Skip to main content

A Series of Questions on Soteriology

I have a question that I would like to ask, what is the relationship between justification, salvation, and judgment? Are justification and salvation coterminous, do they occur at the same time, can one be justified and ultimately not saved, does justification affect judgment and if so how? On a related note, what are the grounds of judgment, on what basis (or bases) does (do) one survive the judgment and experience salvation?

I ask these questions because I truly think they're difficult to answer. How does judgment on the basis of works mesh with justification by faith? I think that if we can get clarity on the relationship between justification, salvation, and judgment then this latter question becomes easier to answer (I also ask them because I'm working on a paper on judgment for my biblical theology class).

Comments

  1. interesting questions. I think I remember N T Wright describing justification as being God's future verdict brought forward into the present (i.e. declaring now what he will declare over us on the final judgment).

    I also think that James' maxim "faith without works is dead" also helps make sense of the many passages that imply judgment according to works. The point is not that faith is not enough on its own and needs to be complemented with some works, but that faith is non-existent if it does not result in works.

    But a different way of looking at it is to tie the believer's judgment according to works as purely determining the level of "reward" and having no bearing whatsoever on the ultimate "salvation" question. I think there is some truth in this, but I'm not sure its the whole picture.

    Do let us know your conclusions.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Mark, Thanks for your response.

    NT Wright has confused me (granted I have not read 'Justification' yet - have you?). I definitely recall him saying that, but I also recall him saying that justification is on the basis of a total life lived. Maybe for him justification is a declaration now of what God knows will happen (i.e., that we will be saved)?

    I definitely agree with you on the James exegesis. The new 'troublemaker' for me is Romans 2, where there is no discussion of faith when discussing judgment. Perhaps thinking about the relationship between Romans 2 and James 2 would be helpful. How do you see Romans 2? Are those who do the law Christians? Is Paul speaking hypothetically? Do we take what he's saying at face value (i.e., we can be saved by works)?

    I actually hadn't thought at all about reward in relation to judgment, so that's something that's good to keep in mind as I go forward. I do agree though, it's definitely not the whole picture.

    My paper isn't due for a little more than a month, so after that I'll discuss my conclusions. Maybe I'll do a series on it. I'm glad that judgment was one of our topics to choose from because I am very interested in it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Marcus,
    I haven't really thought more about Rom 2 since reading Schreiner's take on it. I also haven't read Wright's Justification book yet. I'm doing a talk on perseverance in a couple of weeks, and am trying to work out how that relates to final judgment.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm curious to hear what you have to say on the relationship between perseverance and final judgment. I don't think I'll be able to get into that point much in my paper as I only have 10 pages to work with, but it is integrally related to the questions above.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Often overlooked in the discussion of the relationship between salvation and justification is Romans 8:30. There, justification comes after (though it could perhaps be logically rather than temporally) "calling." Calling, in Paul (in my opinion), refers to that time of "salvation," as we normally term it. If that is how Paul is using it here, then it seems to me that justification can't be coterminous (nice word) with salvation, or at least not the entry point in salvation. I'd be happy to hear other points, however.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hmmm...that's an interesting thought. I'll have to spend some time exploring that as I hadn't thought about it before.

    Thanks Danny!

    On a side note, Romans 8:30 seems to militate against Gorman (and others) who conflate justification and sanctification into one reality.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat...

More Calvinist than Calvin?

I'm working on a paper on the topic of divine sovereignty and human freedom. Occasionally on this topic (or the subtopic of election) you will hear people through out the barb at strong Calvinists that they're 'being more Calvinist than Calvin.' After having read Calvin carefully on the issue I don't think that there's any validity to that charge. I don't see a material difference here between Calvin and say John Piper. Here are several quotes from the Institutes to prove my point. 'All events are governed by God's secret plan.' I.xvi.2 'Governing heaven and earth by his providence, he also so regulates all things that nothing takes place without his deliberation.' I.xvi.3 'Nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by him.' I.xvi.3 Calvin explicitly rejects a limited providence, 'one that by a general motion revolves and drives the system of the universe, with its several parts, but which does not specifc...

Galatians 2:11-14: The circumcision group

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (TNIV) There's an important issue that we need to wrestle with in this passage, and it's the question of whether or not the people from James and the circumcision group are the same group. I am not inclined to think that they are. The ensuing discussion is drawn from Longenecker's commentary pp 73-5...