Home
« Home | Next: Amazing »
| Next: The final numbers were in! »
| Next: For Discussion »
| Next: A Well Balanced Perspective »
| Next: The News from India »
| Next: Awards »
| Next: Would you think it wise? »
| Next: Behind Enemy Lines? »
| Next: Mission to India »
| Next: A Continuation »

Thoughts

Topics

Archives


Subscribe

Feed Link

Study Help

Real Help

    Needed Prayers


Links

About

About Kc


Awards

Quotes

    "You are really cool you are married to an European!! How cooler can you be??"
    Fisherman Pecheur

    "Smarty Pants"
    Mad Matt

    "Oh, you did not ask for Bonhoeffer's opinion did you? You wanted mine..."
    the SOFYST

    "You are like the master at this "feelings" stuff!
    Kind Kristi

    "I enjoy your comments, but they are always delightfully enigmatic"
    Dyspraxic Fundamentalist


Sunday, October 28, 2007

Okay gang, set back and get comfortable...

Update 11/05/07: The new link to "Between Salvation and Eternity" is http://historyofsalvation.wordpress.com/

Kick off your shoes (preferably at the door, says Matthew), take a deep cleansing breath and clear your minds...Comfy?

Now click on this link and prepare to read, re-read and read again as much as you need to make sure you understand the concepts presented here.

Labels: ,

7 Comments:

Blogger jeff said...

KC,

I've heard this argument before and I'm not sure if the primary presupposition is even correct.

Viewing the Bible as a whole, couldn't it be said that OT "salvation" seemed more communal, in nature... ie- the direction of the king determined the direction of the people, while NT "salvation" is more bent toward the individual?

I read NT verses like this:

John 3:36 The one who believes in the Son has eternal life. The one who rejects the Son will not see life, but God’s wrath remains on him.

and this:

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought at a price. Therefore glorify God with your body.

...and I wonder if the OT societal paradigm isn't somewhat fulfilled through the adoption of the Gentiles, and the NT emphasis on personal confession in salvation.

And while I understand the sociological implications of the 1st century church, it would seem to me that scripture should, in fact, influence society, and not vice-versa.

From the post-in-question:
My point is that if individualism was NOT the social paradigm of the day, then to "construct" theological paradigms that have individualism at their core, would necessarily be incongruous or at odds with the New Testament's emphases on salvation (since it is a product of first century Judea, in general).

Funny. In reading the NT, I see no evidence that the teachings of Jesus and Paul do not, in fact, place emphasis on the concept of a personal choice in salvation. Sure, the social paradigm was different than today, but it seems to me that much of the NT flies in the face of the 1st century sociological view.

A personal assurance of salvation is hardly a solely, 20th century concept. Just ask the thief on the cross...

10/29/2007 05:41:00 PM  
Blogger jeff said...

...or did I totally miss the concept?

;-)

10/29/2007 05:41:00 PM  
Blogger Kc said...

Jeff I don’t think you missed the concept but I suspect that some of his points might be clouded and I don’t think that’s necessarily in your comprehension. I actually think Bobby would appreciate your input very much.

I’ve been following his articles for over a year as well as his interaction with others so it may be that I pick up on some things he writes because of his previous articles. I know he would appreciate knowing if he should expound on a topic to make his position more clear.

Would you consider offering your thoughts here at his site?

10/29/2007 08:35:00 PM  
Blogger jeff said...

KC,

What do you feel are the implications of this line of thinking? How does the concept of "communal" assurance of salvation affect the modern-day methodology of salvation? Do you think this effect is a good/bad thing?

10/30/2007 09:42:00 AM  
Blogger Kc said...

Jeff, first thanks to you and Dorsey both for your feedback to Bobby.

To be honest I don’t think this perception makes any implication on the method of salvation but I do believe it can alter our understanding on election and our understanding on election is what ultimately determines where we seek assurance of eternal life and if we look for assurance where there is none we might never be able to “move on to perfection.” (Heb. 5:12-6:2)

How's that for a run-on sentence? ;-)

10/30/2007 04:49:00 PM  
Anonymous bobby grow said...

Kc,

thank you for linking me, I'm sorry I just noticed you did that.

I think EMPHASIS is everything in theology, and biblical theology. And that's what my point was, underscoring a different anthropological emphasis present in first century Judea, and the middle east in general. Scripture, like I said, is a product of its culture (that's right in line with a full verbal inspiration view, that we Evangelicals follow so closely), therefore understanding the linguistic/socio/cultural norms of "that" day is significant in understanding the audience and thus motifs that Paul or any other scripture writer would have as his informing communicative grid.

It is true scripture is divine in origin, but like Christ, it has enculturated itself in human modes. Thus these two realities are not in competition, but by design complement eachother relative to God's unfolding "revelation," in Christ.

As far as the emphasis of a "communal" approach, I think the trinity, as I noted in comment at my site, is significant in this regard . . . since this places the "person of Christ" in the forefront of the question at hand, i.e. "assurance." And if HE represents both the "objective" and "subjective" side of salvation . . . then all we need to KNOW is HIM, and realize that our reconciliation to the Father, through Him, by the power of the Holy Spirit serves as the focal point of our election, and as your rightly point out, Kc, assurance. And let me correct myself, I said "our election", the focal point is actually "HIS election". Once again, Christ is supreme, and our union with Him must simply be taken at HIS WORD, and nothing that WE can subjectively discern about "His supposed" work in us, relative to the issue of assurance.

Don't you all see how if we look away from Christ, to affirm our relationship with Him, how this leads to pelagianism, and "re-inserting" ourselves (our good works) as the foundation and point of salvation (excuse the rhetorical tone of this little paragraph, please ;).

Anyway I do thank you all for the feedback, and once again, thank you Kc for promoting this particular post of mine--much appreciated.

P.S. I have transferred my "Between Salvation and Eternity" blog to a wordpress host, unfortunately I was unable to transfer the comments, if you want you can copy and paste those before tomorrow, when that particular typepad blog will be no more.

11/03/2007 08:52:00 PM  
Blogger Kc said...

Bobby I’m very happy to promote and support you and your effort in this in what little way I am able. I suspect I fully understand the tone of your plea but I am convinced it has nothing to do with rhetoric but is born out of a sincere desire to help others perceive the dire consequence of seeking or accepting a false assurance for themselves or others.

I will also confess that I suspect your understanding in this might also help to pry free the doctrine of Election from the grips of Determinism.

Thanks for the heads-up on the change of address. I will update my links this morning.
;-)

11/05/2007 04:01:00 AM  

Post a Comment