(urth) (no subject)

[Matthew Weber]

If I may (as one who does theology from time to time)...

I'm trying to understand the sense in which David is using the term
"grace".  I find it difficult to separate from the concept of salvation,
because salvation is only possible through grace.  In other words, it is by
the grace of God that we are saved, not through any striving of our own
(although obviously we need to respond to that grace in some way).

Christians believe that salvation comes only through Jesus Christ.  This is
not to say that Jews, Muslims, virtuous pagans, etc cannot be saved; it is,
however, to say that whether they are aware of it or not, it is Jesus who
saves them.  Salvation consists in being freed from the just consequences of
our sins, due to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross.  We are no longer
subject to punishment for our misdeeds, because Another has taken that
punishment on our behalf.  The word "grace" denotes that this is a gift, not
something we are expected to earn; our good works are not a means of winning
this gift, but a natural response of gratitude--you could say "thank-you
notes to God" if it doesn't make you want to throw up.  (NB : I am aware
that ultramontane Catholicism and five-point Calvinism alike will find
points of disagreement in this paragraph)

Grace in the Christian sense doesn't seem to have existed before Christ's
passion and resurrection.  The Torah seems to embody an accountant's
approach to morality, with each transgression appearing in the debit column
and requiring the sacrifice of a corresponding asset.  In comparison, the
sacrifice of Christ is a general debt amnesty, a super-Jubilee if you will.

I hope this clarifies rather than muddies.  If the latter case obtains, feel
free to ignore!

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 2:23 PM, David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>wrote:

> Better check with the theologians on that. Here, Wolfe's probable beliefs
> must trump our own.
>
> On 12/16/2010 2:41 PM, Son of Witz wrote:
>
>> I have to say I don't see the sense in projecting that interpretation of
>> paths to salvation if you don't believe in them.  For me, I think salvation
>> is possible without Jesus. I think Jesus meant something completely
>> different than the common interpretation of "None come to the father but
>> through me" or however the quote reads.  So, no Jesus shouldn't imply no
>> salvation. Not even all Christians believe theirs is an exclusive path.
>>
>> On Dec 16, 2010, at 11:15 AM, David Stockhoff<dstockhoff at verizon.net>
>>  wrote:
>>
>>  Well, it's not a concern of mine, so I'm trying to stick with what I
>>> understand as the technical definition.
>>>
>>> Yes, but with a loophole for really good pagans. ;)
>>>
>>> On 12/16/2010 2:08 PM, Son of Witz wrote:
>>>
>>>> I guess then, that you feel there is no possible salvation but through
>>>> Jesus Christ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 16, 2010, at 11:02 AM, David Stockhoff<dstockhoff at verizon.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 101216-1, 12/16/2010
> Tested on: 12/16/2010 5:23:57 PM
>
> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>



-- 
Matt +

Let each man pass his days in that wherein his skill is greatest.
    Sextus Propertius (54 B.C.-A.D. 2), Elegies, II, i, 46
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20101216/88715c7f/attachment-0003.htm>