I LOVE comments. Please leave some even if they are brief half-formed ideas
that you aren't even sure you really believe. I just love comments.

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Day 84 (Meta Reflection)

[reaction to OYB's Sep. 15-17 readings]

Right after the American Civil War the Roman Catholic church established the doctrine of papal infallibility. Around the time my great grandmothers were born, some Protestants established something called the Fundamentals, which included the idea that the Bible was inerrant. This movement lead to something strange wherein some Christians treat Paul's words as laws.

This makes the following set of rhetorical questions seem kind of funny: You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?

Hint, it is by believing. So, is it fair for me to refer to Paul's condemnation of legalism in order to condemn the legalism of Fundamentalists? Isn't that contradictory:even hypocritical? Maybe, but Paul didn't worry about such things. He used the Scripture to justify his anti-law position, explaining, "Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: 'All nations will be blessed through you.' So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith."

I'm just saying that according to Paul, I can rely on Faith not on Paul's rules to find salvation, which is itself based on the Scriptural support for being against legalism. Clear?

Here's all of Galatians 3.

No comments: