Thomas Schreiner, Peter Stuhlmacher, and Paul

[bookslover]

Thomas Schreiner has a long, rather ecstatic, review of Peter Stuhlmacher's recently-translated Biblical Theology of the New Testament. It's at the Gospel Coalition site, here: www.thegospelcoalition.org/reviews/biblical-theology-new-testament.

In discussing Stuhlmacher's views on the general epistles, Schreiner says, "Actually, a better way than that offered by Stuhlmacher is to recognize that Paul believed works are necessary for final justification and salvation, as well." This statement is in the first paragraph under the heading, "General Epistles."

Does Schreiner really believe that Paul believed and wrote this? If so, then why did Paul write Ephesians 2.8-10, which states the exact opposite?

Guess I don't need to read any of Schreiner's books. And, based on his review of Stuhlmacher's tome, I don't need to read that, either!

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Er, no. Schreiner has a particular approach when speaking of final justification and salvation.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/justification-faith-plus-nothing/

Extract above from:
https://www.amazon.com/Faith-Alone-Doctrine-Justification-Reformers-ebook/dp/B00PFCPQ52/

From Ch 16 of Schreiner's book:

"The NT clearly teaches that bare faith cannot save, and that works are necessary for final justification or final salvation. As we will see, this latter notion does not compromise or deny sola fide when it is properly understood."

"We have every reason to think that the words “justify” and “save” refer to our final salvation. After all, James uses the same words Paul uses when discussing soteriology (“ faith,” “works,” “justify,” and “save”). Indeed, one of the most prominent verses that Paul appeals to in discussing justification (Gen 15: 6; Rom 4: 3; Gal 3: 6) is cited in James (Jas 2: 23). And James and Paul both discuss the same person — Abraham. Surely, the burden of proof is on the one who thinks the issue is salvation in Paul but an entirely different matter in James."

"It is clear, then, that James is teaching that bare faith alone — simply agreeing that certain statements are true — does not save us. “Faith by itself” when “it is not accompanied by action, is dead” (Jas 2: 17). Or, “faith without deeds is useless” (2: 20 NIV). By this, James isn’t denying sola fide; rather, he inveighs against an empty faith, a barren faith, an inactive faith — a dead faith. Genuine faith is a living and active thing, and it will inevitably produce results. We see this plainly in 2: 22, “You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did” (NIV). Faith and works belong together."

"Conclusion

Justification is by faith alone, which means that our works don’t warrant our justification. Still, this does not mean that faith is dead and lifeless. True faith always leads to works, to a changed life. There is no such thing as cheap grace in the Bible, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer rightly said. There is only costly grace, grace that is purchased at a cost and that is powerful to change us. Yet it is free grace because it is given to us in Jesus Christ. The faith that is ours expresses itself in works and manifests itself in works. Hence, justification is by faith alone, but it is a faith that expresses itself in good works. Good works aren’t the basis of justification, but they are a necessary evidence and fruit of justification."

Schreiner, Thomas R.. Faith Alone---The Doctrine of Justification: What the Reformers Taught...and Why It Still Matters (The Five Solas Series). Zondervan.​

 

[bookslover]

Er, no. Schreiner has a particular approach when speaking of final justification and salvation.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/justification-faith-plus-nothing/

Extract above from:
https://www.amazon.com/Faith-Alone-Doctrine-Justification-Reformers-ebook/dp/B00PFCPQ52/

From Ch 16 of Schreiner's book:

"The NT clearly teaches that bare faith cannot save, and that works are necessary for final justification or final salvation. As we will see, this latter notion does not compromise or deny sola fide when it is properly understood."

"We have every reason to think that the words “justify” and “save” refer to our final salvation. After all, James uses the same words Paul uses when discussing soteriology (“ faith,” “works,” “justify,” and “save”). Indeed, one of the most prominent verses that Paul appeals to in discussing justification (Gen 15: 6; Rom 4: 3; Gal 3: 6) is cited in James (Jas 2: 23). And James and Paul both discuss the same person — Abraham. Surely, the burden of proof is on the one who thinks the issue is salvation in Paul but an entirely different matter in James."

"It is clear, then, that James is teaching that bare faith alone — simply agreeing that certain statements are true — does not save us. “Faith by itself” when “it is not accompanied by action, is dead” (Jas 2: 17). Or, “faith without deeds is useless” (2: 20 NIV). By this, James isn’t denying sola fide; rather, he inveighs against an empty faith, a barren faith, an inactive faith — a dead faith. Genuine faith is a living and active thing, and it will inevitably produce results. We see this plainly in 2: 22, “You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did” (NIV). Faith and works belong together."

"Conclusion

Justification is by faith alone, which means that our works don’t warrant our justification. Still, this does not mean that faith is dead and lifeless. True faith always leads to works, to a changed life. There is no such thing as cheap grace in the Bible, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer rightly said. There is only costly grace, grace that is purchased at a cost and that is powerful to change us. Yet it is free grace because it is given to us in Jesus Christ. The faith that is ours expresses itself in works and manifests itself in works. Hence, justification is by faith alone, but it is a faith that expresses itself in good works. Good works aren’t the basis of justification, but they are a necessary evidence and fruit of justification."

Schreiner, Thomas R.. Faith Alone---The Doctrine of Justification: What the Reformers Taught...and Why It Still Matters (The Five Solas Series). Zondervan.​

So, at the very least, Schreiner's statement quoted in my OP needs quite a bit of unpacking in order to understand him correctly. Seems like he's making it unnecessarily complicated. Better to say:

"You cannot perform good works to either get saved or to stay saved. You perform good works because you are saved, out of gratitude and obedience to God."

That's simpler and more straightforward - and I hope that it's what Schreiner believes.

 

[Dachaser]

Er, no. Schreiner has a particular approach when speaking of final justification and salvation.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/justification-faith-plus-nothing/

Extract above from:
https://www.amazon.com/Faith-Alone-Doctrine-Justification-Reformers-ebook/dp/B00PFCPQ52/

From Ch 16 of Schreiner's book:

"The NT clearly teaches that bare faith cannot save, and that works are necessary for final justification or final salvation. As we will see, this latter notion does not compromise or deny sola fide when it is properly understood."

"We have every reason to think that the words “justify” and “save” refer to our final salvation. After all, James uses the same words Paul uses when discussing soteriology (“ faith,” “works,” “justify,” and “save”). Indeed, one of the most prominent verses that Paul appeals to in discussing justification (Gen 15: 6; Rom 4: 3; Gal 3: 6) is cited in James (Jas 2: 23). And James and Paul both discuss the same person — Abraham. Surely, the burden of proof is on the one who thinks the issue is salvation in Paul but an entirely different matter in James."

"It is clear, then, that James is teaching that bare faith alone — simply agreeing that certain statements are true — does not save us. “Faith by itself” when “it is not accompanied by action, is dead” (Jas 2: 17). Or, “faith without deeds is useless” (2: 20 NIV). By this, James isn’t denying sola fide; rather, he inveighs against an empty faith, a barren faith, an inactive faith — a dead faith. Genuine faith is a living and active thing, and it will inevitably produce results. We see this plainly in 2: 22, “You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did” (NIV). Faith and works belong together."

"Conclusion

Justification is by faith alone, which means that our works don’t warrant our justification. Still, this does not mean that faith is dead and lifeless. True faith always leads to works, to a changed life. There is no such thing as cheap grace in the Bible, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer rightly said. There is only costly grace, grace that is purchased at a cost and that is powerful to change us. Yet it is free grace because it is given to us in Jesus Christ. The faith that is ours expresses itself in works and manifests itself in works. Hence, justification is by faith alone, but it is a faith that expresses itself in good works. Good works aren’t the basis of justification, but they are a necessary evidence and fruit of justification."

Schreiner, Thomas R.. Faith Alone---The Doctrine of Justification: What the Reformers Taught...and Why It Still Matters (The Five Solas Series). Zondervan.​

Isn't this somewhat like the NT Wright viewpoint , as both seem to be saying that we will not be assured of our eternal state until the Lord investigates us in the end? Isn't that also getting closer to the Sda Investigative Judgment theology?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

So, at the very least, Schreiner's statement quoted in my OP needs quite a bit of unpacking in order to understand him correctly. Seems like he's making it unnecessarily complicated.

I think Schreiner usages are aligned with his frequent agenda of calling the Reformed believers to pay attention to what sola fide implies in its fullest sense, especially in the free grace culture abounding around us. See the article below for example.

Isn't this somewhat like the NT Wright viewpoint , as both seem to be saying that we will not be assured of our eternal state until the Lord investigates us in the end? Isn't that also getting closer to the Sda Investigative Judgment theology?

Not at all akin to NPP, SDA, FV, or whatever other bogeyman is seen lurking behind every phrase that may "trigger" someone. We need to tread carefully when we start to attach these labels to another person.

See this:
http://equip.sbts.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Justification-by-Works-and-Sola-Fide.pdf

What therein would you denounce or quibble with?

And get a copy of his book previously cited, if you have a chance.

 

[greenbaggins]

Turretin is better and far clearer on this point, in my opinion, than Schreiner. He says that good works are necessary, but not for the obtaining of salvation. They are necessary in a consequent way. So, for instance, is the boom of a cannon shot necessary for the cannon to have been shot? Well, it is inevitable. You can't shoot a cannon without a large boom resulting. As far as I know, they don't make silencers for cannons. Only a fool, of course, would say that the boom caused the cannon shot. The cannon shot caused the boom. Likewise with salvation and good works. Salvation ALWAYS produces good works as surely as a cannon shot produces a boom. So, the question is about this particular issue: in what way are good works necessary for salvation? They are NOT necessary in any kind of causative way. They are necessary in that they ALWAYS follow true faith. They are NOT necessary in obtaining or keeping the state of salvation. To claim that one has faith without works would be the equivalent of saying that the cannon has been shot, but the only evidence for that claim is a doctored computer-generated video, which, upon examination of the cannon, proves that the cannon has not, in fact, been shot, since there is no powder residue anywhere. The video is a lie.

 

[Dachaser]

I think Schreiner usages are aligned with his frequent agenda of calling the Reformed believers to pay attention to what sola fide implies in its fullest sense, especially in the free grace culture abounding around us. See the article below for example.



Not at all akin to NPP, SDA, FV, or whatever other bogeyman is seen lurking behind every phrase that may "trigger" someone. We need to tread carefully when we start to attach these labels to another person.

See this:
http://equip.sbts.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Justification-by-Works-and-Sola-Fide.pdf

What therein would you denounce or quibble with?

And get a copy of his book previously cited, if you have a chance.

I would not have any disagreement with him in that article, as do see that he and I would be in full agreement with the truth that while we are freely justified before God based upon the Cross, we would still need to evidence some type/kind of fruit that would support our claim to being now new creatures in Christ Jesus.

 

[Dachaser]

Turretin is better and far clearer on this point, in my opinion, than Schreiner. He says that good works are necessary, but not for the obtaining of salvation. They are necessary in a consequent way. So, for instance, is the boom of a cannon shot necessary for the cannon to have been shot? Well, it is inevitable. You can't shoot a cannon without a large boom resulting. As far as I know, they don't make silencers for cannons. Only a fool, of course, would say that the boom caused the cannon shot. The cannon shot caused the boom. Likewise with salvation and good works. Salvation ALWAYS produces good works as surely as a cannon shot produces a boom. So, the question is about this particular issue: in what way are good works necessary for salvation? They are NOT necessary in any kind of causative way. They are necessary in that they ALWAYS follow true faith. They are NOT necessary in obtaining or keeping the state of salvation. To claim that one has faith without works would be the equivalent of saying that the cannon has been shot, but the only evidence for that claim is a doctored computer-generated video, which, upon examination of the cannon, proves that the cannon has not, in fact, been shot, since there is no powder residue anywhere. The video is a lie.

Didn't John Calvin state that while we are saved by grace alone through faith alone, the faith that saves us will not be alone, but shown in good works?

 

[Bill The Baptist]

Words and how we use them are very important. The modern tendency to redefine and use words carelessly has led to a further muddying of the theological waters.

 

[bookslover]

Didn't John Calvin state that while we are saved by grace alone through faith alone, the faith that saves us will not be alone, but shown in good works?

Yes, while understanding that good works are not the cause of our salvation.

 

[Dachaser]

Yes, while understanding that good works are not the cause of our salvation.

True, but will be able to demonstrate that we have more then just a mere profession of faith in Christ alone.

 

[Dachaser]

Words and how we use them are very important. The modern tendency to redefine and use words carelessly has led to a further muddying of the theological waters.

Do you have any words in mind here?

 

[Bill The Baptist]

Do you have any words in mind here?

Yes, justification. Many today who are influenced by the N.T. Wrights of the world will conflate justification and sanctification and make into some kind of works based salvation-lite scheme.

 

[Dachaser]

Yes, justification. Many today who are influenced by the N.T. Wrights of the world will conflate justification and sanctification and make into some kind of works based salvation-lite scheme.

Good point, as while reading Wright, I sometimes get the impression from him that he is trying so hard to build a theological bridge back to Rome, that his theology takes the worst path to getting back there!