The New Testament tells that Paul’s missionary vision was concentrated on serving the Gentiles. Being a strong enemy of Christianity, Paul became one of the greatest miracles of the New Testament and thus his life was a true representation of what a real mission is. There are several characteristics of missionary methods Paul uses in his service.

The first method that can be recognized is the so-called itinerant evangelism which lies in spreading the good news in every place on Earth. In other words, Paul “[calls] people everywhere in the then known world to repent and give themselves to Christ” (Moreau, Corwin, and McGee 2004). The accent is put on the fact that the Gospel is spread by Paul not in the place of his usual inhabitance but in the places, he would even never visit if it were not for God’s calling in his life. This method should be well understood by each Christian because often Church sees evangelism only locally. Paul provides a good method of making God’s will be done since the main commission consists in spreading the Gospel to the ends of the Earth. Paul’s method went beyond all borders of the average human mind- he committed himself to go anywhere God would send him, whatever it cost him. Another important method used by Paul in his evangelism is following the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It is evident from the Scriptures that Paul was led by Holy Spirit in every decision he made. It even turned out sometimes that the places he wanted to visit were not part of God’s plan so he successfully avoided traveling there. Thus, “in a blend of Spirit-led decisions and divine revelations, Paul moves from one city to another” (Moreau, Corwin and McGee 2004). Of course, since mission is God’s will first, and each missionary should follow this rule, but Paul’s life is a true example of how missionaries should accomplish their calling in preaching the Gospel to the ends of the Earth.

The next characteristic of Paul’s missionary methods that may be traced from the life of Paul is total fearlessness. Paul did not appreciate his earthly life at all but considered God’s mission to be the main purpose. It is clear that Paul’s mission consisted in fulfilling God’s will even at the cost of his own life, and his daring heart allowed him to return to places full of danger. Therefore, “modern Christians may wonder what Paul’s feelings were as he returned to Lystra, where recently he had been stoned and left for dead…” but this seems to be “a nonissue” for Paul as he was straight-out for mission (Moreau, Corwin and McGee 2004). Paul’s methods were radical enough: he exposed people’s sins and also was not afraid to die for the truth. One more important characteristic of Paul’s missionary methods is that he never left those he converted to Christianity without spiritual help and support. To be more precise, despite his calling consisted of going to the nations and spreading the Gospel to the ends of the Earth, he still considered it important to support the planted churches. He does this in the face of persecutions and tries to fulfill his promise to visit the churches at all costs, though still, he is every time led by the Holy Spirit.

The last characteristic is presenting Gospel to all people, regardless of their background. Paul “was willing to adapt in different places a radically different approach, as he put it, “for those under the law and for those not under the law” (Winter and Hawthorne 1981). This was one of the most crucial characteristics of Paul’s mission because it triggered many contradictions among the Jewish people and Pharisees. His message was as contradictory and difficult to accept as the message of Jesus Christ. This is the testimony of Paul’s true devotion to the teaching of Christ. As His disciple, Paul followed the main principle Jesus Christ used: God loved the world and wants every human being to be saved. All in all, Paul’s missionary methods fully express the essence of the Gospel: God’s love to people at all cost.

References

Moreau, A. Scott, Gary Corwin, and Gary B McGee. 2004. Introducing World Missions. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic.

Winter, Ralph D and Steven C Hawthorne. 1981. Perspectives on The World Christian Movement: Reader. Pasadena, Calif.: William Carey Library.

The post Paul’s Missionary Methods appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

To understand who Jesus in the Old Testament was, one must first understand who he was in the New Testament. The New Testament refers to Jesus as Christ which means Messiah borrowed from the Hebrew word and the Greek word which means the chosen one or the anointed one. Most of the apostles that came after the death of Jesus Christ and those who were his students refer to him as Jesus the Messiah. This means that they believed that he is the very same person that was prophesied in the Old Testament by many prophets, for instance, Jeremiah, Daniel, Isaiah, and Ezekiel. “It is not easy to determine what constitutes allusion in the Old Testament”[1]. The paper aims at relating the New Testament to the Old Testament to offer a summary and emphasis on the topic of discussion.

Summary

The Old Testament presents a God of juice and punishment on those who disobeyed his rules, for instance, he, the father, sent plagues on Egypt as punishment for what they had done to the children of Israel. He too gained freedom on Sodom, but Jesus comes in the New Testament and offers a different approach to love and compassion offering humankind forgiveness and in the most important part and foundation of Christianity, he as for their sins. The Old Testament offers a prophecy of a son, born in the lineage of David as a praise to God the father. It also describes that no one had seen the Father nor heard him directly unlike Jesus that is born of the origin Mary ad walks among men in a day that God the Father had not done before.

Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament. In Genesis, God creates the world from the word of the mount and later but because of human sin, he offered a promise that the Messiah would be born in the very lineage of David. While he was under arrest, Jesus referred to Himself as ‘I AM’ which is also the divine name of God as He had used it while in the Exodus to Moses, and thus, he brought in a confirmation that God the Father has never been seen or heard by man before. In the same instance, Christ had predated Abraham, which made the Jews quite angry but it also brought out the new meaning. This offered a probability that he, Jesus had the probability of being the son of God[2].

The Old Testament has fifty-two prophecies on the coming of Jesus Christ and thus if we considered that the Old Testament prophesies are void and invalid, Christianity as we know it does not have meaning. The savior that had been affirmed in the Old Testament would not have been born and thus he would have been just a man fulfilling his mission, and thus, there is relevance that has been created by the Old Testament.

Jesus himself did not claim to be the Son of God in the New Testament he responded that it was the people that called him. Thus, it brings out a question on whether he was the actual fulfillment of what had been prophesied but in affirming the place of Jesus in the Bible. Jesus accepts to die for human sins as he had been ordered by God the father claiming that His will should be done which confirms the validity of his coming and the ascending to the father after his work was done[3].

After the death of Jesus Christ, Christianity evolved, and new movements were formed, unlike the olden days where the Roman Catholic church was dominant at that time[4]. The apostles of Jesus Christ had learned new philosophies that they had learned from their teachers. They spread out and continued the work that the Son of God had started.

Paul, one of the apostles of Jesus Christ, explains how the church was formed. He states that they built the development of the New Testament church that emerged after the death of Jesus through the New Testament. Then the prophets who wrote the Old Testament and Jesus Christ himself being the cornerstone of all of it (Ephesians 2:20)[5].

Peter another apostle preached on the day of Pentecost a very powerful sermon at the beginning of the New Testament church and on that day he converted 3000 people and his sermon only entailed scriptures from the Old Testaments (Acts 2:14-41)[6].

Conclusion

Most of the books in the New Testament make lots of direct quotes from the Old Testament except for four books. Many individuals today misinterpret the New Testament living like the Old Testament is not part of the new teachings. This is not the case as it is seen on numerous occasions that we have seen the Old Testament being involved directly with the New Testament. Jesus Christ believed in the Old Testament teachings and prophets. The books of the Old Testament inspire and retain a permanent value, they do not depreciate but hold a huge significance as none of the old covenant has ever been revoked.

Bibliography

FRANCE, R. T. Jesus and the Old Testament. [Downers Grove, Ill.]: Inter-Varsity Press, 1971.

GUTHRIE, NANCY. The One Year Book of Discovering Jesus in the Old Testament. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2012.

[1] R. T France, Jesus and the Old Testament ([Downers Grove, Ill.]: Inter-Varsity Press, 1971). p.15

[2] Nancy Guthrie, The One Year Book Of Discovering Jesus In The Old Testament (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2012). Feb 4.

[3] Nancy Guthrie (2012). Feb 8.

[4] R. T France (1971), p.17

[5] Nancy Guthrie (2012). Feb 8. September 12.

[6] R. T France (1971). P.35-37

The post Jesus and the Old Testament appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

Mary, the mother of Jesus, is one of the most significant characters in the New Testament. For her humility and obedience to God, Mary has been admired by generations of Christians throughout history. The character of Mary has also been widely covered in Western art, literature, and music. Based on the New Testament’s depiction of her, Christians and theologians across the world have over time constructed a largely admirable picture of Mary. Interestingly, biblical references to Mary are too sparse and few especially considering her character and significance. Because of this, the current paper presents a biographical study of Mary with an aim to shedding more light on her character, early life, and significance to Christianity. In addition to the New Testament, the paper relies on established scholarly sources for the necessary literature.

Background Information and Early Life

According to some scholars, Mary was a descendant of David and this ensured that ancient prophecy over the lineage of Jesus was fulfilled through her being the mother of Jesus. This supposition is, however, based on Luke’s genealogy of the ancestors of Jesus through Mary. Matthew’s genealogy of the ancestors of Jesus is different from that of Luke as the former traces this lineage through Solomon while the latter traces it through Nathan[1]. Although other scholars interpret that Luke was tracing Mary’s lineage, he was tracing that of Joseph. When viewed in this context, it is difficult to ascertain whether Mary was a descendant of David. It is, however, clear that Jesus was a descendant of David since there is Biblical evidence that Joseph was from David’s lineage[2].

The most comprehensive biblical references of Mary’s early life are in the books of Luke and James. According to the Gospel of James, Mary was the daughter of Joachim and Anna. Joachim was very wealthy and always gave a double offering to the Lord. Despite his generosity and commitment to offerings, Joachim and Anna stayed for long without having children. When a man by the name of Reubel reminded him that he had not yet conceived a child, Joachim became particularly frustrated and moved to the desert where he fasted and prayed until the Lord heard his prayer. When describing the child that she would give birth to, the angel of the Lord told Anna that the child would be famous and be spoken of everywhere[3].

When Mary turned three, her parents took her to the temple where she received food from an angel. Mary served in the temple until she was twelve. When she reached this age, the Lord instructed Zachariah on how he would get a husband for Mary. The Lord told Zachariah to gather widowers so that the Lord would give Mary to one of them as his wife. When Zachariah did as the Lord had instructed him, Joseph was anointed as the one to take Mary as his wife. And although he declined at first, Joseph agreed to take her after considering the potential wrath that would result from disobeying God.

While at Joseph’s house, an angel appeared and confirmed to her that she would conceive of the Lord. At first, Mary appeared shocked by the idea of conceiving a child from the Lord God. The angel, however, explained to her that the power of God would get her pregnant and that the child she would give birth to would save people from their sins. It was only after this clarification that Mary agreed to the prophecy of the angel. The visit of the angel is regarded as one of the most important events in the early life of Mary as it was during this time that Mary understood God’s plans for her[4].

The Character of Mary

The earliest reference to the character of Mary is found in the book of Galatians. In the fourth chapter of this book, the phrase “born of woman” is used. In contemporary theology, some scholars regard the phrase as an allusion to Mary while others regard it as a reference to the essential humanity of an individual. When applied to Mary, the phrase “born of woman” was meant to portray Jesus as completely human[5]. Considering that at least one parent was needed for a child to be considered human in the ancient world, Mary played a particularly important role in the depiction of Jesus as a man and human. The phrase could also be taken to mean that Jesus’ birth would not be conventional as it would involve a woman only rather than a woman and a man[6].

According to some scholars, the phrases “born of woman” as used in the Bible and “born of the Virgin Mary” as used in the Apostles Creed have a similar significance and purpose when used to refer to Jesus the son of Mary. When used in this context, the two phrases highlight that Mary’s role as the mother of Jesus was the most important of her life. In this regard, this role takes precedence over all other roles played by Mary throughout her life. Despite this seemingly acceptable interpretation, the concept of a virgin birth as advanced by Catholicism has been notably divisive among scholars. According to opponents, the concept of a virgin birth is not consistent with the fact that Jesus was a human being born of a human mother. Proponents of the concept, on the other hand, argue that a virgin birth was enabled by Mary’s acceptance of the role of facilitating the process of incarnation.

Although most references to Mary’s pregnancy in the Old Testament assert that she conceived without any human agency, certain texts could be interpreted to suggest otherwise. In Matthew 1:16 for instance, the phrase “Joseph begat Jesus” has been used by some scholars to question whether Mary conceived without any human agency[7]. Interestingly, references to the topic of how Mary conceived are only found in the books of Matthew and Luke. This makes it particularly difficult for scholars to make conclusions on the topic with any degree of certainty. Despite this, most Protestant churches continue to teach that Mary’s virginity was not impaired when she conceived Jesus[8].

The question over whether Mary was genetically connected to her son Jesus has been equally divisive throughout history. When analyzing the issue, it is important to first acknowledge that the sinful nature of our first parents has always been passed from one generation to the other. In this regard, similar to all other human beings, Mary had sinned since she was genetically related to Adam and Eve. Her son Jesus, however, was an exception as He did not have an inherited sin nature. When placed in this context, it could be argued that Mary did not have a genetic connection with her son since Jesus was sinless[9]. The book of Hebrews ascertains this proposition by referring to Jesus as a special creation of God that was placed in Mary’s womb (Hebrew 10:5…). This Biblical reference could also be used as evidence for the proposition that Mary conceived without any human agency. Had she conceived otherwise, Jesus would have inherited a sinful nature.

During the period after Jesus’ baptism, Mary experienced a rather unfortunate time with her son Jesus. When Jesus started to spread the Gospel, Mary joined her other sons in regarding Jesus as crazy. Subsequently, Jesus appeared to disown them when He refused to go meet His family who had come over at one of His meetings.

“Who are my mother and brothers?” He asked. Then he looked round at those seated in a circle around Him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.” (Mark 3:33-35)[10].

The above incident marked the start of a difficult period for Mary. The fallout between Mary and her son Jesus continued when Jesus appeared to refer to Mary as far from blessed. The incident in which these events happened also marked the first worshipper of Mary recorded in the Bible. While reacting to one of Jesus’ teaching sessions, a woman amongst a crowd called out to Jesus and said “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you (Luke 11:27).” Jesus responded to this statement by asserting that those who hear the word of God and heed to it are the ones blessed.

The response from Jesus appeared to indicate the strained relationships in Mary’s family. Mary and her other sons had joined hands in regarding Jesus as crazy after He had refused to meet them. On the other hand, Jesus had responded by terming those interested in seeking the word of God as more important than His family. Mary’s experiences during Jesus’ ministry could also be used to highlight the difficulties that face families when there lacks a deep knowledge of the Gospel. Having known the role that Jesus would play in the salvation of mankind from the day the angel of the Lord visited her, Mary should have led her sons in supporting Jesus’ ministry.

Mary’s suffering during Jesus’ lifetime had been prophesied by Simeon. When the aged prophet met baby Jesus at the temple, he prophesied that Mary would suffer and experience pain in the course of Jesus’ ministry:

“This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel and to be a sign that is spoken against. –yes, a sword will pierce your own soul too – so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed” (Luke 2:34-35)[11].

The prophecy that Mary’s soul would be pierced by a sword was fulfilled through her rather strained relationship with Jesus and His ministry. The prophecy could also be seen to have been fulfilled at the foot of the cross where Mary wept following her son’s crucifixion. The thoughts of Mary’s heart could also be seen to have been revealed through Jesus’ ministry. Although Mary “fell” when she listened to her sons, she later realized her mistake and accepted Jesus. In this regard, the thoughts of her heart were revealed.

Although Mary did not follow Jesus as He traveled and preached throughout Israel, her presence when He was arrested in Jerusalem underlines her love for her son. In the company of Jesus’ aunt, Mary was present throughout Jesus’ judgment process and witnessed His crucifixion at Golgotha. There is Biblical evidence indicating that Jesus reciprocated this love. While at the cross, Jesus reciprocated the love His mother had shown Him:

“Near the cross of Jesus stood His mother, His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw His mother there, and the disciple whom He loved (John) standing nearby He said to His mother, “Dear woman, here is your son,” and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.” (John19:25-27)[12].

The Baptism of Mary

There is no Biblical reference to the baptism of Mary. Considering that Jesus had ordered all Christians to be baptized, however, it is particularly difficult to believe that Mary was not baptized. Like her mother, Mary was likely among the first Christians to be baptized by immersion as Jesus had instructed all Christians to do. As earlier indicated, however, there lacks a Biblical account of Mary’s baptism and as such, there is little that can be evaluated about the process.

The Death of Mary

Similar to her baptism, the Bible does not account for Mary’s death. According to some church records, John took Mary with him to Ephesus where she died and got buried. Largely due to the lack of credible evidence, the topic of Mary’s death remains divisive among scholars and the various church dominations.  The ‘Assumption of Mary’ is arguably one of the most renowned legends regarding the death of Mary. According to this account, Mary’s ascended to heaven in a similar manner as Jesus[13]. And while this account is popular in Christianity, it is critical to note that Biblical evidence opposes this supposition.

The Gospel of John’s declaration that “no man has ascended to heaven” could be used as evidence that Mary did not ascend to heaven as Jesus did[14]. It is hard to believe that John, who took care of Mary, would have declared that no one had descended to heaven had Mary did so. By the time John wrote the book, Mary was well over 100 years. Equally, it is hard to believe that Mary was still alive by the time John wrote the book. Apostle Paul also says that every human being shall be made alive on the day of resurrection each in their order. Considering that Mary was in every aspect a human being, it could be argued that she belongs among those who will be resurrected by Jesus and given eternal life[15].

Based on the above discussion of Mary’s death, it could also be conclusively asserted that Mary is not in heaven. This brings up an equally divisive topic over whether Christians should pray to her. According to available evidence, Mary did not rise to heaven and is sleeping in the dust with others waiting for the resurrection day[16]. In this regard, it could be regarded as wrong to pray to her since she cannot hear prayers. Praying to Mary further breaks one of God’s commandments that prohibit Christians from consulting the dead. Christians should consult God only.

The Lord’s Prayer as taught by Jesus to His disciples provides further evidence that Christians should not address their prayers to anyone else other than God. According to Jesus’ teachings, Christians should address their prayers to their “Father who art in Heaven”. When placed in this context, it is critical to note that Jesus did not instruct Christians to pray to Him[17]. There is no Biblical evidence indicating that prayers should be addressed to anyone else other than God. And although Christians can pray to God through Jesus, the same cannot be said of Mary[18].

Mary and the Book of Revelation

Some scholars have interpreted some symbols in the book of Revelation as referring to Mary. The book of revelation refers to a woman clothed with the sun and who appears to give birth to a son. According to some scholars, the woman referred to by this symbol is Mary. And although it is particularly difficult to ascertain whether that woman is Mary, it is important to refer to several Biblical phrases that could relate to the topic. Firstly, there appears to be a common acceptance that the son of the woman referred to in the book of Revelation is Jesus. When comparing the woman mentioned in Revelation with that mentioned in Genesis, it could be noted that this woman is probably faithful to Israel.

Further Biblical evidence indicates that this woman later became the spiritual mother of the church at Jerusalem. Following the ascension of the son of a woman, this woman was persecuted and this made her flee to the wilderness. When viewed from this point, it is more likely that the woman mentioned in the book of Revelation is the Israel faithful such as Jesus’ disciples and not Mary the mother of Jesus. This interpretation should, however, be taken as one of the many possible interpretations that can be made of the woman mentioned in Revelation.

Significance of Mary to Modern Christianity

Over the years, some scholars and Christianity faithful have advanced the belief that Mary is mother to the world. According to this supposition, Mary is an example of godly motherhood, and as such Christians are obliged to regard Mary as their mother. While addressing his audience during a mass at Saint Peter’s Square, Pope Francis once referred to Mary as the mother of Christians. According to the Pope, those who do not share this feeling ought to regard themselves as orphans. Expectedly, some scholars took issue with this statement as it seemed to violate the Scripture.

Although Mary serves an important role in modern Christianity as the model of motherhood, it is important to acknowledge that she does not have a role in the spiritual nourishment of Christians. On the contrary, Christians are nourished by the word of God through interaction with it and service to its course[19]. The supposition that those who do not regard Mary as their mother are orphans is also not true since it violates the teachings of Jesus as a record in the Bible. According to Romans 8:14-17, there are no orphans in Christ as all Christians have a Father in God. Based on this evidence, it could be noted that while Mary remains an important figure in Christianity, her role and significance should be interpreted cautiously.

Conclusion

Mary is with little doubt one of the most renowned figures in the Bible. Even among those who have never read the book, Mary is known for her role in the process through which God saved mankind. Being the mother of Jesus, Mary played an important role in Jesus’ upbringing and set an example to millions of Christians across the world on how to lead a life by God’s laws. Despite her popularity, however, Mary has been the center of a range of divisive topics in Christianity as scholars and believers seem to disagree on certain aspects of her life and significance to the religion. According to some scholars, Mary was a descendant of David and this ensured that ancient prophecy over the lineage of Jesus was fulfilled through her being the mother of Jesus. This supposition is, however, based on Luke’s genealogy of the ancestors of Jesus through Mary. Matthew’s genealogy of the ancestors of Jesus is different from that of Luke as the former traces this lineage through Solomon while the latter traces it through Nathan[20]. Although other scholars interpret that Luke was tracing Mary’s lineage, he was tracing that of Joseph. When viewed in this context, it is difficult to ascertain whether Mary was a descendant of David. It is, however, clear that Jesus was a descendant of David since there is Biblical evidence that Joseph was from David’s lineage[21].

Among the divisive topics concerning the life and significance of Mary include whether she conceived Jesus without any human agency. Other topics that have been particularly divisive include whether she similarly ascended to heaven and whether Christians should pray to her. As noted through the current biographical study, however, there is no evidence that Mary ascended to heaven. As such, Christians should not pray to her as Jesus instructed that all prayers be addressed to God. It is, therefore, important for Christians to acknowledge the significance of Mary for her role in the birth and upbringing of Jesus rather than for her spiritual completeness. This is because all descendants of Adam and Eve have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory.

Bibliography

Bockmuehl, Markus. “The son of David and his mother.” Journal of Theological Studies 62.2 (2011): 476-493.

Brown, Raymond, E., Donfried, Karl, P., Fitzmyer, Joseph A., & Reumann, John, (eds.), Mary in the New Testament, Fortress/Paulist Press, 1978.

Dasnabedian, Thamar. “Mother of Christ the King and Her Influence, as Reflected in the Armenian Sharaknoc (Hymnary).” The Ecumenical Review 60.1/2 (2008): 53-58.

Hahn, Scott. Hail, Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God, Doubleday, 2001,

Kim, Stephen. “Encountering Jesus: Character Studies in the Gospel of John.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 53.4 (2010): 838-839.

Pagels, Elaine. “What Became of God the Mother? Conflicting Images of God in Early Christianity.” Signs Journal 2.2 (1976): 293-303.

Pelikan, Jaroslav. Mary Through the Centuries: Her Place in the History of Culture, Yale University Press, 1998.

Procario-Foley, Elena. “In Quest of the Jewish Mary: The Mother of Jesus in History, Theology, and Spirituality.” Theological Studies 75.1 (2014): 171-173.

Ritva, Williams. “The Mother of Jesus at Cana: A social-science interpretation of John 2:1-12.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 59.4 (1997): 679-692.

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids. Zondervan Publishing House, 1984.

[1]
[1]         Procario-Foley, Elena. “In Quest of the Jewish Mary: The Mother of Jesus in History, Theology, and Spirituality.” Theological Studies 75.1 (2014): 172.

[2]
[2]          Procario-Foley, 173

[3]
[3]         Brown, Raymond,E.,Donfried, Karl, P., Fitzmyer, Joseph A., & Reumann, John, (eds.),Mary in the New Testament, Fortress/Paulist Press, 1978.
[4]
[4]         Brown, Raymond,E.,Donfried, Karl, P., Fitzmyer, Joseph A., & Reumann, John, (eds.),Mary in the New Testament, Fortress/Paulist Press, 1978.

[5]
[5]         Dasnabedian, Thamar. “Mother of Christ the King and Her Influence, as Reflected in the Armenian Sharaknoc (Hymnary).” The Ecumenical Review 60.1/2 (2008): 55.

[6]
[6]         Hahn, Scott. Hail, Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God, Doubleday, 2001,
[7]
[7]         Dasnabedian, 56

[8]
[8]         Hahn, Scott. Hail, Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God, Doubleday, 2001,

[9]
[9]         Ritva, Williams. “The Mother of Jesus at Cana: A social-science interpretation of John 2:1-12.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly59.4 (1997): 681

[10]
            [10]         The Holy Bible, New International Version

[11]
[11]          The Holy Bible, New International Version

[12]
[12]          The Holy Bible, New International Version

[13]
[13]          Pagels, Elaine. “What Became of God the Mother? Conflicting Images of God in Early Christianity.” Signs Journal 2.2 (1976): 298

[14]
[14]         Pagels, 299

[15]
[15]         Pelikan, Jaroslav. Mary Through the Centuries: Her Place in the History of Culture, Yale University Press, 1998.

[16]
[16]          Bockmuehl, Markus. “The son of David and his mother.” Journal of Theological Studies 62.2 (2011): 478.

[17]
[17]         Bockmuehl, 479

[18]
[18]         Pelikan, Jaroslav. Mary Through the Centuries: Her Place in the History of Culture, Yale University Press, 1998.
[19]
[19]         Kim, Stephen. “Encountering Jesus: Character Studies in the Gospel of John.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society53.4 (2010): 838.

[20]
[20]          Procario-Foley, Elena. “In Quest of the Jewish Mary: The Mother of Jesus in History, Theology, and Spirituality.” Theological Studies 75.1 (2014): 172.

[21]
[21]          Procario-Foley, 173

The post Mary, The Mother of Jesus appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

St Augustine is one of the most significant figures in the history of Christianity as his works had a great influence on the development of the Western church. Of his many works, Augustine is probably best remembered for his writings in response to widespread heresy that had threatened to destabilize the church in the early 4^th century. This heresy had been started by Pelagius, a British believer who emphasized personal holiness over the saving grace of God. In response to this rather controversial proposition, Augustine developed what was later referred to as “Augustine’s theology of grace”.

Pelagius’ criticism of the moral laxity in the early church began after he found Augustine’s statement “Give what thou commandest, and command what thou wilt” to be offensive[1]. The statement as contained in the Confessions, a spiritual autobiography written by Augustine, emphasized the power that God had over man and the inability of a man to do good without God’s grace. Pelagius’ doctrine of grace contradicted that of the early church. Fearing that Pelagius’ doctrine could corrupt the church, Augustine embarked on a life-long defense of God’s grace and its necessity in man’s salvation. The demanding nature of this mission made Augustine make some of the most profound and controversial theological assertions. Given this, the current paper discusses Augustine’s theology of grace as a response to Pelagius and the impact it had on the development of the early church.

Pelagius and Pelagianism

Little is known about the personal life of Pelagius. According to some early writings, Pelagius was a British monk and theologian who moved to Rome during the period around c.380. While in Rome, Pelagius worked as a spiritual director and became a highly regarded religious figure due to his intellectual ability. As a person who exercised rigorous asceticism, Pelagius was greatly disturbed by the moral laxity of the Church in Rome. According to him, this moral laxity had resulted from the teachings and beliefs advanced by the doctrine of divine grace as written by St Augustine[2]. Opposed to the doctrine, Pelagius attacked the teachings of the church and accused its leadership of jeopardizing the entire moral law.

According to Pelagius’ teachings which were later referred to as Pelagianism, man is basically of good moral nature. Based on this supposition, Pelagius argued that a man can live without sin. Pelagius went ahead and gave examples of men in the Bible who lived without sin. While providing these examples, he relied on the fact that the Bible does not provide incidents when these men sinned. Pelagius’ doctrine of grace had several other controversial suppositions.  According to his doctrine, Adam would still have died regardless of whether he sinned or not. Additionally, Adam’s sin did not hurt the entire human race but rather himself only. From this understanding of the origin of sin, Pelagius argued that the human race does not die as a result of Adam’s sin and neither does resurrect through Jesus. Overall, his teaching on grace appeared to borrow more from the fields of psychology and sociology than from theology.

Augustine’s Response to Pelagius

Augustine’s work, particularly his anti-Pelagian writings, played a significant role in stabilizing the early church and preventing the spread of potentially harmful heresy. His anti-Pelagian writings collectively formed what is referred to as Augustine’s theology of grace. While these writings were rooted in his personal experiences, they hugely borrowed from the Scripture and this made them integral to the teachings of the early church. According to Augustine, every good work is the work of God because it is Him who gives human beings the ability to do that which is good[3]. In this regard, it is who God works within human beings to advance that which is good. While human beings can act as they wish, God brings about the power to do so. The good deeds of man are, therefore, the work of God in the sense that it is Him who provides the power.

By describing man’s merits as God’s gifts, Augustine argued that God does not regard these merits as belonging to man but rather to Himself since it is only through His gifts that they are realized[4]. Based on this supposition, Augustine noted that it is only through God’s grace that man’s good deeds can be viewed as actually belonging to the man. God’s grace is, therefore, integral and necessary in the life of man as it is only through it that man can get salvation. Augustine’s understanding of grace contradicted that of Pelagius who had argued against the need for divine intervention in man’s salvation. According to Pelagius, salvation is humanistic and as such, it is realized through good deeds only. In this regard, God’s grace is not necessary for human beings to break away from sin and achieve salvation. Pelagius further argued that God’s grace serves to help human beings obey His commands but cannot be used to save anyone. By describing grace in this way, Pelagius regarded it as internal and sin as external. When comparing his line of thought with that of Augustine, however, it is clear that Pelagius missed an important point by describing man’s deeds as independent of the will and power of God. As the source of life, God has always influenced man’s will and actions as it is from Him that the ability to think and act comes from.

According to Augustine, grace is necessary for human beings as they inherited Adam’s sin. After creating man, God gave him all the human faculties that he still possesses. Among these faculties, free will was the most significant as it would determine whether man retained the uprightness he was created with. By freely giving the man his uprightness and the grace with which to retain it, God could be seen to have put the man on probation. Rather than use the faculty of free will to advance his uprightness, man used it to sin and in doing so involved the whole human race. It is because of his sin that physical and spiritual death fell a man and passed over to the entire human race. Through the teachings of Scripture, Augustine noted that he was certain that all generations of Adam had inherited his sin and the condemnation that followed it. In this regard, it could be termed a fact that no one from Adam’s generation is free from the condemnation that followed his sin.

Although Augustine did not specifically indicate how human beings became partakers of Adam’s sin, his writings appear to point several possible explanations for this phenomenon. In some texts, he appears to attribute the phenomenon to the fact that human beings are united by race. In this regard, the whole human race was present in the person of Adam when he sinned. In other texts, Augustine appears to suppose that human beings inherited sin through nature. Adam corrupted nature which in turn corrupts human beings through the ways it communicates to them. There are also writings where Augustine seems to attribute the phenomenon to simple heredity. Regardless of how human beings came to inherit Adam’s sin, Augustine notes that sin is propagated within generations as a result of the connection mankind has with Adam[5].

Due to the inherited sin nature, human beings lost the divine image that God had created them with. And although not all of it was lost, Adam’s sin meant that human beings had to rely on God to do anything truly good. Sin further made injured the faculty of will as God had originally designed it, and this made man prone to the power of Satan. Since the free will suffered as a result of the original sin, man could no longer desire and choose anything but evil. For him to desire and do anything well, the man had to first be freed by God’s grace. Augustine’s proposition on how the original sin necessitated God’s grace in man appears to be in line with modern psychology. An evil man remains evil even in their willing the same way a good man remains good both in will and deed.

In its simplest form, Augustine defined grace as God’s assistance to man’s salvation. This assistance entails all forms of external help that God uses to support the course of man’s desire to break away from sin. Among the forms of help that God advanced to man include forgiveness, the law, Christ’s death, and the gospel[6]. This assistance also includes the guidance of the Holy Spirit which works within man to enable him to choose what is good by the law and gospel. It is only through the assistance of the Holy Spirit that man can overcome the temptation to sin. In this regard, the Holy Spirit as a form of God’s assistance differentiates Christians from other men.

The impact of grace on man by its nature. As earlier noted, grace is the principle set forth by God to aid the redemption of man from sin. Based on this description, Augustine noted that grace cannot be viewed as a series of unrelated gifts but rather as constant assistance from God. While this is the most complete view of grace, it can also be viewed in terms of the sequential effects it has on a man. The first effect of grace on man is bringing about faith. Through faith, the forgiveness of sin is realized and this allows an individual to do what is good. Other effects of grace on man include love to God, perseverance to the end, and progressive power to do what is good. When it is bestowed on man, grace is both irresistible and indefectible. For example, Augustine argued that faith in God is irresistible to those on whom grace has been bestowed.

Since grace is given to no preceding merits, it can then be argued that God foreknew that man would need His grace even before the actual need arose[7].  According to Augustine, God would be something less than an eternal God had he not known from the beginning that man would need His grace. Based on this line of thought, it could also be argued that God knew the specific individuals to whom He would give grace. And while men may describe the predestinated nature of God’s grace as fate, Augustine argued that this view can hardly be held as true. According to him, God’s grace is undeserved love and tender mercy that God expressed to mankind and without which no one would be saved.

Controversial Assertions in Augustine’s Theology of Grace

Although Augustine’s theology of grace played an integral role in uniting and developing the early church, there are controversial assertions that resulted from his doctrine. The most controversial of these assertions is probably his view on those who died unbaptized. Augustine described as lost all those who died unbaptized. He further asserted that those who died unbaptized but who were guilty of the original sin only would be given the lightest punishment. And while these assertions could have been necessitated by the need to highlight the significance of baptism in Christianity, it is critical to note that they created notable controversy and to an extent painted badly Augustine’s theology of grace[8]. Given his description of God’s grace, one would note that it is extremely difficult to assert with any degree of certainty what will happen to those who died unbaptized.

As earlier noted, Augustine’s belief on the significance of baptism in Christianity could have forced him to make the controversial assertions. According to him, baptism was the only way through which salvation and incorporation into the visible church could be realized. Interestingly, however, it is only through his theology of grace that Christians could learn that the invisible church of God is more accommodating than the visible church which is a human institution[9]. In this regard, God’s grace as manifested through the death of His son was enough to save those who had died unbaptized but who believed in His word. Baptism could, therefore, be described as a physical sign of salvation and as such less significant compared to the inner belief and acceptance of God’s word. By expressing His grace outside of the conventional channels, God regards as His children those who die before they get the opportunity to be baptized and attain physical salvation.

Based on the above analysis, it could be noted that Augustine’s controversial assertions resulted from his rather strong emphasis on adherence to the beliefs and traditions of the visible church and insufficient regard for the invisible church of God. Due to the threat posed by Pelagianism, Augustine included in his theology of grace assertions he probably did not believe to be true. The flaws in his theology and how they came to highlight the impact that Pelagianism had on the early church.  Although Pelagius did not succeed in instilling his doctrine of grace in Christianity, his thoughtful interpretation of Scripture threatened to jeopardize the progress of the early church. The response from key figures such as Augustine was, therefore, highly likely to contain controversial assertions as Pelagius had identified and criticized the inconsistent nature of some early church teachings.

Relevance to Modern Christianity

Augustine’s theology of grace has had a notable impact on Christianity throughout history. Partly due to the interpretation advanced by Augustine, the doctrine of original sin remains a divisive topic in modern Christianity. Although a significant number of scholars in the history of Christianity have argued that children remain sinless until they reach a certain age when they can distinguish between good and evil, it is critical to note that this assertion is inconsistent with the Scripture. And while this supposition appears to counter Augustine’s controversial assertion that infants depart into eternal punishment, it is not based on any Biblical teachings and as such cannot be held as true. Based on Augustine’s theology of grace, it could be argued that children are born in sin since they are all descendants of Adam. If those who die in infancy will go to heaven, they will do so because of God’s grace as manifested through the death of Jesus Christ.

The interpretation of man’s free-will by some scholars could also be described when viewed in the context of Augustine’s theology of grace. Some modern scholars and critics of the Bible have argued that man’s faculty of free-will as given by God gave human beings the capacity to determine what is good and evil[10]. According to Augustine, however, man’s free-will was not entirely free as it was bound in sin. This assertion was later advanced by Martin Luther in his work “The Bondage of the Will”. In defense of Augustine’s theology of grace, Martin Luther noted God does not save an individual based on their level of faith but rather because of His mercy and grace to mankind. In this regard, nothing in a man motivates God to save him from sin. The supposition that man can work up his faith and merit God’s salvation is, therefore, inconsistent with teachings from the Scripture. As such, there is a need for modern Christians to understand and acknowledge the fact that salvation results from God’s grace and does not depend on how an individual works up to their faith.

Going forward, it is highly likely that Augustine’s theology of grace will become even more significant to the church’s stability. In the recent past, some scholars and key church leaders have warned that modern Christianity is at risk of becoming semi-Pelagian. According to Pope Francis, contemporary forms of Pelagianism can be observed from how human beings have become so indulged in themselves that they appear to acknowledge the significance of God’s grace. In this regard, while self-help courses can be integral in improving quality of life, they should not serve to minimize the power of grace since it is only through it that Christians can flourish in faith. Overall, as concern over the existence of contemporary forms of Pelagianism continues to build, one would expect the relevance of Augustine’s theology of grace to grow.

Conclusion

St Augustine is one of the most significant figures in the history of Christianity as his works had a great influence on the development of the Western church. Of his many works, Augustine is probably best remembered for his writings in response to widespread heresy that had threatened to destabilize the church in the early 4^th century. Augustine’s doctrine of the origin of sin formed the basis of the doctrinal controversy between him and Pelagius. While Pelagius believed that man is born without sin and can as such life without it, Augustine argued that Adam’s sin enslaved mankind to it and as such all men are born with a sinful nature. According to Pelagius, man can choose to do good by exercising his free will accordingly and does not, therefore, need God’s grace to achieve salvation. Augustine opposed this assertion and argued that man’s sinful nature makes it impossible for him to choose the good without relying on the assistance of God’s grace. Considering the notable flaws in Pelagius’ doctrines, it could be noted that his teaching on grace and salvation was particularly erratic. In response to these misleading doctrines, Augustine developed some of the most consistent doctrines of the early church. His thoughtful analysis of Scripture and ability to provide reliable guidance on rather controversial issues earned him the title “Doctor of Grace”.

 Bibliography

Augustine, Roland J. Teske, & Boniface Ramsey. Selected Writings on Grace and Pelagianism. Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2011.

Cary, Phillip. Inner Grace: Augustine in the Traditions of Plato and Paul. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Dreyer, Elizabeth. Manifestations of Grace. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1990.

Dupont, Anthony. Preacher of Grace: A Critical Reappraisal of Augustine’s Doctrine of Grace in His Sermones Ad Populum on Liturgical Feasts and During the Donatist Controversy. Leiden, MA: Brill, 2014.

Harrison, Carol. Rethinking Augustine’s Early Theology: An Argument for Continuity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Heans, Simon. “Original Sin or Original Sinfulness? A Comment.” Heythrop Journal 54.1 (2013): 55-69.

Lam Cong Quy, Joseph. “Revelation, Christology, and Grace in Augustine’s Anti-Manichean and Anti-Pelagian Controversies.” Phronema 28.2 (2013): 131-149.

Thiselton, Anthony C. The Thiselton Companion to Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2015.

[1]
[1] Cary, Phillip. Inner Grace: Augustine in the Traditions of Plato and Paul (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2008), p.188

[2]
[2] Augustine, Roland J. Teske, & Boniface Ramsey. Selected Writings on Grace and Pelagianism(Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2011), p.42

[3]
[3] Dupont, Anthony. Preacher of Grace: A Critical Reappraisal of Augustine’s Doctrine of Grace in His Sermones Ad Populum on Liturgical Feasts and During the Donatist Controversy (Leiden, MA: Brill, 2014), p.112

[4]
[4] Dupont, p.115

[5]
[5] Heans, Simon. “Original Sin or Original Sinfulness? A Comment.” Heythrop Journal 54.1 (2013): 59

[6]
[6] Dreyer, Elizabeth. Manifestations of Grace (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1990), p.31

[7]
[7] Lam Cong Quy, Joseph. “Revelation, Christology, and Grace in Augustine’s Anti-Manichean and Anti-Pelagian Controversies.” Phronema 28.2 (2013): 141

[8]
[8] Harrison, Carol. Rethinking Augustine’s Early Theology: An Argument for Continuity (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2008), p.61

[9]
[9]  Harrison, p.63

[10]
[10] Thiselton, Anthony C. The Thiselton Companion to Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2015), p.89

The post Augustine’s theology of grace as a response to Pelagius appeared first on Students of Scriptures.