Grace and behavior

Contemporary Christian notions of grace also frequently fail to take into account the effective nature of grace. That is, the aim of God’s gift of the Christ is to set us free from our slavery to sin, the law, and evil powers and to transform us so that we become new creatures, righteous in the Messiah (Rom. 5:20-21; 2 Cor. 5:17-21; Gal. 1:1-6; 6:15; Titus 2:11-14). In the Christ, we are ruled by grace, “grace reigns through righteousness unto eternal life” (Rom. 5:21; cf. Rom. 5:17; 1 Cor. 15:10). It is inappropriate, then, to suggest that God’s gift of the Messiah, if the gift is accepted and subsequently held, would be ineffective in bringing about God’s transformative aims. So we should not set grace at odds with the required behavioral changes (good deeds) associated with allegiant union to Jesus the king.—Matthew Bates in Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 104 (emphasis original)

Thought for the day

3 When the very bottom of things falls out,
     what can a righteous person possibly accomplish?

4 But the Lord is in his holy temple.
     The Lord! His throne is in heaven.
His eyes see—
     his vision examines all of humanity.
5 The Lord examines
     both the righteous and the wicked;
     his very being hates anyone who loves violence.
6 God will rain fiery coals and sulfur on the wicked;
     their cups will be filled
     with nothing but a scorching hot wind
7 because the Lord is righteous!
     He loves righteous deeds.
     Those whose heart is right will see God’s face.— Ps. 10 (CEB)

If you confess with your mouth…

[N]otice that in the other portion of the verses under discussion, Romans 10:9—10, Paul states that for a person to be saved, he or she must “confess” with the mouth that “Jesus is Lord.” It is important to recognize that Paul does not say “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus fulfills the Davidic promise” or “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus died for your sins.” With regard to confessing, the focus lands squarely on one specific stage of the gospel—Jesus as Lord. Why? This is not mere happenstance.

Confession of Jesus as Lord is an expression of allegiance to him as the ruling king. Paul is pointing at our need to swear allegiance to Jesus as the Lord, the ruling sovereign, precisely because this lordship stage of Jesus’s career expressly summarizes a key aspect of the gospel, describes Jesus’s current role in earthly and heavenly affairs, and is the essential reality that must be affirmed to become part of God’s family. Public acknowledgement of the acceptance of Jesus’s rule is the premier culminating act of pistis. The verb that Paul selects to describe what is necessary, homologeo, refers in this sort of context to a public declaration, as is made clear by the “with your mouth.” Paul does not envision raising your hand in church or silently praying a prayer in your heart as a sufficient “confession” (nor does Paul say that such an action couldn’t initiate salvation, but he clearly intends something more substantive). Paul is talking about something public and verbal, like what might happen at an ancient baptism.—Matthew Bates in Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 97–98 (emphasis original)

So who reigns?

Other terms that we today traditionally associate with Christianity were also popular as part of imperial propaganda. In the broader Greco-Roman world, the word euangelion, “gospel,” could mean good news of military victory or of the emperor’s birth or reign. The term kyrios, “lord,” along with sōtēr, “savior,” was a favored term used by the emperor. In fact if one had ceased to be a Christian and wanted to prove that to the Roman authorities, then one could offer a sacrifice in the presence of a statue of the emperor while saying “Caesar is Lord,” which was understood in such contexts as incompatible with the sworn confession “Jesus is Lord.” We have a detailed description of this process in the letter of Pliny to the emperor Trajan, written around AD 112. Pliny certainly understood that allegiance to Jesus as a sovereign was more fundamental to Christianity than anything else, even if it is not readily recognized today.—Matthew Bates in Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 88

<idle musing>
Indeed! We see all too much evidence of that everyday here in the US, with christianity being equated with nationalism. The early church wouldn't understand any of our culture war mentality. They knew Jesus was Lord and that he reigned. And because of that, they were not manipulated by fear, the weapon of choice today against christians.
</idle musing>

The weekend that was

We had a storm come through on Saturday afternoon, with winds up to 60 MPH. It knocked down both my pole bean trellis and my cucumber one; they were both made from 1x2 and 2x2 lumber. I spent a few hours yesterday rebuilding them and reinforcing them by tying them to the garage, the old clothesline post, and a pair of fenceposts. I don't think they will come falling down again. Miraculously, none of the plants were destroyed.

We also were without electricity for about 10 hours. The electricity had flickered a couple times, and then a blast of lightning hit so close that the boom was almost simultaneous with the flash. Probably the closest I've ever experienced. Later we found out that most of our side of town was without power. We got ours back around 2:00 AM. Others didn't get their power back until Sunday afternoon.

When we went out for a walk after the storm, there were limbs down everywhere. On East Avenue, tree had fallen across the road, blocking it. It had also taken out some power lines. It was an older maple that was hollow inside, so it basically snapped into pieces.

Sunday afternoon, about 20 hours after the storm, I was working the garden (putting the trellises back together) when I heard a loud crash from the front yard. I thought maybe someone was doing some cleanup across the street and kept working. A minute or two later, a neighbor told me to look out front. A limb from our maple, weakened by the storm, had cracked and fallen across the street! Normally, there is a vehicle parked under that limb, but they were gone. Five minutes later, they came home. Needless to say, they were extremely thankful that their vehicle wasn't parked there when the limb fell.

Here are a couple of pictures of it.

So, what is this faith thing?

“Faith is not an alternative achievement nor a refined human spirituality, but a declaration of bankruptcy, a radical and shattering recognition that the only capital in God’s economy is the gift of Christ crucified and risen” ([Barclay, Paul and the Gift] 384—85; cf. 390n5). Perhaps faith, then, is best understood as an allegiance to the Christ predicated on the recognition that nothing apart from this allegiance has saving value.—Matthew Bates in Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 83 n. 15

Why foreground "Christ"?

I would argue that the probability that Paul specifically intends to foreground the allegiance aspect of pistis in passages such as these is moved from possible to highly probable when we consider that, for Paul, Jesus above all is the Christ or the Lord. “Jesus is Lord” is in fact where the gospel above all reaches a climax. When Paul speaks of Jesus Christ—and note that he does speak in this way every time Jesus is mentioned in all of the passages quoted above—Christ is not a last name or a meaningless addition; it is an honorific designation. It means Jesus the Messiah, Jesus the long-anticipated but now-ruling Jewish-style universal king. I cannot overstate the importance of this. In other words, Paul everywhere presupposes that the most basic identity of Jesus is that of the enthroned divine—human king, the actively ruling Son of God. So contextually the most obvious and natural way to speak about the proper relationship between the king and his people is allegiance or loyalty.—Matthew Bates in Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 82–83

What is the gospel?

The Gospel: An Outline

Jesus the king

1. preexisted with the Father,
2. took on human flesh, fulfilling God’s promises to David,
3. died for sins in accordance with the Scriptures,
4. was buried,
5. was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
6. appeared to many,
7. is seated at the right hand of God as Lord, and
8. will come again as judge.—Matthew Bates in Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 74

<idle musing>
Straight out of 1 Cor 15. It's usually called the kerygma, a Greek word meaning announcement. Unfortunately, most people truncate the gospel to items 3 through 5, possibly including 6 as an afterthought. They totally neglect the other ones, which are what frame the gospel and make it Good News.
</idle musing>

A logical reaction

Is it any wonder, then, that upon hearing Jesus’s shocking allusion to Psalm 110 and Daniel 7, the high priest tore his garments, exclaiming, “Why do we need any more witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy. What is your decision?” And then we find it summarily reported, “They all condemned him as deserving of death” (Mark 14:63—64). Knowing full well that he was going to die, Jesus had claimed that he was nonetheless about to be installed as the king at God’s own right hand, as the ruler over a universal and everlasting kingdom, and that his accusers would soon be condemned by God. Jesus anticipated that his death and resurrection were in the final analysis purposed toward his enthronement as the king of heaven and earth. In other words, in the Gospels Jesus is described as proclaiming the good news that he would be seated at the right hand of God as the cosmic king or universal lord.Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 72

Turning the tables, or things aren't what they seem to be

Two things are particularly noteworthy here [Dan 7:13–14]. First, not only is this “one like a son of man" given glory and an eternal kingdom; the scope of his rule is also universal, “that all people, nations, and languages should serve him.” Second, Jesus has deliberately alluded to this particular vision from Daniel 7 with his provocative words “and you will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven.” The images evoked—a trial scene, the coming of the Son of Man, the clouds of heaven, and receipt of heavenly authority to rule—are far too specific to suggest anything otherwise.

So Jesus, before a human tribunal, makes the outrageous statement that he indeed is “the Christ, the Son of the Blessed,” implying that even if he is falsely judged by a human court, he will be vindicated by God, seated at God’s right hand, and given an everlasting kingdom over which he will rule. And in so doing, Jesus once again has subversively turned the tables on his accusers, bringing out the deep irony of the entire trial scene. For if those who are trying Jesus—the Jewish high priest, ruling council, and their lackeys—find him guilty, then Jesus has insinuated that they will in fact be acting not as the Ancient of Days would desire, but rather in collusion with the fourth beast and its arrogant horn by attacking Jesus. And these are the very ones who fancy themselves to be standing in the legitimate place of the God of Israel in giving a verdict, especially the high priest! Jesus’s words have turned the entire trial scene upside down, for Jesus has asserted that this earthly trial is an inversion of the heavenly reality. It is in fact, as Jesus has painted the picture, the high priest and his minions who are really on trial in association with the fourth beast’s hostile activities, and they will be condemned and ultimately destroyed by God! Meanwhile, Jesus is about to be declared innocent and installed as king, sharing in God’s very throne.Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 71–72

What and where is Jesus now?

Jesus reigns right now. Second, Jesus’s reign corresponds to the present epoch of world history that we find ourselves in now. The first six stages of the gospel refer to events in the past with respect to Jesus’s life story—for example, he has already taken on human flesh, died for our sins, and been raised from the dead. But if Jesus has been raised from the dead, then where is he now? And what is he doing? It shouldn’t surprise us if the answer proves to be fundamental to all aspects of Christian life today. Jesus is currently the enthroned king, Lord of heaven and earth, and he is actively ruling until, as Paul puts it in 1 Corinthians, “he has put all his enemies under his feet” (15:25). He is also serving in heaven as the great high priest who has offered his own blood as a redemption for our sins, so he is busy interceding on our behalf (Heb. 8:1—2; 9:11-12). Satan may be called “the god of this age” (2 Cor. 4:4), but his power is limited because it has been decisively broken through the cross and resurrection; the new age of Jesus’s kingly rule is currently overwhelming the old age (Col. 1:13-14).—Matthew W. Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 67 (emphasis original)

The whole gospel

Jesus’s reign is a nonnegotiable portion of the good news. First, when the gospel is presented today by a preacher or teacher, most of the time this “Jesus reigns” portion of the gospel is either entirely absent or mentioned as an aside. The cross and resurrection get central billing, but ]esus’s kingship is tucked away offstage. We need to recover ]esus’s kingship as a central, nonnegotiable constituent of the gospel. Jesus’s reign as Lord of heaven and earth fundamentally determines the meaning of “faith” (pistis) as “allegiance” in relation to salvation. Jesus as king is the primary object toward which our saving “faith”—that is, our saving allegiance—is directed. 67 (emphasis original)

<idle musing>
It has been refreshing the last few years to see books appearing that emphasize the ascension and enthronement as an essential part of the gospel. You can't lose the cross, but equally, you can't lose the resurrection and ascension and enthronement. Without any of these you end up with a truncated gospel.
</idle musing>

But what about the ascension?

Scripture attests that Jesus appeared to a great variety of witnesses in diverse geographical locales over the course of some forty days, These appearances are a core constituent of the good news. Last of all Jesus appeared to Paul, as he so memorably puts it, “as if unto a miscarried fetus” (1 Cor. 15:8). Paul means that he saw Jesus when he was in a state of utter spiritual death. And as the last in the chain of witnesses, his viewing was fundamentally different than the rest of the apostles, all of whom had seen Jesus prior to his ascension. It is this ascension, however, together with the events surrounding it, that is the most critical yet most neglected component of the gospel today.—Matthew W. Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 66

Just a part, not the whole!

That Jesus died for our sins and, as a portion of that “our,” that he also died for my sins is truly part of the gospel—emphatically so!—but it is imperative to realize that it is only a small but vital portion of the gospel as properly understood, not the whole gospel. It is also critical to recognize that “faith” is not primarily aimed at trusting in the forgiveness-of—sins process. For Paul does not primarily call us to “faith” (“belief” or “trust”) in some sort of atonement system in order to be saved (although mental affirmation that Jesus died for our sins is necessary), but rather to “faith” (“allegiance”) unto Jesus as Lord. Abstracting this for—our-sins portion of the gospel from the full gospel and the larger narrative frameworks that control its meaning is risky, especially if over time this “Jesus died for our sins” portion is placed in a new, slightly different me—centered controlling narrative—as has happened in much of our contemporary Christian culture. For the wider narrative frameworks determine what “sins,” “my need for salvation,” and indeed what has traditionally been termed “faith” as it relates to the gospel might entail in the first place.—Matthew W. Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 39

Preexistence

[I]n both Romans 1:3 and Philippians 2:9 the normal verb for birth, gennaō, is passed over in favor of ginomai, a term that can mean ordinary birth but much more often stresses change in status or existence. In Romans 1:3 Paul speaks of the Son who, as it pertains to the flesh, “came into existence by means of the seed of David.” Similarly in Philippians 2:9 the Christ Jesus is the preexistent one who nonetheless “came into existence in the likeness of humans.” In other words, in both passages Paul (and whatever sources he used) neglected the ordinary word for birth and selected instead ginomai, the best word to describe the coming into fleshly human existence of a preexistent divine being through birth (cf. also Gal. 4:4).—Matthew W. Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 37

Sola fide, or what is faith?

In short, if you mentally agree that Jesus died for your sins, then nothing else is required for your salvation— you are on your way to heaven. The problem here is a deficient definition of faith (and for that matter of salvation). Advocates of free—grace salvation have correctly recognized the primacy of God’s grace and the necessity of holding certain doctrines as “true” or “real,” but by effectively reducing faith to intellectual assent, they have introduced a dangerous error.

Nobody, even in the free—grace movement, wants to claim that the demons in Mark’s Gospel—who know Jesus’s divine origins and who utter, “I know who you are, the Holy One of God!” (Mark 1:24) and “You are the Son of God” (3:11)—are in actuality saved because of their true knowledge of Jesus. Free—gracers are quick to disavow such a conclusion. All would agree with the Letter of James, which affirms that such “facts” are not enough: “You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe and shudder” (James 2:19). Nonetheless, problematically, at least some in the free—grace movement want to make salvation depend on nothing but a slight variation of the Son-of-God fact, an affirmation that Jesus died for my sins.—Matthew W. Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 25

A leap in the dark? Not so much!

Yet—and now for the way in which this leap—in—the-dark idea is a dangerous half—truth—it must be remembered that neither Noah nor Abraham launched out into the void, but rather each responded to God’s command. They acted in response to the call of a promise—fulfi11ing God with whom they had experience. Abraham was asked to sacrifice Isaac by the God who had miraculously provided Isaac—a God who had proven to be trustworthy to Abraham through a lengthy life journey together. One might even dare to say that in so acting Noah and Abraham above all showed allegiance to God as the sovereign and powerful Lord who speaks all human affairs into existence, but more on this later.

The key point is that true pistis is not an irrational launching into the void but a reasonable, action-oriented response grounded in the conviction that God’s invisible underlying realities are more certain than any apparent realities. Stepping out in faith is not intrinsically good in and of itself, as if God is inherently more pleased with daring motorcycle riders than with automobile passengers who cautiously triple—check their seatbelt buckles; it is only good when it is an obedient response to God’s exercised sovereignty. We are not to leap out in the dark at a whim, or simply to prove to ourselves, God, or others that we “have faith.” But the promise—keeping God might indeed call us to act on invisible realities of his heavenly kingdom.—Matthew W. Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 19–20

Remember when?

I'm sixty-four years old. I remember a lot of things that have changed—many for the better, and some for the worse. We could probably argue about some of them as to whether they are better or worse. And there are some changes that are a mixed bag. Actually, most changes are that way. You gain something, but lose something else. That's the nature of change and life.

But there is one change that baffles me, and has for years. Back in the 1980s, the Republican party bought the (mostly white, middle-class) Evangelical vote with a promise of a constitutional amendment against abortion. Remember that? At the time they proposed it, they didn't have enough clout in either of the houses of congress to make it happen. But, then all of a sudden they did.

Do you remember any of them introducing a constitutional amendment? Me either. But they kept promising it. Until they stopped. Then they just started promising judges who were anti-abortion. But the evangelicals decided that was enough.

Here's the thing, though. Historically, abortion rates have gone up, not down, under Republican administrations. Why? Because outside of the white, middle-class world where abortions are matters of a convenient way to keep status, another mouth to feed means real economic hardship. The Republicans have traditionally reduced spending on social programs, hence to aid for those who need it. Ergo, increased abortions.

A side note, but not unrelated: Since the 1980s, the party that has been the most war-happy and bomb 'em into submission, has been the Republican party (it was the opposite during Vietnam in the 1960s). How is that "pro-life"?

Don't recite to me the litany of evils about the Democrats. There are plenty! Government is a human institution with plenty of institutional sin to go around for all!

All I'm asking is that if you label yourself as an evangelical Christian, you need to take a closer look at why you vote the way you do—by taking into consideration the entire New Testament. Especially the Beatitudes and one of my favorites: "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." James 1:27 NIV

Dismantling the social safety net doesn't seem to be in line with that, does it? Think about that the next time you endorse a candidate only because they claim to be "pro-life." It might turn out that they are simply "put a judge in there who claims to be pro-life" and has all kinds of other baggage that is morally questionable, at best.

What do we mean by faith-based?

Faith or belief was being put forward as the opposite of reasoned judgment in consideration of the evidence. Indeed such evidence was deemed immaterial in advance! Faith was reckoned not just an alternative but a superior way of knowing what is true and what is false. Judgment could be rendered on the basis of inward feelings alone. For these women, and they are not alone in our culture, faith is defined as something one simply must privately and personally affirm regardless of whatever contrary public evidence exists. In short, for many today faith is defined as the opposite of evidence-based truth. This is neither a biblical nor a Christian understanding of faith.—Matthew W. Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 17

Rome might not be burning, but then again…

If you haven't already read Roger Olson's post yesterday, you should. And then you should consider very carefully what exactly you wish this country to become. If you want it to become a right-wing dictatorship, then obviously do nothing. The current occupant of that house in Washington, DC, is intent on convincing the white class that their way of life is in immanent danger. And that only he, as the fearless leader, can rescue you.

If that's your opinion and you call yourself a christian, then you had better pay closer attention to the scriptures that you claim to hold as authoritative, because 90 percent (at least) of what he does is antiscriptural. He spews hate, fear, and lies continually. Is that what you want? Is that the kind of toxic environment you want to live in?

For the record: I don't. And I don't believe most people do. Of course, neither does he, or he wouldn't be working so hard to suppress the votes of those who disagree with him. And don't go telling me that the other guy is just as bad. It's not about that. It's about what you want this country to become (or remain, as it seems to be heading very quickly toward authoritarianism). Be a Republican or a Democrat or an Independent. Fine. But don't buy into their platform without checking it out. Fight for changes to it.

But, as christians, your number one job is to radiate LOVE, not hate. Not fear. Not violence. Love! And pray! Pray for the soul of the nation. Pray for a godly attitude in your own heart, too. If you are against what is happening, but react in hatred, you are as much a problem as "that other guy."

Just an
</idle musing>

P.S. I am going to become increasingly vocal about these things as time goes on. I want to be able to stand before God and say I spoke up on behalf of the underprivileged, the widow, the orphan, the immigrant. What about you? Matthew's parable about the sheep and the goats is pretty clear! Where do you stand?