What are we saved from?

Status
Not open for further replies.

chuckd

Puritan Board Junior
Q. 23. Into what estate did the fall bring mankind?

A. The fall brought mankind into an estate of sin and misery.[91]

Q. 24. What is sin?

A. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, any law of God, given as a rule to the reasonable creature.[92]

Q. 27. What misery did the fall bring upon mankind?

A. The fall brought upon mankind the loss of communion with God,[97] his displeasure and curse; so as we are by nature children of wrath,[98] bond slaves to Satan,[99] and justly liable to all punishments in this world, and that which is to come.[100]

----------------------------------------------------------

Augustine formulated the doctrine of original sin in opposition to Pelagius. It seems that since that time, original sin has been the focus of salvation in the west. Salvation from the bondage of Satan has been a focus in the east. Romans has been the primary text of study as we find the relevant themes, as opposed to spiritual warfare in Colossians, Galatians, and Ephesians. Does anybody else feel this way?

Eph. 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; 2 wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience...5 even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved)

Gal. 1:4 who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father

Col. 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15 and having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

Col. 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

2 Cor. 4:4 in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

2 Tim. 2:26 and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
 
Isn't that deliverance at some "lower level"? By the way, I would not agree that Romans goes in a unique direction. Romans talks about being enslaved to sin-personified; speaks of the law wielded like a lash. And see Rom.16:20 for a direct reference to Satan. Regarding other letters, Eph.1&2 speak strongly of God's Triune saving work, which has overcome our alienation from him, when we were "without God in the world," 2:12; when we needed reconciliation to him, 2:16. Reference to evil, personal powers is relatively minor.

What I mean is, salvation is above all being saved from God. There's no greater threat to us than from God himself. The wrath of God means inevitable destruction, along with whatever terrors and agonies might presage the final, interminable condition. Wrath is the consequence of sin.

We are also saved from ourselves. Sin has made us self-abusers, self-destroyers. Our worldly passions are as much a threat to us any external tormentor. We could be in bondage to some alien personality, even the Devil, while remaining free to some degree in our hearts.

We are saved from sin. This is something of an abstraction, that encompasses at least "the world, the flesh, and the devil." It is that which condemns and places under the wrath of God. It is that which corrupts and renders persons odious to all holy perception.

We are saved from the law, Eph.2:15.

Being left to the mastery of cruel power--of which Satan (also a condemned creature) is the greatest manifestation--is an element of the general judgment against mankind. We ourselves, when we are hurtful to anyone around us, are lesser though more direct agents of punishing or abusive power.

The length of Romans is suited to its subject. It does not need more references to Satan, based on it's length. So, in fact the references to demonic power are scattered here and there throughout the letters; and none of them have an especial focus on it.
 
Hi Reverend,

Thank you for your response. I always enjoy when you post. My post was not to detract from the realization that we are indeed saved from many things: ourselves, sin, the law, etc. Just the balance of those things when taught the word of God. I am speaking personally that I think the emphasis in the west is on original sin due to Augustine, while the east may be more of Satan.

Hypothetically, if original sin be disproved, would our system collapse? I would say many in the west would say yes - what is there to be saved from?

However, if Satan be disproved, would our system collapse? Unlikely.

Would these answers be reversed if we grew up in the east?
 
I think the doctrine of Original Sin (OS) is important, even a vital Christian teaching (it is grounded in Gen.3, not just in Paul's writing).

But regardless of how one views man's state and its origin, which is what the doctrine of OS addresses, one still must deal with the universal sinfulness of man.

Is man sinful, because he's just following his "master," the devil, into wrongs of various descriptions and degrees? And will he improve (even to deification) simply by recognizing or deciding on a new master, Christ or God? By using the church and its sacraments as a ladder?

I suppose that one could argue that in EO if one got rid of Satan, either another ultimate and immanent source of evil would be substituted (e.g. the State, or false religion; or creaturehood; etc.); or else unadjusted it could collapse as an irrelevant system. Obviously, one needs a Savior from something; or the demand for one evaporates, and institutions dedicated to supplying that demand go the way of the dodo.

I think it far more likely that a substitute problem would fill the vacuum. After all there were, are, and continually will be people whose trip through life has little place for demons, or much spiritual reality of any kind. And yet, they maintain a religious element in their lives as a placeholder. In other words, the church still believes (and adjusts), even if a percentage of its members do not.


If such-and-such a doctrine were "disproved," it is hard to say what sort of effect it would have. We might think that wholly getting rid of a personal Devil would have little effect on our theology. But that (it seems to me) is more of a sense we get from the fact we live in the 21C, and not the 16C or earlier. Who can say whether certain problems western churchmen face in the present day might be traceable in part to a general decline since the Middle Ages of concern over a personal Devil? I think the question is too reductionistic.

You may be right about the impact the Pelagian controversy had on the Western church. It goes to show how important fights with heresy can be, and how seriously it must be taken by everyone, not just those directly engaged. That controversy probably deserved a universal church-council with doctrinal deliverances. Thank God (probably) there was no council called to Rome, that the whole rest of the church attended. Otherwise, it would have been another reason for Rome to boast in herself. But it would have been a good thing for both the Latins and the Greeks to recognize the seriousness of confessing this matter definitively and in unison.

As it is, both Rome and EO end up with a faulty anthropology (Rome softens its official Augustinian stance into semi- or quasi-Pelagianism). In both churches, man's sin problem is rooted in his creatureliness, rather than in a radically defective moral compass. Rome aims at getting man back into a state of grace, thus restoring what the fall supposedly lost (donum superadditum). EO takes as its aim the gradual elevation of the human spirit to the ethereal limits of creatureliness (via theosis), nearly absorbed by the spiritual glory of the divine. There's more than a whiff of Gnostic influence there, and the Platonic chain-of-being.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top