What is faith? - An Initial Response to Schreiner, Seifrid, Vickers, and Burk Responses' to Wright’s Response to Piper
Continuing from the previous post, I want to ask the question again concerning the notion of 'justification by faith' which is obviously very important to the panelists. I am going to transcribe and quote specifically from Seifrid and Schreiner to highlight a point that Seifrid has made concerning Wright's concept of justification.
".. it is this faithfulness that will determine our standing in the last day. So it starts becoming the question of "Have I been faithful enough?" which oddly ...... this was precisely of course Luther's question prior to his reformational discovery, "Have I repented enough? Have I, of course it was all by God's grace, but the question was, "Have I got enough of it myself?" (11:10-111:40)
Seifrid here criticizes Wright that his formulation leaves a level of degree in which we need to work out our faithfulness in order to achieve justification. So, to Seifrid, there is always the problem of whether we have achieve enough of faithfulness.
I am actually quite surprised by this criticism because whatever Seifrid has said here also works against his formulation of 'justification by faith in Jesus Christ alone'. Why do I say that? It is because the same criticism can be used to ask the question of "Have I believe in Jesus Christ enough?" Picture this, a new believer confesses that he believes in Jesus Christ and that through him, God has forgiven his sins. Let's assume also that he truly believes it in his heart that this is so, and not merely making some declarative statement. Further on in his life, he turns away from believing in this truth and shows no evidence of faith working in his life. The same question is than asked, "Is his faith earlier on enough for his justification?" "Could he be declared justified based on his earlier stage of faith which he now no longer demonstrates?" There exists the same issue of whether how much, or more accurately, how long must a person hold on to his faith in order to be justified? So, there is still the problem of how much or long a person has to 'believe' before he could be justified.
This is confirmed later on by Schreiner and the panel when they answered the question of what kind of faith that leads to justification. The answer which they agreed on is that of a persevering faith. So, again, there is the question of "Have my faith persevered enough?" "Have I persevered enough?" Or "Have I done enough with my faith?"
Do not get me wrong. I do believe that the faith that justifies us is that of a faith that endures to the end. And of course, the evidence or fruits of faith is works or works of the Spirit in us (like what Wright has said if the panelists have understood him and his new book correctly. I have, of course, not read the book except for the excerpt because the book is still unpublished.)
I am simply making the point that Seifrid's critique of Wright's formulation of justification by faith is equally applicable to his notion of justification by faith and faith alone. That is because faith is never about just making a declarative statement which would forever guarantee our justification now and forever. It is persevering which requires our active involvement in yielding to the Spirit which will inevitably lead to works of faith (as in James) or the fruits of the Spirit (as in Galatians). The problematic question of "Have I been faithful or persevered in faith enough?" will always linger at the doorsteps of our hearts. The seal and the assurance of our faith and redemption is of course the comfort and the fellowship the Holy Spirit (which is I think what Wright is trying to say; I have to read the book when it is available to find this out.)
".. it is this faithfulness that will determine our standing in the last day. So it starts becoming the question of "Have I been faithful enough?" which oddly ...... this was precisely of course Luther's question prior to his reformational discovery, "Have I repented enough? Have I, of course it was all by God's grace, but the question was, "Have I got enough of it myself?" (11:10-111:40)
Seifrid here criticizes Wright that his formulation leaves a level of degree in which we need to work out our faithfulness in order to achieve justification. So, to Seifrid, there is always the problem of whether we have achieve enough of faithfulness.
I am actually quite surprised by this criticism because whatever Seifrid has said here also works against his formulation of 'justification by faith in Jesus Christ alone'. Why do I say that? It is because the same criticism can be used to ask the question of "Have I believe in Jesus Christ enough?" Picture this, a new believer confesses that he believes in Jesus Christ and that through him, God has forgiven his sins. Let's assume also that he truly believes it in his heart that this is so, and not merely making some declarative statement. Further on in his life, he turns away from believing in this truth and shows no evidence of faith working in his life. The same question is than asked, "Is his faith earlier on enough for his justification?" "Could he be declared justified based on his earlier stage of faith which he now no longer demonstrates?" There exists the same issue of whether how much, or more accurately, how long must a person hold on to his faith in order to be justified? So, there is still the problem of how much or long a person has to 'believe' before he could be justified.
This is confirmed later on by Schreiner and the panel when they answered the question of what kind of faith that leads to justification. The answer which they agreed on is that of a persevering faith. So, again, there is the question of "Have my faith persevered enough?" "Have I persevered enough?" Or "Have I done enough with my faith?"
Do not get me wrong. I do believe that the faith that justifies us is that of a faith that endures to the end. And of course, the evidence or fruits of faith is works or works of the Spirit in us (like what Wright has said if the panelists have understood him and his new book correctly. I have, of course, not read the book except for the excerpt because the book is still unpublished.)
I am simply making the point that Seifrid's critique of Wright's formulation of justification by faith is equally applicable to his notion of justification by faith and faith alone. That is because faith is never about just making a declarative statement which would forever guarantee our justification now and forever. It is persevering which requires our active involvement in yielding to the Spirit which will inevitably lead to works of faith (as in James) or the fruits of the Spirit (as in Galatians). The problematic question of "Have I been faithful or persevered in faith enough?" will always linger at the doorsteps of our hearts. The seal and the assurance of our faith and redemption is of course the comfort and the fellowship the Holy Spirit (which is I think what Wright is trying to say; I have to read the book when it is available to find this out.)
Comments