RE: sacraments as means of grace (was Re: [asa] Pregnancy & Communio)

George said: & here in fact is a very important connection with
theology-science dialogue. God's work in creation is, at least in the vast
majority of creation, done in cooperation with creatures. I.e., things in
the world & natural processes are the means by which God creates and
sustains life, &c. The idea that God must save us without means - by some
kind of spiritual zapping without Word and Sacraments - is a pretty precise
parallel to the anti-evolutionist notion that God can be the creator of
living things only if that creative work is done directly rather than
through natural processes.

Yes, that is an important comparison that I had not considered. Thanks.

Murray said: Just to help eschew obfuscation; my remarks had nothing
whatever to do with the SB church.

Oops, I got too excited when I read another's SB comment, apparently. My
mistake. I should have chewed a little longer before I swallowed. 2 cents
isn't worth as much as it use to be worth. J

I appreciate your other church background comments, too. [UK Baptists
during the 19th century is something I would like to hear more about. It
intrigues me to learn that some denominations of more "fire and brimstone"
in style were, apparently, favorable to Darwin's version of evolution due to
the more judgmental sense of outcome for species vs. the more sweeter
versions (eg Lamarck).]

Coope

From: George Murphy [mailto:GMURPHY10@neo.rr.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 5:05 PM
To: George Cooper; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: sacraments as means of grace (was Re: [asa] Pregnancy &
Communio)

----- Original Message -----

From: George Cooper <mailto:georgecooper@sbcglobal.net>

To: asa@calvin.edu

Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 3:24 PM

Subject: RE: sacraments as means of grace (was Re: [asa] Pregnancy &
Communio)

George said: ................................................

Because human beings preach & hear the Gospel, does that make it a "work"
which can't be a means of salvation?

What does "means" mean? If it implies reward for action irrespective of
belief then preaching and hearing is of no effect, and salvation is
unlikely. In this case, it is not a "means" of salvation. But I believe
you are referring to "means" in the sense that preaching and hearing may
lead to salvation, then I assume all would agree with this view. I mention
the former possible meaning to clarify Murray's citing, which I suspected
might be considered an erroneous view of the SB church, which it is not, I
feel safe to say. Just trying to eschew obfuscation. J

..................

Means as in "means to an end" - i.e., things used to accomplish something.
The Holy Spirit does not work immediately to bring us to & keep us in faith
but but acts mediately, through Word and Sacraments. (Or, to use
Augustine's image, through audible and visible words.)

& here in fact is a very important connection with theology-science
dialogue. God's work in creation is, at least in the vast majority of
creation, done in cooperation with creatures. I.e., things in the world &
natural processes are the means by which God creates and sustains life, &c.
The idea that God must save us without means - by some kind of spiritual
zapping without Word and Sacraments - is a pretty precise parallel to the
anti-evolutionist notion that God can be the creator of living things only
if that creative work is done directly rather than through natural
processes.

Salvation is not a "reward" for listening to preaching, or being baptized,
or receiving communion. Rather, those are ways that the Holy Spirit works
to create & renew faith in Christ, & faith is the may we appropriate
Christ's benefits. Cf. I Cor.12:3.

Shalom
George
http://home.neo.rr.com/scitheologyglm

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Nov 7 08:47:05 2008