Here is a great summary of how Thomas Torrance understood the biblical realities of: justification, reconciliation, and redemption. This summary is provided by Robert Walker, TFT’s nephew and editor of Torrance’s book Atonement. Of note is the vicarious nature of all three concepts, all grounded in Jesus Christ as our priest and mediator:
(ii) Justification, reconciliation and redemption are the act of God and man in Christ
Again throughout his theology, Torrance emphasises that in Jesus Christ we have the act of God and of man, of God as man in his one person. Justification, reconciliation and redemption therefore must be thought of not simply as the act of God for our salvation, but also as the real act of man, of God as man for us. the importance of this for Torrance’s theology and for understanding it cannot be overstated. Justification is not simply the act of God judging sin, atoning for it himself and declaring us righteous in his beloved Son, it is man saying amen to the righteous judgement of God and at the same time fulfilling all righteousness in his own perfect life and humanity. Reconciliation is thus not simply God reconciling the world to himself in Christ, but reconciliation worked out, achieved and realised by Christ as man within his own person, in his own mind, life, heart and soul. Redemption is the mighty act of God in which mankind is liberated from bondage and decay into the new creation through the resurrection of the man Jesus Christ from the dead in the fullness of physical existence. (T. F. Torrance, ed. Robert T. Walker, “Atonement,” xlv)
This is the stuff (the guts) of Evangelical Calvinist thought on salvation. If you fail to grasp this, then you will fail to see how EC is indeed distinguishable from Classic Calvinism, in general; and most Christian soteriological understandings, in particular. Furthermore, if you fail to engage the material here, then at the same time, you’ll also fail to realize ‘how’ Calvinist this actually is.
First, there is a grounding of all salvation in God’s life alone, in Christ; thus the reason EC stresses the vicarious humanity of Christ for us. We press this, because if we don’t, we leave open the possibility for man to have some objective part in salvation (i.e. cooperate with God kind of soteriology). If Christ truly assumed humanity — and He did — and if He truly is our priest and mediator — and He is — then He, as the firstfruits from the dead, accomplished every aspect of salvation (in Himself). He trusted the Father for us, He first loved the Father, that we might love Him; He repented in our stead, He resurrected that we might resurrect, etc. etc. How this is appropriated is through the Holy Spirit’s creativity and otherness (who brings us into communion with the Father and the Son, just as sure as He is the bond of communion and union between the Son’s divine and human natures) — Myk Habets alerts us to the language of theosis and theopoieses in the theology of Torrance [fodder for another post] — the Spirit provides the space (as He did in the Son) for humanity to ‘respond’ out of Christ’s faith on our behalf.
Second, I say you’ll realize how Calvinist this is because it places a genuine primacy on Christ’s life. It places a supremacy on God’s life as salvation and grace, as the origination of all that is. That without God’s unilateral activity in salvation, there, indeed, is no salvation; after all, God’s life is salvation. I say these markers are benchmarks of Calvinism because of Calvinism’s goal, historically, to speak of salvation in terms that magnify Jesus alone. Now, just because all Calvinists would say these are the touchstones, does not mean all versions or instantiations of Calvinism reach these marks. My contention is that Federal/Classic Calvinism does not; and it is simply because Classic Calvinism has a flawed doctrine of God that does not allow fluid discussion about salvation, because it will not allow for a dynamic understanding of God’s trinitarian and relational life.
Just some points, what do you think? Are you comfortable with TFT’s understanding of Justification, Reconciliation, and Redemption?
If I could be permitted to be perhaps crass or simple about the vicarious humanity of Christ as so stressed, my question would be this: How is Christ the instantiation for all of our lives, for a live of only 33 years to be sufficient case to cover for all the versions of life ever to be lived? It is not that I doubt the efficacisouness of Christ, though perhaps i do! But how, if you can ask a how question here, how does the One life represent and include the many? Perhaps i am thinking in all too human and finite terms of reference, forgetting the x factor that it was God Himself at work in Christ and intimately so. What I think we vulnerable humans crave is the intimacy too which Christ has with the Father and we will do just about anything to get it, in order to assuage our loneliness and isolation, at times or most of the time. Why? Because even in the difficult and suffering bits of Christ's life , he knew that there was fulfilment and purpose and a completeness to what he was doing. And alas, we humans want to mirror this and follow suit. And therein lies the temptation and the danger. Sadly there can be much play, via preaching , upon just such a state of affairs, with our vulnerable humanity cf. Christ's vicarious humanity, coming to the fore. The preacher convicts us of our vulnerablities and necessary incompleteness as finite (?) beings ie. created beings, and then 'convicts' us using pyschology and where the preacher himself is no more or less than a standing in for Christ himself. And sadly, this is a million miles away from the beauty of our efficacious Lord, but maybe sometimes, I have let this unique Lord be a million miles away from my recognition and obedience?
Tim,Alot in your comment. Let me ask you a question before I respond further; what do you think it means to be created in "God's image?" And who is it in the Bible who is said to be the "image of God?" I think answering these questions will answer your question on vicariousness. Also, Colossians 1:15ff has alot to add to this as well (in re. to supremacy). And lets not forget passages like Heb. 4:15; and the implications of "union with Christ" passages like I Cor. 6:17 and Jn 17. Likewise, let's not forget what it means for Christ to be "fully human;" and what that implies for us in terms of His mediatorship and advocacy for us. As Calvin says: there is a "mystical union" (unio mystica) here, a real union with Christ. We are true and real sons' of God by adoption (Christ by nature). We share in the trintiarian union through the mediation of Christ by the Spirit. We have the same benefits as the Son (Eph 1:3). Tim, your point on vicariousness is loaded; but I think scripture is rife with the idea that were are very intimately related to Christ; so much so that we share in the "same" glory He has shared with the Father by the Spirit for all eternity (past, present, and fully realized [for us] in the future). I hope you might experience the joy and rest this reality brings with it. But you'll have to answer those questions I posed first; or maybe you've answered those, and I'm misunderstanding you.
Bobby, Maybe it is a sad reflection on the Christian life, but i dont think that i have been ministered to, outside of the pages of a book, or as here, on the internet, as to the efficacious vicarious humanity of Christ upon us, as in allowing us to genuinely turn away from ourselves towards Christ. And my larger, last point above, was really about how I thought that the Preacher – at least one in my locale – can so easily usurp Christ himself, and sound as if they are offering merely the words of the preacher himself, to help shore up our vulnerabilities ie. without preaching Christ in his vicariousness at all.
Tim,That is kind of sad. What I hear you describing about this pastor is how Roman Catholic thought has never left most strands of Protestantism. The preacher is still set up as the pope — i.e. bridging the gap between Christ and the people — when in fact we know from scripture that Christ is immediately present to the people by the scriptures (that's why we are supposed to ingest the Word cf. Col. 3:16). The pastor is only to be an instrument, a witness, to Christ along with the scriptures. I don't think most people have been exposed to much, to be honest, Tim; including pastors, esp. thinking about vicariousness in a pressed out kind of way. Thus is the task of good theologians, to make sure pastors are trained to think theo-logically; to work into and out of the 'inner-logic' of scripture and Christ's life. To be careful thinkers and communicators of the Word; realizing they are under a stricter judgement. Certainly nobody has all their i's dotted and t's crossed, but we need to be constantly endeavoring to rightly divide the Word; which requires resolve and slothfulness. I'm afraid much of the pastorate has been taken captive not so much by sloth, but by a mis-focusing of their energies on a false sense of what it means to be a pastor today (which involves more thought about how to grow "his" church instead of Christ's church). Anyway, I'm ranting, but I'm sorry to hear of your experience, Tim; unfortunately it resonates with much of my church experience too. That's why we must each press on, growing in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ; and motivating others onto love and good works as we see the day approaching (in other words share with others what we have come to know of the Savior, and vice versa, listen to what they have come to know as well — in short be the body by example).
Woops, above I should've said: requires resolve and NOT slothfulness.
Bobby, That was very kind of you, your fulsome reply. When it comes to being the church, and you will have to excuse me for no explicit ecclessiology here – whether we can still be church even if as is maybe often the case, loan voices in our immediate locales, given such a fragmented situation? Why do I imagine that pressing on and living out the Gospel is almost always collective action and not work done by oneself individually for other individuals?
Bobby, My other 'haunting' or sadness about 'church'and simply trying to be actively Christian is that I thought that our personhood is actually socially derived, whereby we discover our personhood only as we are upheld/ affirmed / loved by the faithful others around us who thereby would encourage us and vice versa? But if this dynamic is not really happening then we are really , are we not, missing something vital that comes from direct face to face relationships. In other words, do we not experience, people of good faith around as, as if, like food of Christ or somit? I feel now at this moment, like a child who is trying to describe and experience that which I may have little experience of and therefore has vitually zilch knowledge of! In short, what i am trying to say is that it is of the nature of ministry to be ministered to and not so much to minister to oneself?
The pastor is only to be an instrument, a witness, to Christ along with the scriptures.John the Baptist got it right when he said "He must increase but I must decrease". It is weird how we have so much "Protestant popery" going on. I don't think it is so much a "didn't fall far from the Catholic tree" sort of thing as it is just a human tendency to want to build a hierarchical system of kingdom maintenance. The thing is, that is how Satan has to work to control HIS kingdom. When Adam decided to follow the serpent's lead, they essentially both were saying "I will be god". So, every citizen that is born into this world is, by nature, an anarchist that needs a collar and leash of control.Jesus' kingdom isn't like that at all as He speaks gently and His sheep willingly follow. Those who don't obey get corrected…but He only does what is necessary to get us to listen to Him. Because God's life abides in His people, we shouldn't need the heavy hand of a human king pushing us first one way and than another.Timothya3 God has given us "family" as a physical picture of what He's doing spiritually. http://onmysoapbox2.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/the-slow-learner-gets-reading-glasses/We certainly do need close, interpersonal contact with other believers. Although, if that is currently not an option, I see nothing wrong with seeking out other believers via the internet… If you've been hurt, you've found a good friend here. Bobby handles wounded hearts gently. π
Bobby, Since re-thinking the issue of vicariousness of the humanity of Christ in your initial response, i have now , having taken notice of a book by Christian Kettler 'The God who believes', excerpted on the blog 'Surprising God', realised that I had not followed the full trinitarian treatment of the matter. When fully trinitarian of the work of Christ it makes sense to me to talk of the vicariousness of the Holy Spirit as well as the vicariousness of Christ as well (incidently it is Kettler who enlarges the scope when he writes of the vicariousness of the deity of Christ as well, p32.) So now , if I am right, I can see/know the universal appeal of the Spirit thus making Christ a Christ without the kind of limits I was worried about! I hope I am not laboring the point, but now i need to read the biblical quotes, quite possibly in this new light to make proper sense of them (?).
Tim, Alot there. I would say that you're right, our personhood is in intimate relation with "others;" but I would also say that the power that ultimately is the source and purpose of our personhood is Christ's and God's life. So while, because of sin, there is certainly lack of subjective realization of what it means to be full person; nevertheless we are, this is what growing together in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ is all about. And the point is, is that our personhood is secure, even now, in the eschatological person of Jesus Christ who is our life NOW . . . no matter how imperfect we and others are now (in our experience and placement within the unfolding salvation history of God).All I can say about ministry, is yes you're right; and we are surrounded by "saved SINNERS" (including ourselves). We need to follow Paul and pour out our lives as drink offerings on the sacrifice and faith of others (this is how we spur eachother on to love and good works, and how the reciprocation you're talking about may be motivated a sparked in some).Heather,Yeah, we'll see, feelin' kind of borred ;-).Yes, the fleshly tendency is to "take control;" but I would still want to argue that there is a connection between ecclesiological structures within Prot. and Rom. Cath. Either way, functionally there's really not alot of difference. But yes, John the Baptist's approach is certianly the model.I think there are moments where being firm and almost in your face is called for, it depends on the circumstance. But I agree, being gentle and meek are key characteristics of Jesus (God), the "still small voice" (that rips through mountains, and brings galaxies into existence). There should be some sense of fear before a holy God, but yelling isn't necessary (at least not for HIM). He is faithful to correct us, which is definitely a sign of His love for us (Heb 12).Yeah, I think the internet is one way to fellowship; certainly face-to-face is the ideal, and necessary.Tim,I've heard of Kettler, I'll have to look further into his stuff; as time allows. I'm glad you're being encouraged with the reality of vicariousness, and all the beauty that is there in the LORD's life.
I feel that Torrance gets clearer in his writing on this topic, in the chapter, The person of the Mediator, in the book, 'The mediation of Christ', obviously a much later work than the quotation quoted at top of page, where the emphasis includes the proper framing of our union with Christ, within the life of the trinity, (..theosis, p75 lst ed.) and further on where he says…'human nature is not only saved, healed and renewed, but lifted up to participate in the very light, life and love of the Holy Trinity.' Strong stuff here.
Hey Bobby I understand what is meant in EC theology about all of salvation being accomplished in the person of Christ but what is meant by Christ repenting in our stead?
Hey Bobby I understand in EC theology that all of salvation is accomplished in the person of Christ but what is meant by Christ repenting in our stead?