Showing posts with label Union with Christ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Union with Christ. Show all posts

Saturday, July 23, 2011

Unity and plurality

Colin Gunton notes that:

"Much recent thought has turned into a contest between exponents of the essential unity of things and those advocating a fundamental, even chaotic, plurality." (. 13, The Christian Faith)

In contrast to this war between the camps that emphasise unity (particularly Modernists) and those that emphasise plurality (particularly Postmodernists), Christianity sees no conflict. Gunton argues that the Bible has a doctrine of creation that emphasises both the "free and sovereign action", but also a pattern of mediation which gives "space" to creation to be itself.

Interestingly he then ties unity particularly to the work of the Son, and plurality to the work of the Spirit, both of whom the Father uses to create both old and new creations:

"while reference to Christ shows how we may hold the world together in unity, the Spiirit is the principle of reality's variety and multiplicity" (p. 14, ibid)

This makes sense to me particularly as I think of Paul and his teaching on the church. He appeals to the unity we as a body in Christ (cf. Col 1:17 which sees union in Christ in creation), but often sees the Spirit gives a diversity of gifts. Christ's saving work is seen supremely in his one action of incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension; but the Spirit works in countless individuals in a variety of times and places and ways. Of course each indwell the other, to the glory of the Father in Jesus Christ, so that there is harmony in the Trinity's work.

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Union with Christ

I think union with Christ is in the first instance:

  • Marriage - a new relationship with the Son

Married couples share what they have and give their whole selves to each other, so this union means:

  • Adoption - sharing Christ's relationship with the Father (...which leads to...)
  • Inheritance - sharing Christ's relationship with the Spirit (...which leads to...)
  • Baptism, Mortification->Vivification etc - sharing Christ's story of his relationship to his own humanity - killing the old cursed humanity in us to experience the new blessed humanity by the Spirit (...which leads to...)
  • Giving - sharing Christ's story of his relationship to the world - self-sacrifice to bring others life

... or something like that. Any thoughts? I'm not sure that I've got it quite right.

A friend asked what would be a good book on the doctrine of Union with Christ. I can think of good books emphasising one or the other aspect I've listed, but not one that has the broad scope I think covers all of what it means to be in union with Christ. Any suggestions?

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Three aspects of union with Christ

Richard Gaffin says there are three aspects or dimensions of union with Christ:

  1. The predestinarian 'in Christ' (e.g. Eph 1:3-4)
  2. The redemptive-historical 'in Christ' (e.g. Rom 6:8)
  3. The actual 'in Christ', or applied union with Christ, (e.g. Rom 16:7)

As usual with these things the key is to neither separate them, merge them together or neglect any one.

BTW I didn't choose the terms. Maybe I would have said (1) the eternally purposed, (2) the objective historical, and (3) the subjective Spiritual, aspects. It may also be more beneficial though to distinguish them in terms of the distinctive roles of the persons of the Trinity... I'll have to think some more, but I just wanted to note them down.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

More thoughts on the 'one body'

From an email to the friend I am thinking this through with (see my previous post for less developed thoughts).

On reflection I can think of several inter-related reasons why we are 'one body' in Paul's eyes.

We all share:

  • 'one bread' (1 Corinthians 10:17)
  • 'one baptism' (Ephesians 4:4-6; 1Corinthians 12:13)
  • 'one faith' (Ephesians 4:4-6)
  • 'one hope' (Ephesians 4:4-6)
  • 'one God and Father' (Ephesians 4:4-6)
  • 'one Lord' (Ephesians 4:4-6)
  • 'one Spirit' (Ephesians 4:4-6; 1Corinthians 12:13)

So for Paul the ultimate cause of us being 'one body' is the Trinity (isn't great how Paul refers to all 3 persons in Ephesians 4:4-6?). The promise of the Trinity is communicated (not just mentally) to us by the sacraments, and we embrace the promise contained in the sacraments by faith. The sacraments are promises that we can share in the death of Christ (Romans 6; Ephesians 2:16) but then also share in the same Spirit (a Spirit of life, John 6:63, Romans 8) by which he was raised (Romans 8:11; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:44; Mark 1:8; 1 Corinthians 12:13).

I like your observation that 'one body' has a corporal dimension. 'Body' for Paul is closely associated with 'flesh' and death. There is only one death which leads to life and that is Christ's death. His is the only cursed flesh where salvation can still be found. So he is also the 'body' which we need to find ourselves in. However for Paul 'body' is not as negative as 'flesh'/'death' and he is able to talk happily about our 'spiritual body' too (1 Corinthians 15:44).

However returning to our original discussion about where the term originated I think there are only two options:

  1. The institution of the Lord's Supper.
  2. The OT concept of marriage between God and Israel which Paul picks up and applies to Christ and the Church ('one flesh' is a small step away from 'one body', cf. 1 Corinthians 6:16).

It is interesting how it is difficult to imagine any closer union than either consuming something (food) or sexual union, and this is how the NT so often describes our relationship to Christ. We eat him, and we marry him! Incredible condescension to miserable sinners! He doesn't give gifts from on high, but comes down to us and gives us himself.

Friday, October 06, 2006

Quotable: Vos on the covenants

Quotes I wanted to record from the essay "The Doctrine of the Covenant in Reformed Theology" by Geerhardus Vos. I think they all pass Simeon's test too.

God does not exist because of man, but man because of God. This is what is written at the entrance of the temple of Reformed theology.

(pp. 242, "The Doctrine of the Covenant in Reformed Theology", in Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation: The Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos, ed. Richard B. Gaffin Jr.)

[according to Lutheran theology] Precisely because mankind’s destination had already been reached before the fall in Adam, Christ can do nothing but restore what was lost in Adam. And since the destination already realized was fully compatible with mutability and the possibility of falling, the sinner who has been brought back to his destination by Christ must necessarily have to remain at this level. Lutheran theology is, therefore, wholly consistent when it teaches an apostasy of the saints. It does not at all object to uniting the state of justification and sonship with the possibility of such apostasy. […]

What we inherit in the second Adam is not restricted to what we lost in the first Adam: it is much rather the full realization of what the first Adam would have achieved for us had he remained unfallen and been confirmed in his state. Someone placed in that state can never again fall from it. As truly as Christ is a perfect Saviour, so truly must be bestow on us the perseverance of the saints.

(pp. 242-243, ibid)

I'd never heard these two doctrines connected before.

The obtaining of eternal life thus comes to lie in God, as a work that is Hs alone, in which His glory shines and of which nothing, without detracting from that glory, can be attributed to the creature. On this point the entire Reformation, both Lutheran and Calvinist, took exception to Rome, which failed to appreciate this fundamental truth. Yet the reasons which had driven both sides to this protest were different. With Luther it was the thirst for peace and stability for a restless conscience which could find no tranquillity in Rome’s salvation by works. As long as the sinner himself has to do something for his acquittal, his work remains unstable. Thus the sola fide became the shibboleth of the German Reformation, justification, its principle doctrine. One will agree that, despite all the purity with which this doctrine develops and in which, in developed form, it is given anew to the church, the highest point is still not reach, namely, that point from which the Scripture itself views the matter when, in the words of Paul, it sees the heart of Abraham’s faith in his “giving God the glory” (Rom 4:20). Even in its doctrine of justification Lutheranism did not catch hold of this idea in its fullness. Not a purely theological, but a partly anthropological motif ran through it. It was different with the Reformed. They, too, felt the same necessity to leave the waves of Rome’s salvation by works and once again stand on solid ground. But beside and behind this necessity there lay a deeper longing: a thirst for the glory of God that did not primarily meditate on its own peace. When the Reformed takes the obtaining of salvation completely out of man’s hands, he does this so that the glory which God gets from it might be uncurtailed. What is important for him is the realization that God glorifies Himself in the salvation of sinners, whereas the Lutheran is satisfied when it merely becomes evident that man brings nothing of his own instability into the picture. For the Reformed the center of gravity does not lie in justification as such, but in the principle by which the latter is to be judged and which the Scripture everywhere applies when it teaches us to regard the work of salvation in its totality as being exclusively a work of God.

(pp. 246-247, ibid)

According to the Lutheran, the Holy Spirit first generates faith in the sinner who temporarily still remains outside of union with Christ; then justification follows faith and only then, in turn, does the mystical union with the Mediator take place. Everything depends on this justification, which is losable, so that the believer only gets to see a little of the glory of grace and lives for the day, so to speak. The covenantal outlook is the reverse. One is first united to Christ, the Mediator of the covenant, by a mystical union, which finds its conscious recognition in faith. By this union with Christ all that is in Christ is simultaneously given. Faith embraces all this too; it not only grasps the instantaneous justification, but lays hold of Christ as Prophet, Priest and King, as his rich and full Messiah. The deepest reason for this difference in view is none other than the fact that the reception of the full glory of the work of God’s grace in the consciousness of faith is the most important thing to the Reformed believer.

(pp. 256-257, ibid)

Not sure about that last sentence though.