I am still unclear regarding what Dr. Jervis is saying here. Is she arguing that Christ’s death propitiates sin, whereas our sharing in the suffering of that death contributes to expiating sin?

Or is she maybe saying that in Christ’s atoning death we are reconciled to God (through God’s activity only), whereas in our participating in the suffering of that death we help complete our salvation ?

Either way, and even if ‘salvation’ here means an entering into God’s fullest shaloam (beginning now and fulfilled in the future), I would struggle with a move that divides God’s work on the cross so as i don’t see how it can diminish the shear ‘gratuity’ (ref. Eilers) of God’s gift of God’s self on the cross. In the end it would lead to God in some way needing humanity to achieve God’s purposes.

Dunno… just musing…

From her comments, I am sure Jervis would not disagree with you regarding the “source” of eternal salvation being found only in and through the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus. Rather, what Jervis wants to emphasis here is the role Christians should play in resisting and working againt the ongoing presence of sin in the world.

I don’t think she is saying we can rid the world of sin, but that we can work “against” sin through or suffering and compassion for others and against the powers of evil (however they are manifested). This is were a strong doctrine of the Spirit would come in to explicate how we understand this.

Kent

Good words indeed. Jervis does emphasis the sanctifying work that suffering can accomplish but she restricts herself in this book to only commenting and exegeting the particular books of 1 Thessalonians, Philippians, and Romans. In the chapter we discussed here it was only 1 Thessalonians. So she limits herself a bit – but she would agree with you 100% because she emphasizes some of the same points from that text.

The questions you pose are good ones and I would love to see someone else pick up on them.

Kent

1 Tim 4 (ESV)

7 Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths. Rather train yourself for godliness; 8 for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come. 9 The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance. 10 For to this end we toil and strive, [2] because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.

[2] 4:10 Some manuscripts “and suffer reproach”

In other words, is it through godliness, brotherly kindness and ultimately love or is it through suffering that His kingdom comes?

Does godliness take form in the life of a believer if s/he does not enter into suffering by faith?

Can suffering be both an opportunity for godliness and a byproduct of it?

And finally, if suffering is only one means among many God uses towards greater Christlikeness within His Body, is the author placing too much significance on salvific effects of suffering?

Thanks

I agree. I found Jervis’ comments to helpfully clarify and expand on what she said in print. It seems she is drawing here upon the larger biblical notion of “salvation” (beyond the individual/eternal significance the word carries in other contexts) then applying that to the present scenario.

I still have “worries” about the language of participation in this regard though. I just wonder if we shouldn’t be expecting our doctrine of the Spirit to be doing this work for us rather than our doctrine of atonement. The recent Finnish reinterpretations of the doctrine of justification (e.g. Mannermaa) leave me with the same questions. Anyway, that is a conversation for another day I hope.

Cheers,

Kent