"May all evangelicals recover this precious legacy of the Protestant Reformation and do away with the depressing and damaging notion of eternal degrees of reward in heaven once and for all".
That was Blomberg 20 years ago. I wonder if he still believes this.
I think I first found out about the article in a footnote to his book "Jesus And the Gospels," published in 1997. So apparently he still held the belief at least 15 years ago. :)
He released a second edition of the book in 2009, but I don't have it. If someone does they could check to see if he still refers people to it, assuming I'm correctly remembering where I heard of the JETS article.
If Blomberg has changed his mind, then it'd depend what his reasons for changing his mind are. Let's say Blomberg has changed his mind. However, if Blomberg's exegetically-based arguments in the JETS article are correct, and if his new reasons don't undermine or overturn the arguments in his JETS article, then it wouldn't matter if he has changed his mind.
That said, I just checked the second edition of Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey (2009), and it looks like he still does approvingly cite his JETS article. See here.
Doesn't Steve's reply to Olson undermine Blomberg's entire premise, i.e., that degrees of reward is contrary to justification apart from any human merit?
"Doesn't Steve's reply to Olson undermine Blomberg's entire premise, i.e., that degrees of reward is contrary to justification apart from any human merit?"
How so? Which specific part or parts do you have in mind as undermining Blomberg?
Speaking for myself, I don't see anything inconsistent about Steve's response with Blomberg's article. Let alone anything which undermines it.
By the way, although I've always had questions about the topic, I hadn't ever seriously made a study about degrees of reward in the Bible. So I'm quite glad to have read Blomberg's article. If nothing else, it's certainly thought provoking. But if true, which I don't have any reason to think otherwise as his explanations seem utterly sound and sensible to me, would and does inspire me to praise our God. It could also be quite freeing from a psychological and emotional perspective (as Blomberg notes in his article). In fact I think if true it would cause the believer to thank and love the Lord all the more.
Blomberg would be challenging the premise of Olson's argument. If sound, that's a different way of debunking Olson. However, that's not the only way. We could accept his premise, but still draw a different conclusion.
When you replied to Olson’s question, “But, then, why are there differences in rewards—some greater and some lesser?” with the explanation, “Well for one thing, because there are differences in good works. Every Christian doesn’t perform the same good works,” were you just accepting Olson’s premise that there are degrees of reward for the sake of argument?
Do you agree or disagree with Blomberg that there is “no unambiguous NT doctrine of varying eternal rewards for believers"?
I'm saying it would be logical if there are different rewards for different Christians. The issue really doesn't concern me that much. We will be fulfilled one way or the other.
Personally, the Blomberg article was insightful but unsatisfying. He only spends two paragraphs on 1 Corinthians 3, which is the best case for eternal rewards. His two paragraphs don't do it justice for me.
Steve, the link appears not to be working for non-members.
ReplyDeleteCopying and pasting this link gets you there:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/35/35-2/JETS_35-2_159-172_Blomberg.pdf
"May all evangelicals recover this precious legacy
ReplyDeleteof the Protestant Reformation and do away with the depressing and
damaging notion of eternal degrees of reward in heaven once and for all".
That was Blomberg 20 years ago.
I wonder if he still believes this.
I think I first found out about the article in a footnote to his book "Jesus And the Gospels," published in 1997. So apparently he still held the belief at least 15 years ago. :)
ReplyDeleteHe released a second edition of the book in 2009, but I don't have it. If someone does they could check to see if he still refers people to it, assuming I'm correctly remembering where I heard of the JETS article.
If Blomberg has changed his mind, then it'd depend what his reasons for changing his mind are. Let's say Blomberg has changed his mind. However, if Blomberg's exegetically-based arguments in the JETS article are correct, and if his new reasons don't undermine or overturn the arguments in his JETS article, then it wouldn't matter if he has changed his mind.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I just checked the second edition of Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey (2009), and it looks like he still does approvingly cite his JETS article. See here.
Doesn't Steve's reply to Olson undermine Blomberg's entire premise, i.e., that degrees of reward is contrary to justification apart from any human merit?
ReplyDeleteshango said:
Delete"Doesn't Steve's reply to Olson undermine Blomberg's entire premise, i.e., that degrees of reward is contrary to justification apart from any human merit?"
How so? Which specific part or parts do you have in mind as undermining Blomberg?
Speaking for myself, I don't see anything inconsistent about Steve's response with Blomberg's article. Let alone anything which undermines it.
By the way, although I've always had questions about the topic, I hadn't ever seriously made a study about degrees of reward in the Bible. So I'm quite glad to have read Blomberg's article. If nothing else, it's certainly thought provoking. But if true, which I don't have any reason to think otherwise as his explanations seem utterly sound and sensible to me, would and does inspire me to praise our God. It could also be quite freeing from a psychological and emotional perspective (as Blomberg notes in his article). In fact I think if true it would cause the believer to thank and love the Lord all the more.
DeleteBlomberg would be challenging the premise of Olson's argument. If sound, that's a different way of debunking Olson. However, that's not the only way. We could accept his premise, but still draw a different conclusion.
DeleteWhen you replied to Olson’s question, “But, then, why are there differences in rewards—some greater and some lesser?” with the explanation, “Well for one thing, because there are differences in good works. Every Christian doesn’t perform the same good works,” were you just accepting Olson’s premise that there are degrees of reward for the sake of argument?
ReplyDeleteDo you agree or disagree with Blomberg that there is “no unambiguous NT doctrine of varying eternal rewards for believers"?
I'm saying it would be logical if there are different rewards for different Christians. The issue really doesn't concern me that much. We will be fulfilled one way or the other.
DeletePersonally, the Blomberg article was insightful but unsatisfying. He only spends two paragraphs on 1 Corinthians 3, which is the best case for eternal rewards. His two paragraphs don't do it justice for me.
ReplyDelete