What did Paul think the role of Jesus was?

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NoelFitz

New member
Some time ago I started a thread seeking to learn whom Paul thought Jesus was. In spite of some excellent replies I was not really satisfied with the conclusions. In that thread it was claimed that Jesus was the Son of God and Lord (Rom 1:4). All quotes are from the NAB).

Now I want to consider what Paul thought the role of Jesus was. I presume it is agreed he was the Messiah (Christ) who came to save us. To start the discussion I will focus on Romans.

He considered Jesus was our redeemer who justifies us, but what did this mean for Paul (Rom 3:24)?
He died for sinners (Rom 5:6 and 5:8).
He reconciled us to God (Rom 5:11).
He freed us from sin and death (Rom 8:2).
He intercedes for us (Rom 8:34).
He died and rose for us (Rom. 14:9 and 14:15).

Some of the above may seem the same. But often I do not know exactly what Paul meant by the words he used (e.g. justified.)

I would welcome clarifications, corrections and additions.
*but established as Son of God in power according to the spirit of holiness through resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom 1:4).

They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus (Rom 3:24).

For Christ, while we were still helpless, yet died at the appointed time for the ungodly (Rom 5:6).

But God proves his love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us (Rom 5:8).

Not only that, but we also boast of God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. (Rom 5:11).

For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has freed you from the law of sin and death (Rom 8:2).

Who will condemn? It is Christ [Jesus] who died, rather, was raised, who also is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us (Rom 8:34).

For this is why Christ died and came to life, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living (Rom 14:9).

If your brother is being hurt by what you eat, your conduct is no longer in accord with love. Do not because of your food destroy him for whom Christ died (Rom 14:15).*
 
NoelFitz said:
Some time ago I started a thread seeking to learn whom Paul thought Jesus was. In spite of some excellent replies I was not really satisfied with the conclusions. In that thread it was claimed that Jesus was the Son of God and Lord (Rom 1:4). All quotes are from the NAB).
Click to expand...
You don’t believe that St. Paul thought that Jesus was the Son of God? On what basis do you come to that conclusion?
Now I want to consider what Paul thought the role of Jesus was. I presume it is agreed he was the Messiah (Christ) who came to save us. To start the discussion I will focus on Romans.
Click to expand...
He considered Jesus was our redeemer who justifies us, but what did this mean for Paul (Rom 3:24)?
He died for sinners (Rom 5:6 and 5:8).
He reconciled us to God (Rom 5:11).
He freed us from sin and death (Rom 8:2).
He intercedes for us (Rom 8:34).
He died and rose for us (Rom. 14:9 and 14:15).

Some of the above may seem the same. But often I do not know exactly what Paul meant by the words he used (e.g. justified.)
Click to expand...
To understand what St. Paul meant, you merely need to study Catholic Doctrine. All the Apostles knew that Jesus was our Saviour, Redeemer, Mediator and God the Son of God.
I would welcome clarifications, corrections and additions.
Click to expand...
Your texts are fine. If you don’t believe that Jesus is Saviour, Redeemer, Mediator and God, you need to provide your support for that idea.
 
De Maria

Many thanks. I appreciate it when people reply to me and help build me up in the faith.

You wrote:
You don’t believe that St. Paul thought that Jesus was the Son of God? On what basis do you come to that conclusion?
I believe Paul thought Jesus was the Son of God. So was Paul, so am I. We are all children of God.
  • Call no one on earth your father; you have but one Father in heaven. (Matt. 23:9 NAB)*
You wrote
To understand what St. Paul meant, you merely need to study Catholic Doctrine. All the Apostles knew that Jesus was our Saviour, Redeemer, Mediator and God the Son of God.
What do you think I am trying to do? I am trying to study Catholic Doctrine.

Perhaps if as well as study one needs prayer. For our faith intellect is not enough. It is more that reason, it is supernatural. But what do the terms Saviour, Redeemer, Mediator and God mean. Did Paul believe in adoptionism? Were there co-redeemers? Origen, one of the greatest theologians ever believed Jesus was subordinate to the Father. Do you over-simpfy?

*42 God transcends all creatures. We must therefore continually purify our language of everything in it that is limited, image-bound or imperfect, if we are not to confuse our image of God–“the inexpressible, the incomprehensible, the invisible, the ungraspable”–with our human representations.16 Our human words always fall short of the mystery of God. (CCC)

I read in the www (professorjohnston.com/thomas-aquinas-on-the-incomprehensibility-of-god/):
It’s good to be reminded that God is beyond us – that what makes him God. It’s even, says St. Thomas, a way of knowing God: to know him as the one you cannot fathom.
It’s also good to be reminded that someone like Thomas Aquinas glories in God’s unknowability.*
 
NoelFitz said:
…He considered Jesus was our redeemer who justifies us, but what did this mean for Paul (Rom 3:24)?..
Click to expand...
None can be justified by the works of the law, but only by the grace of Christ.

Galatians 2
15 We, who are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles, 16 [yet] who know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.[p] 17 But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves are found to be sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin?[q] Of course not! 18 But if I am building up again those things that I tore down, then I show myself to be a transgressor.[r] 19 For through the law I died to the law, that I might live for God. I have been crucified with Christ; 20 yet I live, no longer I, but Christ lives in me; insofar as I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God who has loved me and given himself up for me. 21 I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.
  • p: 2:16 No one will be justified: Ps 143:2 is reflected.
  • q: 2:17 A minister of sin: literally, “a servant of sin” (cf. Rom 15:8), an agent of sin, one who promotes it. This is possibly a claim by opponents that justification on the basis of faith in Christ makes Christ an abettor of sin when Christians are found to be sinners. Paul denies the conclusion (cf. Rom 6:1–4).
  • r: 2:18 To return to observance of the law as the means to salvation would entangle one not only in inevitable transgressions of it but also in the admission that it was wrong to have abandoned the law in the first place.
Psalm 143 - A Prayer in Distress
1 A psalm of David.
Lord, hear my prayer;
…in your faithfulness listen to my pleading;
…answer me in your righteousness.
2 Do not enter into judgment with your servant;
…before you no one can be just.
 
Vico

Thank you so much for your reply.

It is encouraging to note there are people here who know the faith. I feel on safe territory when I try to make sense of my religion, knowing I am in the company of sound, solid Catholics. I believe thinking about the faith is healthy, and discussion, in the household of the Faith, can only be positive. But I am aware I lack background, and understanding.

I would have thought that Paul, as a Jew, would have considered God his redeemer, and a Messiah (Christ), considered lord (not Lord) by David, an ancestor of Jesus would not be the Redeemer of the Jews. The idea of God as redeemer (goel) is in Isaiah, Psalms, Jeremiah, etc.

*NAB Isa. 43:14 Thus says the LORD, your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel: For your sake I send to Babylon; I will bring down all her defenses, and the Chaldeans shall cry out in lamentation.

NAB Ps. 78:35 They remembered that God was their rock, God Most High, their redeemer.

NAB Jer. 50:34 Strong is their Redeemer, whose name is LORD of hosts, The sure defender of their cause, who gives rest to their land, but unrest to those who live in Babylon.
*
 
NoelFitz said:
Vico

Thank you so much for your reply.

It is encouraging to note there are people here who know the faith. I feel on safe territory when I try to make sense of my religion, knowing I am in the company of sound, solid Catholics. I believe thinking about the faith is healthy, and discussion, in the household of the Faith, can only be positive. But I am aware I lack background, and understanding.

I would have thought that Paul, as a Jew, would have considered God his redeemer, and a Messiah (Christ), considered lord (not Lord) by David, an ancestor of Jesus would not be the Redeemer of the Jews. The idea of God as redeemer (goel) is in Isaiah, Psalms, Jeremiah, etc.

*NAB Isa. 43:14 Thus says the LORD, your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel: For your sake I send to Babylon; I will bring down all her defenses, and the Chaldeans shall cry out in lamentation.

NAB Ps. 78:35 They remembered that God was their rock, God Most High, their redeemer.

NAB Jer. 50:34 Strong is their Redeemer, whose name is LORD of hosts, The sure defender of their cause, who gives rest to their land, but unrest to those who live in Babylon.
*
Click to expand...
You are welcome. The plan of redemption was not fully revealed to the Jews before the Incarnation. Catechism details:

65 "In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son."26 Christ, the Son of God made man, is the Father’s one, perfect and unsurpassable Word. In him he has said everything; there will be no other word than this one. St. John of the Cross, among others, commented strikingly on Hebrews 1:1-2:

In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word - and he has no more to say. . . because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behavior but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.
27​
 
NoelFitz said:
De Maria

Many thanks. I appreciate it when people reply to me and help build me up in the faith.

You wrote:
You don’t believe that St. Paul thought that Jesus was the Son of God? On what basis do you come to that conclusion?
I believe Paul thought Jesus was the Son of God. So was Paul, so am I. We are all children of God.
  • Call no one on earth your father; you have but one Father in heaven. (Matt. 23:9 NAB)*
Click to expand...
Not sure how that answers my question. I asked, “You don’t believe that St. Paul thought that Jesus was the Son of God? On what basis do you come to that conclusion?” A quote from the Gospel of Matthew doesn’t answer that question.
…
It’s also good to be reminded that someone like Thomas Aquinas glories in God’s unknowability.
Click to expand...
St. Thomas is an excellent source of Catholic Study.
 
NoelFitz said:
Some time ago I started a thread seeking to learn whom Paul thought Jesus was. In spite of some excellent replies I was not really satisfied with the conclusions. In that thread it was claimed that Jesus was the Son of God and Lord (Rom 1:4). All quotes are from the NAB).

Now I want to consider what Paul thought the role of Jesus was. I presume it is agreed he was the Messiah (Christ) who came to save us. To start the discussion I will focus on Romans.

He considered Jesus was our redeemer who justifies us, but what did this mean for Paul (Rom 3:24)?
He died for sinners (Rom 5:6 and 5:8).
He reconciled us to God (Rom 5:11).
He freed us from sin and death (Rom 8:2).
He intercedes for us (Rom 8:34).
He died and rose for us (Rom. 14:9 and 14:15).

Some of the above may seem the same. But often I do not know exactly what Paul meant by the words he used (e.g. justified.)

I would welcome clarifications, corrections and additions.
*but established as Son of God in power according to the spirit of holiness through resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom 1:4).

They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus (Rom 3:24).

For Christ, while we were still helpless, yet died at the appointed time for the ungodly (Rom 5:6).

But God proves his love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us (Rom 5:8).

Not only that, but we also boast of God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. (Rom 5:11).

For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has freed you from the law of sin and death (Rom 8:2).

Who will condemn? It is Christ [Jesus] who died, rather, was raised, who also is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us (Rom 8:34).

For this is why Christ died and came to life, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living (Rom 14:9).

If your brother is being hurt by what you eat, your conduct is no longer in accord with love. Do not because of your food destroy him for whom Christ died (Rom 14:15).*
Click to expand...
I don’t understand what you don’t understand in these. Can you give a more detailed explanation of your issue on one of them?
 
To De_Maria: The study of Catholic Doctrine is a great help. S. Bonaventure says, “we are able to love what is not seen, but in no way can we love what is not known.” (Com on Eccl. ch. 7, q. 19; cf. Augustine, On the Trinity, 8, 4, 6; 10, 1, 1ff.)

To Vico: the logos, brings superabundant insights, vis., “That the manifold wisdom of God may be made known” (Eph 3:10) the manifold, vis., polupoikilos means ‘many diverse manifestations’, ‘ultra-diverse’

Regarding with Ignatius: I think Ignatius is expecting you to be more particular in your reasoning.

To NoelFitz: Consider the commentary S. Thomas Aquinas wrote on Romans. De Maria mentioned the Angelic Doctor and the books are worth the effort to purchase. Consider the merits of the glorious doctor proclaimed by the Pontiffs here: The Popes on St. Thomas | Thomas Aquinas College
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top