The works of Sven

Sven has been a busy boy over the Christmas holidays. First (and second), he’s been continuing his look at how the early church viewed the atonement; that is, how it understood the life, death and resurrection of Christ. If you think that penal substitution is the be-all and end-all of things, you should read and learn. There is a lot more depth and wisdom there than is captured in that single model.

The Fathers are unanimous in affirming that the Devil was defeated and overcome in the atonement, but they do not all agree a) as to the nature of the rights and dominion that Satan had over man before the atonement and b) how exactly Christ’s work was effectual in destroying the power of the devil. The most commonly held view is that ever since the Fall, the Devil has enjoyed uncontested rights and powers over humanity but this is found alongside the idea that the Devil did not win his rights over man legitimately but is rather some kind of usurper who does not actually enjoy any real rights over mankind…The Fathers themselves do not generally express the idea of ransom in [terms that are] easily dismissed in the way that some have attempted to do. Gregory of Nyssa went to great lengths to show that the deliverance of mankind from the power of the Devil was entirely lawful…John Chrysostom develops the idea in still another direction by suggesting that Satan acts as some kind of cruel tyrant who tortures those whom he rules over, but since he has no right to torture or kill Christ, his killing of Christ then makes him a debtor to God and to pay off his debt he is forced to relinquish ownership of all of enslaved humanity…it must also be made clear that although the transaction between God and the Devil is often expressed in legal terms does not mean that the grand scheme of atonement is thought of as a taking place within a cosmic legal framework, as would be the case in the Latin model of Atonement that would arise later.

Not only that, though, but he also shares an excellent analysis of what Paul means by “works of the law” – and it’s not what is often supposed. The Jews were not involved in some attempt to prove themselves worthy by doing good deeds.

It seems clear here then that [the “works of law”] are rather functioning as a boundary marker between clean and unclean and between Jew and Gentile. The people of God are being defined not by their faith in the Messiah, but by ritual works of the Torah (in this case, circumcision and food laws), which simply cannot be the case, Paul is saying, because faith in Christ identifies one as a true believer, not Jewish ritual. Furthermore not only is faith in Christ sufficient for salvation, but it is also sufficient grounds for fellowship with others (what does this do to our beliefs about ecumenism?). Works of the law only bring division, not the unity that Christ brings…Paul’s point is this: the Gentile Christians have already shown themselves to be in the faith and to have received Spirit…quite apart from any Jewish legalistic observance. Why then would they, like Peter, want to now go and become circumcised and follow Torah? Their faith in Christ was sufficient for them to be in Christ and thus part of God’s people…“the works of the law” does not need to have the works-righteousness label applied to it as [some] seem to think, but that it actually makes more sense in the historical context of Galatians to read it in the manner I have suggested.

Finally, he reminds us that “We are not saved by faith in Jesus Christ, we are saved by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ“ – too often a necessary issue to stress.

pax et bonum

Article posted at 7:51pm on 06 January 2006
Category: Faith, Struggling