There must be a continuous progression from Sinai to Zion, so that the object of justifying faith does not become Epicureanism or, as Peter says, "a cloak for maliciousness." (1 Pet 2:16) -- Martin Chemnitz, Loci Theologici II:501
4 comments:
jgernander
said...
Will,
What page is this on in the old 9 x 12 paper-cover copy? That's the one I have. Or could you cite the section number to help me locate the context? I'm very interested in this statement, fleshing it out etc.
That's the reference I gave - the only copy I have of it. So, in the second volume on page 501. I've been reworking this whole section and it is just golden.
I know this is from a post several days old. But as I said, I'm interested in fleshing this out. I didn't write further yesterday because I had to get some internnet connection problems fixed in the meantime.
As I read that text, it came at the end of a section and appeared to take it in a new direction without giving further exposition of the point.
My question is: How does going from Sinai (the moral law, I presume) to Zion (the gospel, I presume) prevent the object of faith from becoming Epicureanism? Is this simply saying that it is easy for your religion to be merely a religion of the law by which you use it to approve of yourself? If it is merely that kind of Law religion, how does that lead one to Epicureanism, which I take to mean (at least partially) ignoring one's sins or thinking that they are merely excused?
The key is that Zion is the dwelling place of God upon earth. Thus from the slavery of doing what one does not want to do but fears not to, to the delight of the mystical union where the new man wills the will of God freely with joy. That's how I took it, at any rate. Jeremiah's "I will write it ON THEIR HEARTS" - that is, they will WANT to do the Lord's will.
4 comments:
Will,
What page is this on in the old 9 x 12 paper-cover copy? That's the one I have. Or could you cite the section number to help me locate the context? I'm very interested in this statement, fleshing it out etc.
Pastor Jerry Gernander
That's the reference I gave - the only copy I have of it. So, in the second volume on page 501. I've been reworking this whole section and it is just golden.
Will,
I know this is from a post several days old. But as I said, I'm interested in fleshing this out. I didn't write further yesterday because I had to get some internnet connection problems fixed in the meantime.
As I read that text, it came at the end of a section and appeared to take it in a new direction without giving further exposition of the point.
My question is: How does going from Sinai (the moral law, I presume) to Zion (the gospel, I presume) prevent the object of faith from becoming Epicureanism? Is this simply saying that it is easy for your religion to be merely a religion of the law by which you use it to approve of yourself? If it is merely that kind of Law religion, how does that lead one to Epicureanism, which I take to mean (at least partially) ignoring one's sins or thinking that they are merely excused?
Help! (This is an important discussion!)
Thanks (proleptically),
Jerry
The key is that Zion is the dwelling place of God upon earth. Thus from the slavery of doing what one does not want to do but fears not to, to the delight of the mystical union where the new man wills the will of God freely with joy. That's how I took it, at any rate. Jeremiah's "I will write it ON THEIR HEARTS" - that is, they will WANT to do the Lord's will.
Post a Comment