by Bret Capranica | Dec 10, 2006 | Biblical Studies, Pauline Theology
From Schreiner: “Paul must explain in his gospel how Jesus Christ has accomplished redemption. Human beings are freed to honor and praise God because Jesus in his person and work has vindicated God’s honor. He has succeeded where Adam and Israel failed. He is the promised seed of Abraham and David, the Lord of heaven and earth, and he even shares in the divine nature. He fulfills the promises of the new covenant, and through him the promise made to Abraham that all nations would be blessed is inaugurated” (152). “The promises of salvation made to Israel were not yet fulfilled, and the nation continued to live under Roman control because of its sin. The pattern of sin that permeated Israel’s history demonstrated that the glorious promises of deliverance and salvation were not yet a reality. The history of Israel shows that for God’s promises to be fulfilled, a new humanity is necessary; and for a new humanity, we need a new Adam. Paul proclaims that Jesus the Messiah is the new Adam” (152). Schreiner notes that Israel had not seen the fulfillment of the OT prophecies regarding their ultimate salvation (159). He rightly sees that the promise to Israel in the Abrahamic Covenant is limited to the area of Palestine, but the whole of the Abrahamic promises makes Abraham the heir of the world (160), involving descendants that are broader than Israel as a nation (but not detrimental to the literal fulfillment of those promises to Israel either). “The lordship of Jesus cannot be confined to an initial decision where one submits to his lordship. Paul often appeals...
by Bret Capranica | Dec 9, 2006 | Biblical Studies, Pauline Theology
While I’ve fallen behind in posting on my reading from Tom Schreiner’s book, Paul, Apostle of God’s Glory in Christ, I’ve not really been behind in reading it. I’ll try to catch my posts up: Sin is a Power: Sin is . . . a tyrannical power that exercises its dominion over those in Adam. It enters the world through Adam’s sin and exercises its sway over all people (Rom 5:12-19). Sin manifests its reign in the domonion of death (Rom 5:21). Apart from Christ people are ‘slaves’ to sin (Rom 6:6), whereas believers have been freed from the sin that enslaved them and are now enslaved to righteousness (Rom 6:16-18, 20, 22). The image of slaver is not overstated since unbelievers cannot liberate themselves from sin’s grip. Sin exercises control over them so that they are in bondage to it (127-128). Under the rule of the pedagogue (Gal 3:24). The law as our tutor: Paul uses the illustration of the pedagogue for its temporal significance. That is, he does not appeal to the pedagogues because they functioned as teachers or curbed unsuitable behavior. He introduces the pedagogue for one reason only: pedagogues had charge over people during their minority years. Pedagogues are assigned to children, and when one becomes an adult a pedagogue is unnecessary. Thus, Paul uses the pedagogue as a metaphor for the law to make the point that the law was in force for only a certain period of salvation history. . . . Paul uses the illustration to describe the era in salvation history before the coming of Christ, when believers did not yet...
by Bret Capranica | Nov 12, 2006 | Biblical Studies, Hermeneutics
Biblical Foundations » Authorial Intent vs. Reader-Response Andreas Kostenberger just caused me to add his commentary on the Gospel of John to my CapCravings. I don’t know about all of his hermeneutical positions, but I enjoyed his thoughts regarding the need to stay within the author’s intention when interpreting Scripture. I will be looking forward to his next posts on the subject. I have read him on 1 Timothy 2 and found him very helpful and convincing on the subject of women not teaching in the context of the local church. In short, I don’t find it legitimate to assign symbolic meaning to a text, when the original author provides or suggests no such symbolic intention. Maybe when I finish Romans, John should be my next book to tackle. We will have some time to make this decision, I don’t think I’ll be out of the eighth chapter of Romans until...
by Bret Capranica | Nov 3, 2006 | Biblical Studies, Pauline Theology
From Schreiner on The Violation of God’s Law “. . . we fail to grasp the depth of Pauline theology if we restrict the definition of sin to a violation of what God commands. Instead of viewing sin as a rejection of god personally, we may understand it primarily in terms of failing to live up to a standard. Sin certainly involves the failure to heed God’s commands. What must be emphasized, however, is that sin is first and foremost a rejection of the supremacy of God and his lordship over our lives” (103). “Sin does not primarily consist in violating God’s commands; it involves the repudiation and rejection of a person. . . . What Paul stresses . . . is that the horizontal dimension of sin exists because of the vertical rejection of God” (106). “. . . the promises of the Old Testament regarding Israel had not yet become a reality, and the Old Testament teaches that such promises will be fulfilled when the Spirit comes . . . and softens people’s hearts so that they are enabled to keep the Torah. . . . The Jews are judged because of their failure to obey the Torah” (109-110). Schreiner provides a detailed view of how the phrase “works of law” should be defined. He reviews that perpetuated by Rudolf Bultman, that the phrase refers to a legalistic attitude, obeying the law is a means to earning favor with God. He then reviews James Dunn’s view and the New Perspective on Paul, that “works of the law” refers to Jews trying to place nationalistic distinctions between Jews...
by Bret Capranica | Nov 2, 2006 | Biblical Studies, Pauline Theology
Paul spreads the gospel, particularly to the Gentiles, through his suffering. That is the summation of Thom Schreiner’s chpater on “Suffering & the Pauline Mission.” Paul was attacked for his suffering: accused of being a vacillator, criticized for his lack of success in evangelism, told he needed letters of recommendation, charged with hypocrisy and attacked for his failure to take pay for his work (88). Schreiner does not see the Corinthian letter as a battle between he, his apostleship and the Corinthians [I was not convinced] (91). “. . . his sufferings do not disqualify him from his apostolic office but are the means by which God’s Spirit is poured out in the lives of his converts” (95). Regarding the enigmatic verse in Col 1:24 about Paul filling up what is lacking in Christ’s suffering: “The ‘filling up’ of Christ’s afflictions is the pathway by which the gospel is ‘fulfilled’ in the lives of the Gentiles” (102). “Paul through his sufferings, however, extends the message of Christ’s all-sufficient death to the Gentiles, for such a message was concealed from the Gentiles during the life of Jesus of Nazareth. . . . What is lacking in Christ’s afflictions is that the benefit of those afflictions had not yet been proclaimed among the Gentiles. . . . Paul’s sufferings, in other words, are corollary of Christ’s . . . Paul’s sufferings mirror and reflect what Christ has done, so that the messenger in this sense replicates the life of the one proclaimed”...
by Bret Capranica | Nov 2, 2006 | Biblical Studies, Pauline Theology
I did keep up with my reading plan of Schreiner’s book yesterday, but not my posting of it. so here’s some quotes from yesterday’s reading: “The gospel of Christ fulfills what was written in the Old Testament scriptures, and believers inherit the promises made to Abraham” (73). Schreiner then moves into a brief history of Israel. I thought this was a quaint quote: “The promises of land and seed were substantially fulfilled at this juncture [Joshua’s conquest], but there was little evidence that all nations would be blessed through Abraham” (74). What does substantially fulfilled mean? Obviously Dr. Screiner does not even see Joshua’s conquest and the completion of the promise made to Israel regarding the land. The most fun portion of Schreiner’s chapter is his discussion of the Gentiles being included in the community of Israel through the gospel. He is careful throughout, not to refer to the Jew/Gentile oneness as “the church,” but as “the people of God.” This is language that will suit his position well, but not that which is used in the salient passages he quotes. Romans 2:28-29 are not verses directed at Gentiles who can become Jews, but rather Jews who have never understood God’s original intentions for their Jewishness. Gentiles are never called Jews in Romans (81). He further acknowledges the great debate of “the Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16. Plausible interpretations can be made for it referring to Gentile inclusion with the Jews as well as Israel as an ethnic reference (82-83). Ephesians 2:11ff never calls the Gentile-Jew oneness Israel. In fact he states that both groups have become one...
