Skip to main content

Judgment and Justification: Part 1

God's judgment and its related themes are a particular point of interest for me, especially when they come into contact with the justification debates. So, across several posts, we'll be looking at judgment, justification, and other related topics (I am not sure how many posts it will be in total). I wrote a paper this past semester on the theme of judgment for my intro to biblical theology class. I'll present some of my findings from that paper in this series, but I also want to use these posts to extend some of the observations that I made and also address systematic theology questions that were not germane to a biblical theology paper. One thing that I do want to stress up front is that while I have put a lot of thought into these issues, I see my proposals as being far from a final word. This is a work in progress in what I intend to be a life long pursuit. I appreciate feedback, and especially push back, because, to borrow a line from NT Wright, I am sure that a fair amount of what I will go on to say here is wrong, I just don't know which parts they are. Part of my purpose in writing here is in hopes that you all will engage in these questions with me resulting in mutual sharpening.

In today's post we will address what and why. What is judgment and why am I so interested in it? We'll take the first one first, what is judgment? We can talk about two different things using the term judgment. What probably pops into most people's minds first is judgment as a negative concept. A very common usage for 'judgment' in the Bible is as the negative counterpart to salvation. Exodus 6:6 demonstrates this clearly: 'Therefore, say to the Israelites: 'I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. I will free you from being slaves to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgment' (TNIV). Judgment can also be a more neutral concept meaning something like 'a rendering of a decision.' While not explicitly using the term 'judge' or 'judgment,' the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25 is a good example of judgment of the latter type. Judgment can be either/or, and it's especially the latter type that needs to factor into our discussions of justification.

Why do I care about judgment and justification so much? First, I think that they're (especially judgment) central to the biblical witness. If you were to excise every passage dealing with judgment, you'd be missing a very large portion of your Bible. Second, honestly, is because it's so controversial. There are a lot of views on judgment and especially on justification (and I have no intentions of interacting with many of them, just a select few). How could something so central be understood so variously? Third, I think that our understanding of justification and judgment have sizable doctrinal and practical implications, some of which we will explore at the end of this series.

Comments

  1. You're a great writer and thinker and I'm looking forward to reading more. What a gift it is to me to have someone like you at our church!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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