Luther and the new look on Paul v Christianity and Judaism
Posted: August 20th, 2008, 7:02 pm
I said I would start this one but I have to begin by confessing that I know very little about the new look and so I hope I will learn a lot. Let me begin by summarizing Luther's interpretation of Paul as I understand it and where some scholars disagree.
Luther writes and thinks in the context of late Medieval Catholicism. Key to this kind of thinking is the idea of merit. Christ's work merited salvation but this was not guaranteed to any baptized Christian. Rather one had to merit that salvation. This did not mean earning salvation in Pelagian fashion where salvation was seen as a reward commensurable with ones works but rather these works were seen as works of condign merit not in themselves worthy of salvation but counted as worthy by God as a kind of step in the right direction. In practice this seemed to mean that a person was earning salvation through good works.
Luther's nightmare was that he knew God was holy and could never believe that his own works were good enough to merit salvation. What he discovered, or invented, in reading Paul was a doctrine of justification by faith alone. Salvation is not a reward for our works but a response to our faith or trust in God. But behind this stands a doctrine of salvation by grace; the faith which saves us is itself a gift which God gives to whom he will. It is our act of faith and this alone which enables us to have a right standing before God and any good works are a response of gratitude.
Luther equates law and gospel with nature and grace so that nature and grace are in sharp contrast in a way they never were in medieval theology. The law serves only to condemn but under grace we stand forgiven, released from the burden of trying to earn our way to heaven without having to say God has lowered his standards in order to let us in.
In Luther's view first century Judaism is seen as a religion of works, similar to the Catholicism he is opposing but fully rather than partially Pelagian.So having discovered the true gospel the good Dr.Martin visits some of the local Jewish communities to take them the good news that they can be released from the burden of the law; if they accept the gospel this will be a tremendous endorsement for protestantism. It doesn't pan out and the Jews are no more keen on the new Christianity than the old one; indeed in so far as over in Spain some of the key figures in the counter reformation are converted Jews it may be said to be less so. In later life Luther comes to regard the Jews as stubborn and recalcitrant and hence his now notorious ant antisemitism. Over in Switzerland Calvin modifies the protestant gospel, produces something less sharply paradoxical and instead of a contrast between faith and works proclaims a gospel where we are saved by Christ's work not ours. The evangelicals of later years simply add Luther to Calvin and ignore the conflicts between them.
Meanwhile back in the twentieth century Sanders does some digging around in first century sources. He proves to many people's satisfaction that Luther was barking up the wrong tree. First century Judaism was a religion of grace not of works, though not really much concerned with how to get into heaven. So if there was no religion of works for Paul to be arguing against what was he talking about . . . Over to you
Luther writes and thinks in the context of late Medieval Catholicism. Key to this kind of thinking is the idea of merit. Christ's work merited salvation but this was not guaranteed to any baptized Christian. Rather one had to merit that salvation. This did not mean earning salvation in Pelagian fashion where salvation was seen as a reward commensurable with ones works but rather these works were seen as works of condign merit not in themselves worthy of salvation but counted as worthy by God as a kind of step in the right direction. In practice this seemed to mean that a person was earning salvation through good works.
Luther's nightmare was that he knew God was holy and could never believe that his own works were good enough to merit salvation. What he discovered, or invented, in reading Paul was a doctrine of justification by faith alone. Salvation is not a reward for our works but a response to our faith or trust in God. But behind this stands a doctrine of salvation by grace; the faith which saves us is itself a gift which God gives to whom he will. It is our act of faith and this alone which enables us to have a right standing before God and any good works are a response of gratitude.
Luther equates law and gospel with nature and grace so that nature and grace are in sharp contrast in a way they never were in medieval theology. The law serves only to condemn but under grace we stand forgiven, released from the burden of trying to earn our way to heaven without having to say God has lowered his standards in order to let us in.
In Luther's view first century Judaism is seen as a religion of works, similar to the Catholicism he is opposing but fully rather than partially Pelagian.So having discovered the true gospel the good Dr.Martin visits some of the local Jewish communities to take them the good news that they can be released from the burden of the law; if they accept the gospel this will be a tremendous endorsement for protestantism. It doesn't pan out and the Jews are no more keen on the new Christianity than the old one; indeed in so far as over in Spain some of the key figures in the counter reformation are converted Jews it may be said to be less so. In later life Luther comes to regard the Jews as stubborn and recalcitrant and hence his now notorious ant antisemitism. Over in Switzerland Calvin modifies the protestant gospel, produces something less sharply paradoxical and instead of a contrast between faith and works proclaims a gospel where we are saved by Christ's work not ours. The evangelicals of later years simply add Luther to Calvin and ignore the conflicts between them.
Meanwhile back in the twentieth century Sanders does some digging around in first century sources. He proves to many people's satisfaction that Luther was barking up the wrong tree. First century Judaism was a religion of grace not of works, though not really much concerned with how to get into heaven. So if there was no religion of works for Paul to be arguing against what was he talking about . . . Over to you