I remember about two things out of Edersheim’s giant 63-million page The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. One of the two things I remember is that he says that a common saying that was abroad in the first century world was, “No one can hate like a Jew…” That seems to me to sum up the problem with first century Judaism. I am elect, I have grace, and I despise you because you do not share my inness.”
It has seemed to me for a long time that “no one can hate like a Calvinist.” The very people with the highest view of sovereign grace and unearned election can be the most exclusive and hateful people around. What was criminal about first-century Judaism wasn’t that they were medieval pelegians, it is that they were proud ingrates. If we were honest with ourselves, we would have to admit that we Calvinists are prone to wander on the same errant trail.
Sadly, this is well put, Obadiah.
I suppose the “basic sin” is a one-and-many problem. But in Romans 1 it’s ingratitude. If that’s the root, it can have many fruits.
One that I see is the Pharisee’s attitude to Rome. God lovingly put the Romans over Israel as part of His Benevolent Oikumene. In fact, the Romans came in, at the invitation of the Jews, to stop a bloody civil war. But were the Jews grateful? Nope. Some were, of course; many weren’t.
This ingratitude flowered in National Pride. National Pride and Personal Pride are twins. Both are “legalistic” in the sense that somehow one takes pride in oneself. Paul says, “how can you boast”? Well, somehow they could find a way to boast. They boasted in predestination. They boasted in National Election. “Lord, I thank Thee that I’ve been elected and am not like this publican here. I have the Law, thanks to Your election, and I keep it.” I do not think that this Pharisee was operating with a brownie-point merit legalism. Rather, he was operating with Pride, and his expression of gratitude was in fact self-deception.
They had the right doctrine, but they were mean as snakes, with the Snake as their Daddy.
That’s why I think the NPP is fundamentally right (details notwithstanding) and our “traditional” view inadequate (though pointing at the heart of things). The Jews of Jesus’ day, from the evidence inside the Bible, were not so much heretics as hypocrites. Hypocrites is what Jesus called them, and even told the disciples to listen to their teaching, though to avoid imitating their behavior.
The reason they did not recognize and submit to Jesus is NOT because they had bad doctrine, but because they had bad hearts. Making their problem doctrinal lessens the severity of their problem. “They had bad doctrine so Paul had to straighten them out.” A good “protestant gnostic” approach. But NO. “They hated Yahweh and would not even say his name, and Paul rebuked them and told them to bow the knee.” THAT is what is going on in Paul and in the New Testament.
My 2 cents, FWIW.
I believe the reformed faith is truly wonderful. I love calvinism and I love Calvin. But it is hard that we do not act and believe more like him and his ancestors. It is my impression that often men who claim Calvin as their “father” , simply pull a few quotes out of the Institutes without getting the breadth and scope of his work. Very few men in the PCA appoach the Church with the high view that Calvin has, in particular in regards to schism and heresy. Book 4, chapter 1 of the Institutes is one of the best presentations of Christian charity in print and could use more play in reformed circles.
In Christ,
Peter Jones
Pastor, Christ Church, Morgantown, WV
Perhaps though, their lack of submission is bad doctrine. As a personally damning example, when I first embraced the Westminster into my heart, I wandered around treating people like they were dumb ignorant fools for being Arminians. The problem was that my doctrine was not yet my doctrine. That is hypocrisy, but the kind that has two doctrinal systems within the same person. On the one hand, the Godwardness of the Westminster and on the other, the “Selfwardness” of American Arminianism. My sense with the NPP, is that the breakdown is in the area of Anthropology. They don’t take the shatteredness of a fallen humanity or the fact that we are made in the image of a triune God, seriously enough. It is easy to take the simplicity of heart that comes with loving Jesus and then project it onto those around us, but I remember what it was like to be a professing Atheist who wanted to be a Christian and simultaneously wanted nothing to do with Jesus, yet hoping that he would rescue me, while wanting nothing to do with any God that regulated sexual relations. I remember hating the God that I didn’t believe in and wanting to say thank you to the same God that bothered me so much.
Anything that elevates one over another, makes God exclusive to some, is of the old covenant, not the new. Jesus is the great equalizer, having destroyed all ‘power,dominion and authority’ over us. “Call no man, ‘Teacher.’ ”
Or ‘Father,’ or any other title of authority in the religious realm. To do so is to deny Christ his headship.
‘Behold! I make all things new!’ Not ‘some’ but all.