Re: Campbell's challenge

[Paul Nuechterlein]

Here is a quote from the Conclusion (p. 934):

It is very important to appreciate that this analysis is consequently
not an attack on *the* gospel but an attack on *a version of* the
gospel, and *one that I maintain Paul himself would view as false.* It
is therefore a thoroughly evangelical discussion in both method and
purpose. Moreover, the solution that I am aiming toward is deeply
Protestant if not Lutheran. To put things at their simplest, only if
my rereading is true is it possible to affirm coherently Paul’s slogan
that “God justifies the ungodly,” since he means by this that God
delivers the wicked from their enslavement to Sin, when they cannot
deliver themselves, and thereby demonstrates his unconditional grace
and love. Alternative construals of this slogan are caught by
irreconcilable contradictions and theological conundrums — issues of
theodicy, capacity, and so on. But in affirming the slogan in this
sense we are of course being loyal to some of the central insights of
Protestantism and of Luther. Furthermore, only now is it possible to
affirm coherently Paul’s construal of “sanctification,” which he seems
to discuss with such profundity in Romans 5-8, elevating this material
now to its rightful status. Paul’s account of sanctification *is* the
gospel. His description of deliverance and cleansing “in Christ,”
through the work of the Spirit, at the behest of the Father, the
entire process being symbolized by baptism, *is* the good news. It
requires no supplementation by other systems.

On Nov 22, 4:01 pm, Paul Nuechterlein <pau...@ecunet.org> wrote:
> In The Deliverance of God, Douglas Campbell argues that sanctification
> is the heart of Paul's Gospel. Justification is a language Paul used
> in debate with a certain position, namely, the "judaizing" teacher of
> Galatia and Rome. Romans 5-8 gives us the preferred language of Paul's
> Gospel, that of unconditionally gracious deliverance from the powers
> of sin and death. The whole point of that deliverance is to empower
> "life in the Spirit," which is about a life of sanctification.
>
> What are the signs that Campbell might be correct? As I examine my own
> upbringing in Lutheranism, for example, I have no meaningful
> remembrance of what "life in the Spirit" means. We never talked about
> it. And doesn't that seem to be the whole point for Paul as his
> expounding on the Gospel climaxes in Romans 8?