: Anslem of Canterbury,
John Brand, 08/12/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Paul and the Divine Justice: Anslem of Canterbury,
Rabbi Saul, 08/13/2004
-
[Corpus-Paul] Second Temple Judaism and Covenant,
John Brand, 08/13/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Second Temple Judaism and Covenant, Rabbi Saul, 08/13/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Second Temple Judaism and Covenant,
meta, 08/13/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Second Temple Judaism and Covenant, John Brand, 08/16/2004
-
[Corpus-Paul] Pauline Satisfaction of the Divine Justice,
John Brand, 08/13/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Pauline Satisfaction of the Divine Justice,
Jim West, 08/13/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Pauline Satisfaction of the Divine Justice, John Brand, 08/16/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Pauline Satisfaction of the Divine Justice,
Jim West, 08/13/2004
-
[Corpus-Paul] Second Temple Judaism and Covenant,
John Brand, 08/13/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Paul and the Divine Justice: Anslem of Canterbury,
Rabbi Saul, 08/13/2004
-
[Corpus-Paul] Paul and the Divine Justice: Anslem of Canterbury,
John Brand, 08/12/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] (no subject),
Rabbi Saul, 08/12/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.