Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: gilham@csl.sri.com (Fred Gilham) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Minimum Requirements (Was Re: the Sabbath & Soul... Message-ID: Date: 10 May 91 07:06:08 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Computer Science Lab, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA. Lines: 54 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu Hmn, I think Jesus said something like, ``Unless your righteousness exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of God.'' So obviously salvation does not come by a sort of minimum requirement. In fact, Paul claims that ``as to righteousness under the law [he was] blameless.'' Nevertheless, he found this inadequate. He says elsewhere, ``Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not; for if a law had been given which could make alive, then righteousness would indeed be by the law.'' (Galatians 3.21) Note that the issue in this passage is actually righteousness, not salvation (not to claim that the two can be seperated). If people will forgive me for the phrase, I think we really need to see this as a paradigm shift. The question might have been posed, ``How can we be good enough to be saved and to otherwise please God?'' But the N.T. teaching seems to answer a different question, because it says that righteousness grows out of our restored relationship with God, apart from the law (Romans 3.21-22: ``But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe;'' see also Ephesians 2.8-10). Righteousness is not a qualification, it is a by-product. The question of an objective standard for righteousness, in my mind, is answered in Galatians 5, when Paul discusses the works of the flesh and the fruits of the Spirit. I really feel that Galatians 5.22 gives us plenty to deal with. And those qualities are gifts of the Spirit as he works in us. I'd like to point out a distinction here that I feel is important. People often distinguish between `external' righteousness and `internal' righteousness. The first is coerced, the second comes from the heart. Not wanting to deny this distinction, I'd nevertheless like to turn it on its head. In truth, our righteousness is an `external' righteousness. It is not something that we posess or that is an expression of our nature. Instead, we borrow it from Christ. To the extent that Christ's Spirit works in our lives, to that extent we become righteous. (See Phil. 3.9). We are never righteous in ourselves (nor do we ever posess the truth in ourselves, etc.). This is an important point; among other things, if we remember this we will be less likely to condemn those around us. Anyway, I think we need to remember that Christian ethics are `supernatural'. We are not able to be the way God wants us to be by ourselves (back to Galatians 3.21 again). Yet this is painful because we are not in control. If the Spirit does not act, our situation is hopeless. The desire to DO SOMETHING is behind the desire to have a law to follow. Besides this, laws are much more comforting to the leadership. They are an objective standard by which followers can be measured. To have to say, ``Walk by the Spirit'' is very unnerving. However, this is the implication of the fact that our righteousness only grows out of our relationship, by faith, with a supernatural agent. -- -Fred Gilham gilham@csl.sri.com