All Comments (29)

I think you're missing the point. The point is that calling Jesus "Lord" means nothing unless you abide in Jesus' kingdom.

In the first century, in which everyone had a lord over them, think of what it could possibly mean to call Jesus lord. It was more than a title of acclamation or exaltation, it was, "I'm placing my entire self under the rule of this individual."

To get to -heaven- one must realise what -heaven- is. It's present here on earth, it's life lived with God and with people. It is salvation. For the earliest Christians, entering into the Church, the early Christian movement, WAS Salvation, it WAS heaven and it was very very real.

The kingdom of God is as real as the empire of Rome, only it's vastly different. Don't think about it as something that you attain once you die, that's a Platonic understanding of human life, not a Christian one. Don't view life as a prison that you can escape from, life is God-given, it's a gift, it's not a curse.

Allan

Allan,

I do appreciate your response to my post. However, you seem to be making the same errors that almost everyone else has done. You have stated, “You cannot be a Christian and not have both faith and works.” My original argument stated the thief on the cross had only but to believe (this was enough faith to enter His rest). He had no opportunity to follow with good works. I believe that to understand my reasoning, you must know that I separate what Christ has done (His blood gives life for us), and what we might do in response to this action of Christ (our works). The Lord shall judge whether our faith was enough to enter heaven, but you can have a lifetime of good works that get you nowhere.

As I have stated before, one (Christ’s work) must logically come before the other (your work). But if you have saving faith but no opportunity for good works, will the Lord deny you entrance? NO! This means that Jesus’ blood IS the atoning sacrifice for our sins and faith in His work is the requirement for entrance. Faith in that statement is the difference between one who believes as the demons and the one who TRUSTS God.

Again, people quote Matt 7:21 but refuse to finish the statement (Matt 7:21-23) that Jesus was making. First, what is the will of the Father? For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day (John 6:40)."

Secondly, Matthew 7:22-23: these verses clearly show people doing WORKS in his name and Jesus replying he never knew them. If you go on to verse 24, then you see the man putting them into practice. I agree that good works should follow, but once more, what if that opportunity doesn’t come and I die? You see, there must be some other mechanism (I hate to call what the Lord has done a mechanism) that makes this salvation a gift rather than earned. And it is.

By the way, how many good works do you need? One, two, lifetime? How many is enough to accompany salvation? The gift of God is eternal life, the works of man are but glorifying the Father through this belief in the Son.

Thanks again for your post. I thought this thread was dead after I didn’t see anymore responses.

As great a case as that is Rich, faith in God cannot but make you a more just person. It is not taking a statement to be true which is faith; rather it is walking in continuity with what you believe. The act of believing means nothing at all! "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe-and shudder." (Jas 2:19). You cannot be a Christian and not have both faith and works. One thing that my NT lecturer said last year was that the NT doesn't explicitly ask, "How do you get saved?" rather it asks, "Who is lord?" And the answer given by the NT authors, is an emphatic, "Jesus!" You cannot believe that Jesus is lord if your life doesn't resemble it! It takes action to call Jesus lord! "Not everyone who SAYS to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who DOES THE WILL of my Father in heaven." (Matt 7:21 my emphasis). Entering into the "kingdom of God" was like entering into a new universe for early Christians - a new vision of civilization itself which as Crossan says over and over again, is centered on radical egalitarianism and open commensality, civilization centered on peace through justice. Entering into this kingdom of God was and is salvation.

Allan.

Cameron,

What a pleasure discussing this issue with you! I sincerely appreciate your responses and insight…Thanks.

You are absolutely correct in understanding that definitions are crucial to any evaluation! After a more careful reading of "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent. (John 6:29)," and “however, to the man who does NOT WORK but TRUSTS God who justifies the wicked, his FAITH is credited as righteousness.” (Rom 4:5)

1) We have from John 6:29, we have believing as work. So, I must grant your request of — faith is (at least partly) a human act of free-will, i.e. work— as being a viable definition of ‘work’.
2) From Rom 4:4-5, we have one that does not work but has faith. (this SEEMS to contradict John 6:29)

In fact these 2 verses harmonize quite well once you ask the question, what is the purpose of believing in the one he has sent? What does this believing in the one sent get us? For in the gospel a RIGHTEOUSNESS from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith." (Rom 1:17) This RIGHTEOUSNESS from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. (Rom 3:22) And with that understanding it is easy to see why number 2 does not contradict but emphatically agrees with the prior verse. One is righteousness imputed to the believer by Christ’s finished work and the other is a righteousness that is by their own work.

For example, "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I NEVER knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' (Matt 7:21)” Most people understand these verses by quoting only the first sentence (and trying to show that faith alone won’t get you into heaven by just saying “Lord, Lord”), but Jesus is clearly showing that these people were WORKING in his name. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. (Rom 10:3)

You stated, “But you can quote Scripture to back up any position, so I find it hard it take these types of arguments seriously.” If you believed this statement, then you certainly wouldn’t be arguing one way or the other, because it would be futile to even try. But the fact that you have come to some sort of belief system (faith alone is 100% true, but working in the service of Love is also 100% true) based on Christianity means there are certain doctrines that are more convincing to you. Moreover, you could not have come to these conclusions without Scripture, either by way of hearing from someone else or by reading it yourself.

As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he REASONED with them FROM the SCRIPTURES, explaining and PROVING that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead. "This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ," he said. (Acts 17:2-3) This act of reasoning we are doing is not to prove a point but to point to a proof (ie faith vs works), so we don’t have to go another 20 centuries with paradoxes but with concrete understanding.

In summary of my reasoning, we have works defined as wages minus the ONE act of human free-will for salvation. Salvation includes this ONE act of human free-will and faith to enter heaven. This fits with the original argument of the thief on the cross entering heaven without any other work. Still, my original argument stands with this one modification, ONE act of human free-will to choose Christ. If it goes any further, then we get into self-righteousness (not from God) that results in expulsion and does not fit with facts.

Your attentive considerations are much appreciated…Thanks again!!

Hey Rich,

Another intruiging response. I agree with you for the most part: scripture indeed refutes any sort of idea that we can earn salvation, and in this sense we are justified by faith alone.

So yes, faith is a gift, but it is a gift that demands the free response of the whole person - and this involves a minimal degree of human effort, i.e work.

I think we are simply disagreeing about the meaning of the word "work". I define work as a free act of the human heart in response to the gift of Grace - and I made no suggestion that this involves earning one's salvation.

You defined work as "earned wages", as something we do expecting to be compensated or rewarded... And in this sense, you're correct, the world as "the possibility of wages" is exactly what Jesus as the Incarnation of divine justice is overturning and putting radically into question.

I think both our arguments stand once we define the terms... I'm just saying that "faith alone" involves something that a human being has to do, not "earn" but "move into". As Jesus always says after healing the sick: "You're faith has cured you", i.e not the miraculous intevention of God but one's capacity to trust in a certain way of seeing and then moving forward and acting on that trust. Doing the impossible also takes the whole person.

But you can quote Scripture to back up any position, so I find it hard it take these types of arguments seriously. But for what it's worth, Jesus also says that many will claim to believe (i.e have faith alone) but will be refused entrance to the Kingdom because they didn't serve the poor, the orphans, the widows, i.e. they didn't work.

And this means that they are not in Christ - even if they've been justified by faith alone, they didn't live with a passion for paradox in the service of Love, they didn't go all the way with Jesus, and so they are booted out of the Kingdom...

So faith alone is simply not enough - it's only one side the an irreducible creative tension. My position is that we cannot collapse the real ambiguity of following Christ into either the idolatry of "good works" or the cheap grace of "faith alone". In fact they are both 100% true, especially at those times when are really living out our Christian calling...

Again, the paradoxical nature of Christian identity (i.e. faith/works as two sides of the same coin) is affirmed in virtually all of Jesus parables, as well as Paul's theology of the Cross, and it constantly shows up again and again when the Church loses its way - either with Meister Eckhart, Nicholas of Cusa, aspects of Luther, Kiekegaard's absolute paradox, not to mention Tillich, Jung, Chesterton, and in the present day with Dominic Crossan's love for dialectical interplay.

So yes Rich, faith alone is 100% true, but working in the service of Love is also 100% true. And without that piece of the puzzle we're all screwed.

I think what I'm saying is that you can be justified by faith alone (i.e. open to God's ever-present Grace) and still completely waste you're life and be refused entrance into the Kingdom, a Kingdom which comes like a thief in the night, and almost always from the place we least expect.

Thanks for this thoughful exchange, I do appreciate it.

Cameron,

Thanks for your response, for we may actually be getting somewhere. If it can be shown that Faith does not equal work as you stated —faith is (at least partly) a human act of free-will, i.e. work — then my argument stands.

When the disciples heard this, they were very astonished and said, "Then who can be saved?" And looking at them Jesus said to them, "With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matt 19:25-26)

Work connotes earned compensation, and Scripture simply refutes any sort of idea that we can earn salvation no matter how in/significant that work may be. Now when a man WORKS, his wages are NOT credited to him as a GIFT, but as an OBLIGATION. (Rom 4:4)

The man who plants and the man who waters have one purpose, and each will be rewarded according to his own labor." (1 Cor 3:8) Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. "So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. (Matt 6:1-2) These “acts of righteousness” are rewarded according to your own labor (ie giving to the needy) and not according to Christ’s labor (His life, death, and resurrection) which is why salvation is called a gift.

It may be a good thing to believe and accept the truth (faith) and to also feed and clothe the homeless (work), but nowhere in Scripture are these two concepts interchanged or used synonymously. On the contrary; however, to the man who does NOT WORK but TRUSTS God who justifies the wicked, his FAITH is credited as righteousness. (Rom 4:5) Notice that it does not specify what type of work (“a heart felt expression of one's need for salvation, which is itself good works”), but by omission signifies ANY type of work. This clearly delineates between trusting God (faith) and work and also relieves God of any obligation for our "work"!

If your argument was allowed to stand, then the following analogy would apply. If I worked all day and earned $100 then decided to give it to you as a gift, would you consider your acceptance as work? The definition must be narrowed as the Scripture has shown.

So, this act of human free-will cannot be equated, Scripturally speaking, with work though it may be a good thing in itself. Ergo, my original argument stands – Faith alone.

Thought-provoking post Rich, but I disagree.

While pretty much everyone accepts that good works without faith counts for nothing, yr faith alone position doesn't stand up either.

Faith is always shot through with works, even with an atheist on his deathbed or the thief on the cross because faith is (at least partly) a human act of free-will, i.e. work.

So even a last ditch acceptance of God's grace, through faith, involves a human response, a heart felt expression of one's need for salvation, which is itself good works.

So it's both free-will & grace, one without the other will never do. Same with faith & works, faith is the intersection of human free-will with the grace of God, and probably the best work most humans ever accomplish is to actively respond to God's gift - and even if this is done on one's death bed it involves work, it is often shot through with "fear and trembling" and it is itself a free act of the human heart...

So again, it's Both/And, not Either/Or - and this insight isn't an new fad of the Emerging Church - it's at the earliest origins of the Christian tradition itself - in both the teachings of Jesus and the writings of Paul - and is possibly one of the only things they have in common, apart from their Jewishness of course...

As I see the debate, there are only 3 possibilities:
1) Works only will get you saved
2) A combination of works and faith will get you saved
3) Faith alone will save you

As to the first of these arguments, if you only had to work to be saved then Christ did not have to die. It would only be a matter of working off the debt. This absolutely goes against Scripture as one person already has stated on this post. And also, “…for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing! (Gal 2:21)” So this is not a solution.

Number 2 seems to be the one that almost all would agree that seems most plausible. But is it? To uncover whether or not this statement is false, one needs only to find one instance of faith without works. Let us take as our example an atheist on his deathbed reaching out to Christ in faith. He had no chance of doing good works but Christ would never dismiss an honest confession prompted by faith. Is this too much of straw man’s argument? Let us take the thief on the cross who cried "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom. (Luke 23:42)” Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise. (Luke 23:43)" This man, also, had no opportunity to do good works, though I have no doubt he would have but given the chance.

That is the one argument that refutes number 2 and therefore leaves number 3 as the only viable alternative.

Last but certainly not least, faith alone. Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?" Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent. (John 6:29)" God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. (Rom 3:25-26)

It is all about justification. Can you justify yourself? Does your righteousness count? Then you can’t save yourself! You take your life’s work of good deeds and put that up against the precious blood of Christ (as in cases 1 and 2) and see how it foolish it looks! If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness. (Rom 4:2-3)"

Unfortunately, most people do not see that one must come before the other. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them. (Ephesians 2:10) God prepared these things beforehand, not to merit salvation but to glorify Him. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God. (Eph 2:8)

"A recognition that the Holy God who caused Isaiah to cry out, "Woe is me!" and Moses to hide in the cleft of a rock is active in our midst."

Actually, these are words of well- meaning Jewish scribes who had the embellishing talents of the authors of Greek mythology.

It is certainly possible to have works without faith. That is what Paul criticizes. It is not however possible to have faith without works. That is what James reminds us.

Faith is not mere mental assent to a theological proposition. It is an active trust and commitment to Jesus as Lord and such a faith will change how we live and act.

Professor Crossan's interpretation of Philipians 2: "Work out your salvation with faith and trembling" is curious, and wholly dependent on a subjective and idiosycrantic picture of Jesus as a wandering cynic. In an effort to fit this passage to his Procustrean bed, he all but ignores the verse's plain self-explanation: "Because it is God at work in you.
Modern English translations fail to clarify that the personal pronoun here is plural. It is not individuals, but the church as a whole that is working out the implications of its new life in Christ. And the fear and trembling are not a response to the threat of political prosecution, but a recognition that the Holy God who caused Isaiah to cry out, "Woe is me!" and Moses to hide in the cleft of a rock is active in our midst.
Such an awareness is humbling and awe inspiring.

Who chooses what are good works and what are not?
The Church? Sunday at the Confirmation of my young friend at a Catholic Church in Mexico, I saw a crowd of about 300 put money in the basket at the mass presided over by the Bishop. A dirty, old toothless man stood outside the sanctuary with an asthma inhaler and a doctor's prescription in hand. The parishoners smiled and walked by ignoring his outstretched hand. When I gave him 50 pesos (a lot by Mexican wage standards), my friends cried "He's a fraud, the precription isn't real." "How do you know?, I asked. "Because that is the way of the begger," was their reponse. My reply was, "Fraud or not, the Bishop is already rich. I would rather give my money to the old man than the Bishop." Who was right? What was the good work? Giving the money to the Bishop or the old man? Or both? Defining good works is like defining the right religion. Both are just pointing at the moon.

Angie,

For a historical review of Paul's thinking regarding the topic, see Crossan and Reed's book, In Search of Paul.

For more history, see the above commentary about Purgatory and Luther/Protestants/Catholics.

This was a lot of words with no meaning. The Apostle Paul speaking for The Lord Jesus Christ says it simply and as plain as possible.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:

Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

You will not boast of one good work before a holy God. Salvation is a gift.

Neither are more important, are they? I always thought they were one in the same thing. If you have faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ, then naturally "good works" are a mere result of that faith. It is wrong to say that James and Paul contradict each other, for they were writing to two different audiences, and for two different reasons. In Pauls case you have Jews finally accepting the Gentiles saying: okay you can be a part of this too, but you still have to do this in that to be in the club, and on James' side you had people, like a lot of people today, who say that all you have to do is say a prayer, and "have faith" and you are going to heaven. Both of which are false. When Christ TRUELY comes into your life BY FAITH, a heart is merged with HIS, and good works are a result, just as an apple is the fruit that comes from an apple tree, no work is done, the apple vine just simply abides and the apple is the result. When it comes to good works, it is all about the "workers" motive.

Tim
"God love has no opposite but human love must surely does." Interesting.
Human love
#1-Phileo,Brotherly love:-Opposite,War,Hate
#2-Eros,Erotic Sex without commitment.
Opposite-Erotic Sex with a commitment(love).

God love, Agapae love-a self giving love such as Jesus'life.
The opposite-A selfish stingy life.?.

"Either/or - and/both" are probably some kind of lingo used by some mystical types. Maybe the Emerging Church or some other movement like it; possible inspired by McLaren. Its all good, and all their stuff sounds the same after awhile - you know it is and/both. I guess since Love is God and God is love, then love can not have an opposite. The Greeks solved this problem by defining many kinds of love. Agapae love being the highest love. So to be precise agapae love (God love) has no opposite but human love must surely does.

The Both/And approach put forward by Professor Crossan here is absolutely essential as it holds true not just for the faith/works dichotomy but for the very heart of Christian orthodoxy: as Chesterton puts it bluntly, "Christianity is a superhuman paradox where two opposite passions may blaze beside each other."

So it's the same story with free-will & grace, both of these are absolutely necessary for salvation, as it is with forgiveness & the acknowledgment of sin which coincide in the movements of faith. And who would deny that our wounded humanity is inseparable from the inexhaustable love of God? Isn't it also true that it is by losing our lives we save it? Can anyone honestly set apart the crucified Jesus from the risen Christ? Isn't the definitive statement of orthodox Christology since the early Church that belief that Jesus is BOTH 100% human AND 100% divine.

Isn't this both/and understanding and the paradoxical nature of Christian identity simply obvious? Really now, if anyone sets apart these opposing tensions, and wants to collapse this passion for paradox into their favourite opposite then they've lost the very essence of what it means to be a Christian...

The very mark of original sin is "knowledge of good and evil" - which shows up in the all too human tendency to feel good about oneself by clinging to one side of these binary pairs and demonizing the opposite point of view... The very heart of Christ is to break this cycle of violence with a most un-expected gift of Love that ultimately shows up as the absolute paradox of God on a cross.

So adhering to false dichotomies (saved vs.lost, faith vs. works, believer vs. infidel) are never an expression of the way of Christ. This is, as far as I can see, exactly why Professor Crossan speaks of the creative tension of both/and rather than either/or...

Moreover, this paradoxical structure goes back to BEFORE the Christian tradition proper to the oral teachings of the historical Jesus' himself, teachings which shattered the horizons of the existing social order with a paradoxical shock that exposed the upright to be degenerate and revealed the degenerate to be upright...

Love has no opposite

Doing good deeds is the right thing to do but you cannot buy your way to salvation, God won it for the entire human race. God won the keys to hell and death and He will use them in His time. When satan tried to hijack Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews and said that Jesus is merely a prophet and at that a second-rate prophet instead of who Jesus really is and that is God incarnate,well satan is a liar just like God told us when the Second Person of the Trinity of God emptied Himself and became a human being and in doing that became the Brother of the entire Human Race. Like I have said before in different postings God does not look at your religious affiliation or lack thereof but is a searcher of hearts and minds. Knowing God's name isn't some kind of magic, a lot of people know His name and call themselves christians that doesn't mean that they are one. Jesus said a lot of things and one of them was to "Come follow Me". Jesus also said "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life no one comes to the Father except thru Me. That means there are a lot of ways to Jesus. Something else our Brother told us and that is that "My Kingdom is not of this world". The "Good News" which is what the word Gospel means is what the angels said when Jesus was born, "This is Good News for all people". God does look at what you do and why you do it. Actually being a christian is carrying on the work that Jesus started but He said He would help us and also He sent us the Holy Spirit to guide us into all Truth, I think that was pretty nice of Him. I am the New Testament Moses and my job is to proclaim the "Good News", you can believe or not but God wins Total Victory, a tie is unacceptable, the captives will be released, "those in hell" and the dead shall rise, "those in spirital death". We are still in the sixth day of creation, how long it will continue to last I do not know, but night will come like our Brother Jesus said, "Be Ready". The seventh day shall also come and with it the coming of the Kingdom of God or the Kingdom of Love whichever you wish to call it because God is Pure Love. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

"Both/And not Either/Or" -- what is this suppose to mean? It is not very helpful. Nor is the diversion into "fear and trembling" and the use of a theological, pedantic language. Speaking in tongues is nice but then we need someone to translate. Keep it simple: Let's all just be troubled by a faith that does not inspire good works or good intentions. And it is reasonable to take fear and trembling as a plea to be very careful with something infinitely precious.

Luther is not Paul.

Luther is correct in that Faith will create works.

As James put it...

James 2:18
Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

Regardless, it is not by faith we are justified in the sight of God.

Romans 3
28Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Why is it so?

Why are we justified by Faith alone? Here is why...

James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

Again in the words of Luther,

"It is impossible to separate works from faith as burning and shining from fire. "

For a historical review of Paul regarding the topic, see Crossan and Reed's book, In Search of Paul.

For more history see the above commentary about Purgatory and Luther/Protestants/Catholics.

Forget the great swelling words given above, here is the unabridged truth on the matter...

There is no clearer STATEMENT THEN THE FOLLOWING:

Romans 3:
26To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

27Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

28Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

I would be troubled by a faith that did not inspire good works or good intentions.

I take fear and trembling as a plea to be very careful with something infinitely precious.

Actually, Professor, I'd add one more layer to the 'fear and trembling.' The more profound a challenge is, the closer it gets to a place of import, the more we feel a kind of fear and trembling. I reach the end of a sonnet I'm writing if it's good I can barely stay seated. How much more when you're coming to grips with your own salvation, with the power and reality that you yourself, via the grace of G-d, contain and wield?

Actually, Professor, I'd add one more layer to the 'fear and trembling.' The more profound a challenge is, the closer it gets to a place of import, the more we feel a kind of fear and trembling. I reach the end of a sonnet I'm writing if it's good I can barely stay seated. How much more when you're coming to grips with your own salvation, with the power and reality that you yourself, via the grace of G-d, contain and wield?

More background on the topic.

Some faith vs. good works history, as per my good friend, a Catholic theology professor at a large Catholic university: It is all about Purgatory -

"Protestants because of Luther's "sola Scriptura" do not accept Purgatory as a valid doctrine of Christianity. Luther argued that "Purgatory"
is not explicitly found in the Bible. Many scholars believe that he rejected the notion because of its ties to the selling of writs of indulgence. People viewed indulgences as a means for lessening the time of temporal punishment
in purgatory. Protestants also argue that Purgatory negates the satisfaction of sin by Jesus' death. God's grace through the merits of Christ is the only thing that saves. Religious services / prayers by loved ones and the
good works of repentance for deceased persons can do nothing to help a person earn heaven. The rejection of purgatory, is part of a bigger tendency in Protestantism toward individual relationship with God and away from a
sense of participation in a bigger "communion" of the faithful.

"The Roman Catholic Church teaches that after death, those guilty of sins that are not serious (venial rather than mortal) and of mortal sins for
which persons have repented, must spend time being purified through "temporal punishment" or are given the opportunity to repent. The justice
of God requires some punishment for the sins we have committed, due to the harm they have caused. The Biblical basis for this teaching is 1 Cor 3:15. "If any person's work is burned up, he/she will suffer loss, though the person will be saved, but only as through fire." Purgatory is envisioned to be a purification, as gold is purified "as through fire," so is the soul of
the person who has committed sin. 2 Maccabees 12: 38-46 is also associated with belief in purgatory, because it refers to praying for those who have died.

Some scholars trace purgatory as a teaching to the practice of third century Christians of praying for the dead. In the late 12th century
speculation emerged that depicted purgatory as a separate "place" or state of being existing somewhere between heaven and hell. At the Second Council of Lyons (1274) teaching about purgatory became an official doctrine of the Catholic Church. It became fixed in the Catholic imagination due to Dante's Divine Comedy. During the Middle Ages (time of Crusades and Plagues)
Purgatory became an important element in Christian ascetical practices. Through such practices it was believed that the punishment due to sin could be paid here or in purgatory. In the Middle Ages speculation about Purgatory
heightened and the practice of offering masses for deceased loved ones began along with the system of indulgences. Offering prayers and Masses for the dead was seen as a way to be spiritually connected (in communion) with loved
ones.

For Catholics the doctrine of Purgatory is closely connected with belief in the Communion of Saints. This doctrine expresses the conviction that there is a communion between life after death (Saints in heaven and people making reparation for their sins in purgatory) and earthly life. Emphasis on the community of all persons living and dead is stronger in the Roman
Catholic Church than in Protestant Churches. Because of the belief in the Communion of Saints, Catholics pray for loved ones who have died, and pray not only to God - Father, Son and Holy Spirit - but also to Mary and the
Saints, witnesses to and models of the Christian life. [Orthodox Christians also have the practice of honoring and praying to the Saints.] Devotion to the saints is viewed as an expression of love for those who have faithfully loved the God who is love itself."

Professor Crossan, and Dr. Freeman,

Thank you for that useful analyses of the passage in Philippians, (which follows my personal favorite, the Christ Hymn.)I have looked at that "fear and trembling" bit many times and tried to reason why the Master, Jesus, would cause that state, while I tried to serve Him in the manner He called us to do.
I too cannot separate being in Christ with endeavoring with my entire being to do what He calls us to do. And of course failing regularly and then coming back to Him regularly for forgiveness.There are so many ways to be diverted from working for the Realm of God!

For added review about Faith vs. Works, see Professors Crossan and Reed's book, In Search of Paul, especially pp. 377-378.

An excerpt: " In the sixteenth century, Luther said two things about Paul's letter to the Romans, one fundamentally right, one fundamentally wrong, both fundamentally important. In the preface to his commentary on that letter he (Luther) said,

..............................
It is impossible to separate works from faith as burning and shining from fire.

That last sentence is both crucial and correct. "

Great post Professor Crossan,

I love your work and just have a few comments. Even though Paul never met the historical Jesus, this both/and tension between faith and works, (or grace and free-will) is remarkably similarity to the paradoxical structure of the Jesus'parables as recorded in the synoptic gospels.

All too briefly, in the Prodigal Son there is "undecidable" tension between dutiful and rebellious sons; in the Good Samaritan there is a similar creative dialectic between the upright Jews and Samaritan outcast; and in the Workers in the Vinyard there is the same both/and shift in pespective between the expected rewards of the hard workers and the unexpected favour shown to those hired last.

Basically, then, Jesus' most memorable teachings on the Kingdom of God also share the same irreducible both/and tensions of this Pauline passage, as they also refuse to dis-ambiguate opposing perspectives into an either/or logic, and its demand for objective certainty.

Rather, with Jesus' paradoxical teachings - it's the saved who are lost, and the lost who are saved, in a paradoxical language that finds historical continuity in Paul's writings about how the foolishness of God trumps the wisdom of the world, etc...

Just one question though. Is there "fear and trembling" merely because the world will punish us if we succeed (which is indeed true in Paul's existential situation) or rather beause the grace of God moves us to embrace the paradoxical tensions of faith, which consistently unhinge us and break open our ordinary horizons of meaning and expectation.

In this sense, Paul's reference to "fear and trembling" suggests that it is the very movments of faith that take us out of our self-imposed comfort zones and security systems, and expose us to "fear and trembling" as the structural blindness of faith, hope and love...

Thanks for the thought provoking post,

Dr. Cameron Freeman
Adelaide, South Australia