1 / 179

GLADIATOR Productions Presents . . .

GLADIATOR Productions Presents . . . . In association with MAXIMUS STUDIOS. A Michael Servetus “Torchstone” Picture Michael Servetus (1511-1553) OUR MOTTO: “A MAN’S GOT TO KNOW HIS LIMITATIONS . . .”. T OTAL DEPRAVITY U. L. I. P RODUCTION —”Howling Monkey Endeavors”.

inoke
Download Presentation

GLADIATOR Productions Presents . . .

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GLADIATOR Productions Presents . . .

  2. In association withMAXIMUS STUDIOS

  3. A Michael Servetus “Torchstone” PictureMichael Servetus (1511-1553)OUR MOTTO: “A MAN’S GOT TO KNOW HIS LIMITATIONS . . .”

  4. TOTAL DEPRAVITYU.L.I.PRODUCTION—”Howling Monkey Endeavors”

  5. THE MASTER’S SEMINARY2005 FACULTY LECTURE SERIESFebruary 1-10, 2005

  6. THE“NEW “PERSPECTIVE ON PAUL

  7. Featuring . . . F. DAVID FARNELL, PH.D.as “Maximus”“Introduction, History and Presuppositions of the New Perspective”February 1, 2005

  8. Featuring . . .IRVING L. BUSENITZ, TH.D.as “Dean the Defender”“The Reformers View of Paul's View of Paul and the Law”February 3, 2005

  9. Featuring . . . JACK HUGHES, D.MIN.as “Jack the Giant Killer”“The New Perspective’s View of Paul and the Law”February 8, 2005

  10. WILLIAM D. BARRICK, TH.D.as “The Hebrew Hell-Cat”“The New Perspective Changes in the Doctrine of Justification--cruxinterpretum of "the works of the Law“ in Gal. 2:16 et. al.February 10, 2005

  11. ROBERT L. THOMAS, TH.D.as “THE TERMINATOR”“The Hermeneutics of the New Perspective on Paul”February 15, 2005

  12. INTRODUCTIONto the“NPP”**(New Perspective on Paul)*Term coined by James D. G. Dunn

  13. When thinking about the NPP,keep this old preacher’s illustration & picture in your mind . . .

  14. Why a picture of Grape Nuts Cereal? . . . NPP is much like Grape Nuts:The cereal is neither made from grapes nor made of nuts . . .

  15. In the same way . . . the NPP is NEITHER “NEW” nor a “PERSPECTIVE”

  16. As will be seen . . .It is really OLD—i.e. the dangerous, sometimes subtle, sometimes not so subtle, infiltration of WORKS as efficacious for salvation.

  17. As will be seen . . . It is not a “Perspective,” but an IDEOLOGY—i.e. driven by a presuppositional (a priori) grid hostile to the ORTHODOX understanding of the inspiration of the Scriptures and GRAMMTICO-HISTORICAL exegesis!

  18. IMPORTANT:The SAME! PRESUPPOSITIONAL IDEOLOGIESthat gave rise to HISTORICAL CRITICISM also gave rise to NPP!

  19. The SAME ROAD that led to the destruction of the INSPIRATION and historical TRUSTWORTHINESS of the Gospels as catalogued in THE JESUS CRISIS also gave rise to the NPP!!!!!The JESUS CRISIS that wrote about the destruction Gospels . . . Also is relevant to the NPP!

  20. As will be seen . . . NPP Driven by:(1) PHILOSOPHY (Col. 2:8) (2) EISEGESIS, not exegesis of the text!(3) POLITICAL CORRECTNESS (Matt. 23; Rev. 2:9; 3:9; 1 Cor. 1:18-2:14)

  21. While many historical critics were nominal advocates of the Reformed viewpoint on Paul, their work & ideologies eventually led to the destruction of the Reformed perspective and caused the rise of the NPP!

  22. A DIRECT LINK exists between the destruction of the Gospels through HC& the destruction of the Reformed Perspective on Paul!

  23. Once again, to repeat,the ideologies-philosophies of HC led to both the destruction of the orthodox views of the Gospels as well as the Reformed Perspective on Paul.

  24. This underpinning of HC to both the Gospels and the NPP should NEVER be overlooked, ignored or forgotten!

  25. The REFORMER’S PERSPECTIVE on Paul & the Law (a brief review)

  26. HOWEVER,Long before the Reformation, Augustine of Hippo (A.D. 354-430) also stood in the same line of interpretation (as the Reformers (so their view not unique but a revival)

  27. The SINE QUA NONS of the REFORMATION(2) SOLA GRATIA—salvation is by grace alone (1) SOLA FIDE—salvation is by faith alone“by grace through faith alone”

  28. REFORMER’S VIEWED JUDAISM & ROMANISM AS SIMILAR-- LEGALISTIC-WORKS RIGHTEOUSNESS SYSTEMS THAT DESTROYED THE GRACE OF GOD IN SALVATION.

  29. The Reformers maintained two key components regarding justification:(1) emphasis on JUSTIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL as center of Paul’s theology(2) identification of Paul’s opponents as legalistic Judaism (First century Jews similar to 16th century Romanism)

  30. JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ALONE IS SUMMARY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE--LUTHERJUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ALONE IS THE MAIN HINGE ON WHICH CHRISTIANITY TURNS--CALVIN

  31. BOTH LUTHER & CALVIN AGREED THAT JUSTIFICATION COULD NOT COME THROUGH OT LAW—DUE TO STRINGENT DEMANDS FOR OBEDIENCE, i.e. purpose of law was condemnation to drive one to grace of Messiah (Gal. 3)

  32. KEEPING OF LAW FOR JUSTIFICATION PLACES ONE UNDER CURSE—MUST KEEP IT ALL BUT UNABLE TO KEEP IT!Gal. 3:10 (“cursed is the one who does not abide by all”) cp. Deut. 27:26

  33. FOR REFORMERS, “WORKS OF LAW” = ENTIRE OT LAWKEEP IT ALL OR CURSE COMES!

  34. REFORMER’S DID DISAGREE AS TO ROLE OF LAW IN SANTFICATION:LUTHER—MOSAIC Moral law no longer binding—follow only NT stipulations & natural lawCALVIN—keeping of OT law is loving response subsequent to grace; salvation provides enablement of H.S. to be obedient

  35. For the Reformers, and those who stood in their tradition the doctrine of the justification of the sinner by faith alone (sola fide) was always of the utmost importance. In the Lutheran Reformation it was called 'the article upon which the church stands or falls' (ecclesia stantis et cadentis ecclesiae).Luther warned in his Smalcald Articles,Of this article nothing can be yielded or surrendered [nor can anything be granted or permitted contrary to the same], even though heaven and earth, and whatever will not abide, should sink to ruin. For there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved, says Peter, Acts 4, 12. And with His stripes we are healed, Is. 53, 5. And upon this article all things depend which we teach and practice in oppostion to the Pope, the devil, and the [whole] world. Therefore, we must be sure concerning this doctrine, and not doubt; for otherwise all is lost, and the Pope and devil and all things gain victory and suit over usNote: Although Luther did not use this precise term “sole fide” himself, he used similar phrases.

  36. In commenting on Romans 3:20 where the phrase "works of the law" occurs (see also Gal.), Calvin's reveals what is "new" today in the NPP was really "old“ even in his day, being advocated early in church history as well as by the Romanists of Calvin’s day:Even among learned scholars there is some doubt about what is meant by the works of the law. While some extend them to include the observance of the whole law, others restrict them to ceremonies alone. The addition of the word law induced Chrysostom, Origen, and Jerome to accept the latter opinion, for they thought that this addition had a peculiar connotation, to prevent the passage from being understood of all works. This difficulty, however, has a very easy solution. Works are just before God to the extent that we seek to render worship and obedience to Him by them. In order, therefore, to remove more explicitly the power of justification from all works, Paul has used the term of those works which have the greatest ability to justify, if any such exist. For the law has the promises, without which there would be no value in our works before God. We see, therefore, the reasons for Paul's express mention of the works of the law, for it is by the law that our works are evaluated. Even the schoolmen had a well-worn cliché that works are meritorious not by any intrinsic worthiness, but by the covenant of God. They are mistaken, since they do not see that our works are always corrupted by vices which deprive them of any merit. The principle, however, is still true that the reward for works depends on the free promise of the law. Paul, therefore, rightly and wisely does not argue about mere works, but makes a distinction and explicit reference to the keeping of the law, which was properly the subject of his discussion.

  37. Calvin (cont.)The arguments adduced by other learned scholars in support of this opinion are weaker than they should have been. They hold that the mention of circumcision is offered as an example which refers only to ceremonies. We have, however, already explained why Paul mentioned circumcision, for only hypocrites are inflated with confidence in their works, and we know that they boast only in external appearances. Circumcision also, in their view was sort of initiation into the righteousness of the law, and therefore seemed to them at the same time a work of the highest honor, and indeed, the basis of the righteousness of works. They oppose circumcision on the grounds of what Paul says in the Epistle to the Galatians, where, in dealing with the same subject, he refers only to ceremonies. Their argument, however, is not sufficiently strong to achieve what they want. Paul was arguing with those who inspired the people with false confidence in ceremonies, and to remove this confidence he does not confine himself to ceremonies, nor does he specifically discuss their value, but he includes the whole law . . . .We contend, however, not without reason, that Paul is here speaking of the whole law . . . . It is a truth of the first importance that no one can obtain righteousness by the keeping of the law.

  38. IMPORTANT:REFORMER’S POSITION GROUNDED IN GRAMMATICO-HISTORICAL EXEGESIS & ORTHODOX VIEW OF INSPIRATION!

  39. WHAT IS THE NPP?

  40. PRELIMINARY THOUGHT:If one thinks that one has a sufficient grasp on issues centering in Pauline theology, then one may not kept up with the qualitative, even substantively radical changes that have occurred in reinterpretation and understanding Pauline theology, especially in terms of soteriology with its concept of sola fide and the righteousness of God that results from the forensic declaration of righteousness apart from works that was hammered out in the anvils of the Reformation of 1517.

  41. BECAUSE OF THE NPP . . . THE TRADITIONAL REFORMATION VIEW OF PAUL & LAW, JUSTIFICATION, ETC. ON LIFE SUPPORT

  42. A PARADIGM SHIFT IS RAPIDLY OCCURRING in the 2Oth Century

  43. CURRENTLY,THE NPP IS OVERWHELMING & REPLACING THE REFORMATION PERSPECTIVE IN MOST SCHOLARLY CIRCLES

  44. THE NPP AT HEART IS AN ANTI-REFORMATIONAL PERPSPECITVEIt seeks to overthrow the Reformation Perspective on Paul

  45. NPP IS TO THE REFORMED APPROACH AS KRYPTONITE IS TO SUPERMAN! NPP WANTS TO OVERTHROW REFORMATION

  46. In essence, the NPP says that 500 years of Pauline interpretation have been wrong (1517-2005)! Actually, 1500 years of Pauline interpretation have been wrong since Augustine and the Reformers were in close agreement.

  47. THE NPP HAS NO UNIFIED, UNIFORM OR COMPREHENSIVE MODE OF INTERPRETATION PER SE—IT CENTERS IN BEING ANTI-REFORMATIONAL

  48. BUT IT DOES HAVE GENERAL CONSESUS ON SOME KEY POINTS:

More Related