Search

“Common grace” has played an important but disputed role in the Reformed tradition’s picture of God’s relationship to the creation. While providing a theological foundation for many Calvinists’ cultural engagement, certain ambiguities and issues plague the concept. By comparing it to another Reformed vision of God’s continuing creative relationship to the creation, namely that of David Kelsey in his book titled Eccentric Existence, and examining especially three aspects of Kelsey’s vision—i.e. the distinctions between God’s operations, the Trinitarian underpinnings of God’s creational activity, and the proper human response to that activity—promising directions for the common grace tradition are highlighted.

A historic debate with great implications for theology has resurfaced in New Testament circles; however, it has not received the attention it should by theologians. It concerns how to translate and interpret approximately ten instances of the Greek phrase pistis Christou and its near equivalents in the letters of Paul. This phrase occurs within theologically crucial sections of Romans and Galatians, which have provided the foundation for the Reformation understanding of ‘justification by grace through faith’. The question is whether ‘faith’ in these phrases refers principally to the believer's ‘faith in Christ’, as traditionally understood, or should be translated and understood as ‘the faith of Christ’. In this article, I hope to introduce theologians to this debate and make a contribution to it from a theological angle, by describing the two primary ‘patterns of soteriology’ which are in play, and then examining how easily these different patterns of soteriology can be read onto what Paul writes concerning three crucial issues in his letters: salvation, the Law and the ‘righteousness of God’. I argue that the overall theological vision which includes three facets – a christologically centred understanding of the pistis Christou passages, a broader understanding of pistis, and the centring of soteriology around the concept of ‘participation in Christ’ – provides the most convincing interpretational matrix for reading Paul. I also point out implications this has for contemporary theology.