 |
|
     |
|
|
|
The Four: A Survey of the Gospels
Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom
From Behind the Veil: The Epistles of John
Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture
1 & 2 Kings
Brazos Theological Commentary
The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter
A Great Mystery: Fourteen Wedding Sermons
Deep Comedy: Trinity, Tragedy, And Hope In Western Literature
Miniatures & Morals: The Christian Novels of Jane Austen
The Priesthood of the Plebs: A Theology of Baptism
A Son To Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel
From Silence to Song: The Davidic Liturgical Revolution
Ascent to Love: A Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy
Blessed Are the Hungry: Meditations on the Lord's Supper
A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament
Heroes of the City of Man: A Christian Guide to Select Ancient Literature
Brightest Heaven of Invention: A Christian Guide To Six Shakespeare Plays
Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life
The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church
Paul quotes, alludes to, or echoes Isaiah 40-66 over twenty times in the letter to the Romans. Many of the major moves of the letter are linked with references to Isaiah, argues J. Edward Walters.
The thesis that God reveals His righteousness to the Jew first and also to the Greek is similar to the LXX of Isaiah 51:4-8. He quotes directly from Isaiah 52:5 when he charges Jews with doing the very things they condemn in others, and quotes from Isaiah 59:7-8 in chapter 3 to show that all are under the power of sin. In announcing the single sacrifice of Jesus, he alludes to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. ”WHo can bring a charge against God’s elect?” is answered with Isaiah 50:8, “It is God who justifies,” and the hardening and mercy of Romans 9 makes use of Isaiah 49:10.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, August 21, 2010 at 5:51 am
Where does Paul get the notion that Abraham is “heir of the world”? Mark Forman argues in a 2009 JSNT article that it arises from Paul’s seeing the story of Abraham through the lends of Isaiah 54. Applying Richard Hays’s criteria for identifying echoes, Forman concludes that “there is good evidence that Paul is intentionally echoing this passage from Isa. 54 in Romans 4: the passage explicitly occurs in Galatians; there is a degree of verbal and conceptual correspondence between the two passages, and the use of the passage in this way is plausible in the context of the first-century Graeco-Roman world.”
How how does a quotation from Isaiah 54 fit into Romans 4, which is often understood as a passage about Abraham’s personal faith? Forman shows that the promises of seed and land go together in Genesis, and argues that Paul has not spiritualized away the concern with territory. He thinks Paul applies this promise specifically to the Christians at Rome, consisting mainly of the poor and marginalized, and concludes: “it seems likely that in Rom. 4.19-21 Paul deliberately alludes to Isa. 54.1-3, a passage originally used to provide hope in the midst of exile. The artists, poets and sculptors of first-century Rome were covering their ‘canvas’ with colours they perceived would or should be (or already were) the colours ofthe future. Paul appropriates Isa. 54.1-3 and the interpretive tradition associated with it in order to remind his audience that, although they are currently in the midst of a world fraught with inequality and injustice, and dwelling in the shadows of an empire which claims otherwise, it is the people of God, consisting now of believing Jews and Gentiles, who have been promised the inheritance ofthe earth.”
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, August 21, 2010 at 5:37 am
In a 1962 article, one Leslie Allen connections Paul’s discussion of the work of the Last Adam in Romans 5 with the work of the Servant of Isaiah: ”In Paul’s great formulation of the origin and effect of sin and its redemptive counteraction in Christ (Romans v. 12 ff.) it has been recognized that the concepts of the Son of Man and of the Servant have been united. O. Cullmann has written of v. 19: ‘Verse 19 shows clearly that the apostle had in mind the Servant of Isaiah: …by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous.’ This is a reference to Isaiah liii. 11: My Servant shall make many to be accounted righteous.’ A. M. Hunter agrees: ‘The latter half of the verse [v. 19] surely echoes Isaiah liii. 11.’ It is noticeable that Cullmann omits beda‘t? [by his knowledge] in his quotation from Isaiah liii.11. But is not that too echoed in Romans v. 19, in the words dia tes upakoes tou enos (‘by the obedience of the one’)?”
This has intriguing implications in various directions. First, it indicates that the Servant of Isaiah is, among other things, an Adamic figure. Second, it shows how Paul’s theology of atonement and justification is rooted in Isaiah’s Servant prophecies. Third, Paul’s interpretation of the phrase “by his knowledge” as “by obedience” is arresting. Fourth, the reference to “knowledge” in Isaiah 53 becomes more explicable: Because the Servant is an Adam, his work is about undoing the sin of Adam at the tree of knowledge. Justifying many by his knowledge/obedience might be taken to mean “justifying many by obeying with regard to knowledge,” by a right use of the fruit of the tree of knowledge.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, August 21, 2010 at 5:17 am
How is circumcision a seal of the righteousness of faith (Romans 4:11). Augustine (Contra Faustum) says this:
Circumcision was performed on the eighth day.
The eighth day is the day of Jesus’ resurrection.
Jesus resurrection is for our justification (Romans 4:25).
Hence, “because this resurrection, which justifies us when we believe it, was symbolized by that circumcision on the eighth day, the apostle therefore says of Abraham, to whom it was first entrusted, ‘And he received the sign of circumcision as a sign of the righteousness of faith.’”
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, June 8, 2010 at 7:13 am
INTRODUCTION
No family exists in isolation from the rest of the world. Our children have friends, many go to school; eventually they will leave home for good. We should train them so that when they leave, they are led out by the Spirit.
THE TEXT
“There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. . . .” (Romans 8:1-17).
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 5:10 am
Romans 7 is about the law, and the effects that the law has on someone (Paul) who is living in the flesh. When the law comes, it divided Paul into two, like a sacrifice, killing him and leaving him desperate for new life, which he found in Christ and His Spirit (8:1-4).
If Paul is talking about the effect of Torah on people living in the flesh, how is it that so many Christians find that Romans 7 describes their experience? How do we explain Luther’s anguish?
Is it perhaps that the church has, more often than we realize or care to admit, has been Galatian? Is it perhaps because we – Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant all – have regularly brought ourselves back under the elementary principles of the cosmos?
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, May 11, 2009 at 4:44 am
Morna Hooker’s classic article “Adam in Romans 1″ gets a basic point right: Adam is a model of fall into idolatry that Paul outlines. She also gets some things wrong.
First, strangely, though she acknowledges the link between Romans 1 and Psalm 106, she never develops the point by noting that the fall Paul describes is also the fall of Israel (at Sinai, vv. 19-20 ). This doesn’t nullify an Adamic reference; Israel is the new Adamic people. But it does add a layer that would have helped her explain some of the details of Paul’s text.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, March 16, 2009 at 4:05 am
Romans 2:27-29 is frequently brought into discussions of sacramental efficacy: There’s a difference between the physical rite of circumcision and the spiritual reality to which the rite points. I’m not so sure that’s what Paul is talking about.
The terminology of the passage is interesting. Verse 27 speaks of those who are “uncircumcised by nature (phuseos),” picking up the language of 2:14: “the nations who have not the law by nature.” Both are talking about those who are “naturally” Gentiles, Gentiles by birth. The contrast of “inner/outer” is perhaps better translated as “secret/manifest” (phaneros/kruptos). That does imply some sort of inner/outer distinction but differently colored than many have suggested.
The upshot is that the passage is about the Jew/Gentile distinction. The true Jew is the one who, in the power of the Spirit, keeps the Law; the true Jew is the one who has entered into the new covenant reality of the Spirit, with the law written on his heart. The contrast is not anthropological in the first instance, but redemptive-historical.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, September 4, 2008 at 6:51 am
Some reflections based on an ETS talk by Edward Meadors on Romans 9-11. Meadors suggested that “Esau” in Romans 9 refers to Esau as the patriarch of Edom, well-known for its opposition to Israel throughout the centuries. That is Malachi’s focus in the passage Paul cites. And this is set in a context where Paul is charging ethnic Israel with turning to idols and thus suffering the hardness of heart that attends idolatry (ie, worship stone, you become stony). He also noted analogies between Paul’s situation and that of Moses at Sinai after Israel has replaced their true mediator, Moses, with the golden calf.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, November 16, 2006 at 5:00 pm
INTRODUCTION
Last week, I made a case for the legitimacy of imprecatory prayers and Psalms. But that leaves a lot of questions unanswered – When are prayers of imprecation legitimate? Against whom is it legitimate to pray imprecations? And, most importantly, how do imprecations square with the NT’s command, “Bless and do not curse”?
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, September 6, 2006 at 7:25 am
Paul’s discussion of the future of Israel assumes Jesus’ predictions about the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. This is what he’s talking about when he talks about “vessels of wrath prepared for destruction” and when he quotes from Hosea and Isaiah in 9:25-29. In 9:27, the “remnant” does not refer to the Jews who have responded in faith to the gospel, but to the Jews who have survived God’s judgment. Unless the Lord showed mercy, the Jews would have been as utterly destroyed as Sodom and Gomorrah (9:29). But they are not destroyed; God preserves a remnant of Israel through the judgment, who will be delivered from the catastrophe that awaits Jerusalem. These, perhaps, are the “all Israel” that shall be saved, just as the restoration community after the exile was “all Israel” preserved through exile and delivered from captivity.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, August 2, 2006 at 5:45 am
It’s not a new insight with me, but it came home with particular force recently: Paul says in Romans 3:28 that “we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of Torah.” To suppoose the point, he asks two rhetorical questions, the first expecting a negative and the second a positive answer: “Or is God [the God] of Jews only? Is He not [the God] of the Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also.” These questions assume that if justification was by works of Torah, then it would imply that God is only God of Jews. In other words, “works of Torah” can be performed only by Jews. And this means that justification by faith involves the claim that Jews and Gentiles equally can be justified before God and be Abraham’s seed.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, July 31, 2006 at 5:17 am
Everyone else, I’m sure, has already noticed this, but I’m slow: If, as many commentators argue, Paul’s practical concern in Romans is to encourage Gentile believers to accept their Jewish brothers (as reflected in Romans 14), then the discussion of the keeping of days and of eating should be seen in that context. The days in view would then be specifically Jewish festival days, which, in the time Paul is writing are indifferent. The passage says nothing directly about whether the church should have its own calendar.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, May 8, 2006 at 2:32 pm
The canonical ordering of the NT does not carry the authority of the text itself, but it is not irrelevant. (Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy, among others, has shown that the canonical order of the gospels links them together into a unified literary unit.)
With this in mind, it is not irrelevant that Romans follows Acts. The narrative of Acts, especially its concluding chapters, sets up the theme of Romans. When we get to the end of Acts, the question on our minds is not “how can I find a gracious God?” but “what is God doing with Israel?” (I am not, however, suggesting that these are unrelated questions.)
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, April 24, 2006 at 8:12 am
Are imprecatory prayers inconsistent with the biblical demand to love our enemies? On the surface it seems so, but since the Bible contains both imprecations and commands to love our enemy and since Scripture is internally consistent, they cannot be contradictory. Far from being contradictory, in fact, they are mutually supporting.
This is the point Paul makes in Romans 12. In one breath, he tells the Romans to refrain from revenge and leave room for the wrath of God the Avenger, and in the next breath he tells them to give food and drink to their enemies (Romans 12:19-20, where Paul quotes the mean-spirited Old Testament, Proverbs 25:21f). And then in the next breath he tells them to overcome evil with good. The command to do
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, September 19, 2005 at 9:42 pm
ROMANS 9:14-18
Paul rejects the idea that there is injustice with God, as he did in equally vigorous terms in chapter 3, where God?s righteousness is closely linked with His faithfulness (v. 3) and His truth (v. 7). And he supports this conclusion with a quotation from Exodus 33. A. Katherine Grieb has offered an insightful discussion of this quotation. She points out that this is a quotation from Moses?Eintercession with God on Sinai following the golden calf incident. Moses is pleading with God for the people (as Paul himself has been, offering himself for his brothers according to the flesh), urging Yahweh especially to go with Israel to the promised land. Finally, the Lord promises to go along with Israel, but Moses is still not satisfied. The Lord has already said that if He goes among them, He will destroy them. Moses wants some assurance that the presence of God in Israel will be a blessing and not destruction for Israel, and so he asks to see the Lord?s glory. The glory passes while Moses is covered, and then Moses sees the back of God?s glory. Before Yahweh promises to go before him, the
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Sunday, May 29, 2005 at 8:05 am
Wright points out that the storyline Paul is reviewing in Romans 9 is not a general storyline for any old nation or race, nor the history of individuals, but specifically the story of Israel. Whatever God does with other nations, Paul is showing that God?s plan with Israel always involved a division within the family of Israel.
Wright, however, is protesting too much, attempting to avoid as he does elsewhere in his exposition the predestinarian implications of Romans 9. It is true that Paul is dealing with a specific history here, but as Wright himself has said elsewhere, that history is the history of the new humanity that Yahweh was beginning with Abraham. Just as Jesus?Estory is the story of humanity as well as the story of Israel (He is Last Adam and not merely new Israel), so the history of Israel is a microcosm of God?s dealings with humanity as a whole. Specifically, just as it was always God?s purpose to make a division within the nation of Israel, so it was always God?s purpose to make a division within humanity. So, even though (if?) Paul concentrates on Israel alone here, we can draw more general inferences from about God?s dealings with humanity.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Sunday, May 29, 2005 at 7:26 am
Some of this repeats notes from last week, but then moves beyond.
WHAT ABOUT ISRAEL?
The ringing affirmations of chapter 8, that those who are in Christ cannot be lost to Christ leads directly into Paul?s discussion of Israel in chapter 9. He is not beginning a new topic. He has said that nothing can separate us from Christ, that God will never forsake His elect. But similar promises were also given to Israel. In fact, as Schreiner points out, all the promises that Paul speaks of in Romans 8 were initially given to Israel ?Ethe Spirit, resurrection, sonship, a future inheritance, election by God (cf. 9:4-5). And Yahweh had said that Israel should be confident in His unchanging love for her: ?Be strong and courageous, do not be afraid or tremble at them, for Yahweh your God is the one who goes with you. He will not fail you or forsake you?E(Deuteronomy 31:6). But, as Paul says in anguish at the beginning of Romans 9, this same Israel, ?to whom belongs . . . the promises?E(9:4) is not sharing in the fulfillment of these promises through the Messiah.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, May 21, 2005 at 6:19 pm
INTRODUCTION
Romans 8:31-39 is better sung than commented upon. It is a thrilling, ecstatic hymn of confident assurance that God?s purposes will be accomplished. Yet, I will attempt to comment on them. If we are to sing Paul?s hymn, let?s make sure we sing with understanding.
Given the character of these verses, it?s easy and understandable that they, like Romans 8:28-30, are often cited apart from their context. But these verses of course form the climax of Paul?s discussion of the gift of the Spirit and the hope of new creation that he has been talking about throughout the chapter. Paul?s excited confidence is a confidence that God will accomplish His purpose of bringing the sons of God to glory, and His purpose of renewing His creation through those sons. Though Christians in Paul?s day (as in ours) suffer affliction, those afflictions are the birth pangs of new creation.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, May 14, 2005 at 12:56 pm
INTRODUCTION
Paul is talking about the liberation of creation from bondage to decay and corruption into freedom. This raises the question of the time frame for the fulfillment of this prophecy. It is normally taken as a reference to the end of the world. The ?redemption of the body?E(v. 23) is taken as a reference to the general resurrection, and Paul is teaching that there will be a transfiguration of the whole creation when that occurs. Yet, it seems plausible to take this as a reference instead to the transformation of the creation that takes place as the new covenant replaces the old. Could Paul?s prophecy here be taken in a preterist sense? Could the period of ?anxious longing?E(v. 19) be the apostolic age and the birth of a new age be the creation after the end of the apostolic age?
I?m not entirely convinced either way on the question of timing, though I?m inclined to follow a preterist interpretation. Let me offer some arguments in favor of a preterist understanding of this passage. First, Paul is clearly describing the fulfillment of prophecies from the Old Covenant about the renewal of the whole creation through the recreative word of Yahweh (e.g., Is 65:17ff; 66:22). But those prophecies appear to describe a pre-eschatological phase of human history in which there are still enemies, where death still exists, and so on. The prophecies do not speak of the final restoration of all things, but of a provisional and increasing restoration that takes place in the New Covenant.
A similar point could be made concerning prophecies from the NT. The notion of ?birth pangs,?Ewhich is implied by the references to ?groaning?E(Romans 8:22-23) and made explicit with the reference to ?pains of childbirth?Ein v. 22, is found elsewhere in Jesus?EOlivet discourse, referring to events that would take place before the generation passed (Matt 24:8; Mk 13:8). More generally, it?s clear in the NT that the first generation of believers suffered tribulations that were unique in the history of the church (Matt 24:21; Rev 2:22; 7:14). In a unique way, the blood of the first martyrs mingled with the blood of Jesus in renewing the world. Blood of martyrs is always the seed of the church; but that was particularly true in the foundational period of the apostles.
Second, Paul has raised the issue of ?adoption?Ea few verses earlier in Romans 8 (vv. 15-17), and I suggested last week that Paul was still working within the biblical categories from the Old Testament. To say that Christians who have the Spirit are the ?sons of God?Eis to say that Christians who have the Spirit are the true Israel. These are the same ?sons of God?Ewho are mentioned again in verses 19, 21, 23. That is, there is a time coming when the true sons of God will be revealed; the sons of God will be ?revealed?Eand there will be a public ?adoption?Eof the church as the true Israel. It would seem odd that this would be delayed until the final judgment and the general resurrection of the dead. Further, this emphasis on Christians as the true sons prepares for Paul?s anguish concerning his fellow Israelites according to the flesh in 9:1-5. Paul is lamenting that those Jews who have refused Jesus are not going to share in the ?adoption of sons?Ethat is on the horizon.
Third, as NT Wright points out, the ?glorification?Ethat Paul talks about here has to do with the restoration of humanity to a prelapsarian position of rule and authority (which, of course, goes beyond the position that Adam attained). Wright goes on to point out the close connection between the glorification of the sons of God, their installation as the authorities over creation, and the redemption of creation itself from its bondage to decay. As Wright says, ?the thought [in verse 21] seems to be not that creation and Christians will simply all be free and glorious in the same way, but that the freedom for which creation longs, and which it will be liberated into, is the freedom that comes about through the glorification of the children of God. Paul never says that creation itself will have ?glory.?E It will have freedom because God?s children have glory; indeed, their glory will consist quite specifically in this, that they will be God?s agents in bring the wise, healing, restorative divine justice to the whole created order?E(Romans, p. 597). Earlier, and more colorfully, he had stated the point this way: ?if one dare put it like this, as God sent Jesus to rescue the human race, so God will send Jesus?Eyounger siblings, in the power of the Spirit, to rescue the whole created order, to bring that justice and peace for which the whole creation yearns?E(Romans, p. 596). I agree with that. Now, if that?s the case, it?s hard to see how this could be a prophecy about the final resurrection. What, after all, will still need healing and restoration when Jesus returns? Will the general resurrection be followed by an ages-long ecological reclamation project? That?s not how the passage is normally taken; instead, it?s assumed that when the sons of God are adopted, creation will be transformed once for all and completely. But then what is there left for Jesus?E?younger siblings?Eto do? It seems much better to say that the adoption of the true Israel, the true Adamic race, occurs with the definitive end of the old covenant at AD 70, and that the creation then begins to be liberated from its bondage to corruption, until it is finally and fully liberated at the final resurrection and judgment.
Fourth, historically, it seems evident that the liberation of creation from bondage to corruption has been advancing through the ages. It is not simply the case that the curse WILL be removed at the last day. It has been removed definitively in Jesus, and is progressively being moved back as the Spirit indwells believers to fulfill the requirement and goals of the Law, which are righteousness and peace.
Finally, this doesn?t mean that Paul?s encouragements no longer have any relevance to Christians now. If Romans 8 should be taken in a preterist fashion, it?s still the case that we are in a pre-eschatological condition, that we die, that the creation is not wholly liberated from its futility, that we hope for an even greater adoption, glorification, and resurrection in the future. The transition from the Old to the New is a type of the final transition form this world into the heavens and earth of the consummation. It is still the case that we are groaning, and that in a sense we are still groaning for a new birth. But more precisely perhaps we are groaning over the clumsiness of a ?toddler?Enew creation rather than groaning with the pains of childbirth.
ROMANS 8:18-25
If the preterist interpretation suggested above is correct, the sufferings of the ?present time?Erefer to the ?great tribulation?Ethat Jesus said would accompany the shift from the old to the new. Paul encourages the Romans to endure because the sufferings they endure pale in comparison to the glory that will be revealed ?into?Ethem. Paul?s language suggests that glory will not merely be shown to the sons of God, but that it will be bestowed on us.
The reason (?for,?Ev 19) that the glory is greater is because the glorification of the sons of God goes beyond the restoration of humanity to its created glory. When the sons of God are revealed, the creation?s longings will be fulfilled. Creation was subjected to futility by the curse of Genesis 3. The creation never was in rebellion against God, and so it has been longing since that time for liberation from the futility and corruption that Adam brought to it. When the new Adamic race is revealed, the true Israel, then the creation?s waiting will be over because the creation will be handed over to the lordship of those who are filled with the Spirit who first formed the creation as ?good.?E As the Spirit-filled church spreads over the creation, the Spirit is again hovering over the formless void to manifest the goodness of the creation. ?Futility?Esuggests a possible connection with the book of Ecclesiastes, and there the futility or ?vaporousness?Eof creation is larges due to the reality of decay and ultimately death. Ultimately, then, the creation will not be delivered from futility until death is finally defeated; but through the life-giving Spirit of the Risen Christ, futility is being overturned.
Paul describes the futility and corruption of the creation as a form of ?bondage?E(v. 21) that leads the whole creation to ?groan.?E As Wright points out, this language suggests a connection with the exodus story. The whole creation is longing for an exodus, groaning under the burdens imposed on it by Sin and Death, waiting for a new Moses to lead it out of corruption. Israel?s liberation was a matter of a change of lordship. So also is the liberation of the creation, as the creation is given into the care of Jesus and His people.
In this situation of futility, creation, the church, and the Spirit all groan in pains of childbirth. Creation is waiting for the sons of God to serve as midwives of a new creation; believers are awaiting the ?redemption of the body?E and the Spirit also groans to give birth to a new world. A couple of details here are worth noting. First, the word ?body?Ein verse 23 is singular. If Paul were talking about the final resurrection, as Wright says, we would expect a plural. The fact that it is singular perhaps suggests that what?s being redeemed is the body of the church. The body was ?redeemed?Ein the great exodus at the end of the old covenant, which was simultaneously the public revelation that the church was the true Israel, the sons of God. ?Conformed to the image of His Son?E(v. 29), we are made rulers with Christ.
Second, it is important to notice the role of prayer in this whole process. The Spirit assists us when we do not know how to pray with ?groanings too deep for words?E(v. 26). This shows that our prayers (as in verse 15) are prayers from within the Triune fellowship; indwelt by the Spirit, we call on the Father with the same words that Jesus used in prayer. Here, the Spirit ?intercedes?Efor us, and apparently transforms our inarticulate anguish into petitions to the Father through the Son. Prayer thus is not a matter of human speech attempting to cross the infinite distance between creature and Creator; we can pray because we have been introduced into the Triune community. Further, in context the groanings of the Spirit, which produces also groanings within us (v. 23) are part of the pain of childbirth. Prayer is bound up with, and a means for, the birthing of a new creation. Prayer is not a retreat from the history of redemption into private ecstasies of communion. Prayer is a chief instrument by which the Father renews the world through His sons who are in the Son and who have received the Spirit.
Verses 28-30 provide a ground for assurance that what Paul has been describing will certainly take place. We can be confident that our groanings, and the groanings of the Spirit with us, will be heard, and that the creation will be delivered from its bondage to futility, because God is causing all things ?Ethe sufferings of the present age in particular ?Eto work together for good for those who are called. The righteous God will accomplish His righteous purpose of bringing righteousness to fruition on earth. Verses 29-30 make it clear that this whole program is not a whim on God?s part. The goal is to bestow glory on the sons of God, to raise them to the throne never reached because of Adam?s sin, and this glorification fulfills the purpose of God from the foundation of the world. He has a fixed predestined purpose to form a body of believers who are conformed to the image of His Son, who are sons of God, and who therefore participate with Jesus in the deliverance of creation.
Verse 30 sketches out a kind of ?order of salvation,?Estretching from God?s foreknowledge (His eternal electing love), through the predestination of the sons of God, through call, justification and glorification. In the preterist framework that I?ve been developing, the sequence of call, justification, and glorification takes on an interesting nuance. In Genesis, both Noah and Abraham are ?justified?Eor ?reckoned righteous.?E Both are called, picked out from evil generations to be the objects of God?s favor, and as the righteous ones they are called to be partners with God in restoring creation. Their justification leads to glorification: Noah is ?righteous in the eyes of Yahweh,?Eand glorified through the judgment of the flood when Yahweh bestows royal authority on him. Abraham is reckoned righteous, and as a covenant partner with Yahweh, becomes the father of Isaac, the heir of a land, and is promised that kings will come from him. Having been justified He is glorified. This is the sequence of Romans 8 as well: The ?no condemnation?Efor those in Christ issues in the promise that the sons of God in Christ will be ?glorified.?E On this understanding, in short, ?glorification?Eis not merely an eschatological prospect for believers. When the new covenant comes, the sons of God are exalted.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, May 5, 2005 at 1:38 pm
Permission is given to use material on this site, provided the source is cited, blog entries are republished in full, and the author is notified in advance.
