Romans 8:1-4

Last updated on: September 7, 2017 at 12:02 am by Peter Leithart

Romans 8:1-4 2017-09-07T00:02:58+06:00 Peter Leithart

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The following notes repeat a number of things from previous posts on this site.

INTRODUCTION
How does Romans 8 fit into the overall flow of Romans? First, Paul has announced the gospel of God?s righteousness, revealed from faith to faith (1:16-17). God?s righteousness involves His faithfulness to His promises to Israel, His promise to bless the nations through Abraham and his seed. Righteousness also means something like ?right order,?Eand describes God?s commitment to establishing right order in His creation. Thus, righteousness is (in Isaiah, eg) often virtually equivalent to ?salvation.?E For God to bring ?righteousness?Emeans that He comes in judgment to scatter the wicked and all His enemies, to deliver His chosen ones from their enemies, and to establish harmony and right order in creation. The good news has to do with God?s commitment to Israel, and more broadly with His commitment to bring His creation to its proper goal. As Steven Westerholm puts it: Paul believes, with the OT, that creation is good, but that sin makes it impossible for that goodness to be manifest. God is determined to make His goodness manifest by rescuing His good creation from tyranny of Sin and Death.

As Romans develops, however, Paul shows that there is an obstacle to the fulfillment of these promises: The general obstacle of human sin, and the more specific obstacle of Israel?s sin; instead of leading the Gentiles to worship Yahweh, Israel causes Yahweh?s name to be blasphemed among the nations. Unless the curse on Israel is broken through, unless there is a true seed of Abraham, there is no hope of blessing flowing out to the Gentiles.

Romans 8 brings these themes to a climax. In stark contrast to the world Paul describes in Romans 1, a world under wrath, full of idolatry and sin, Romans 8 describes the effects of God?s action in the Son and Spirit, His action to restore creation and humanity, His righteous restoration of the world, His manifestation of His own infinite goodness.

The nearer context has to do with the role of the Law/Torah in redemptive history. The sequence from Romans 4-8 is similar to the sequence in Galatians 3-4. Abraham was justified by faith and not by the works of the law (in any sense of that disputed phrase). Why then was the law added? Paul says in Galatians that the Law was added because of transgressions. In Romans, especially chapter 7, Paul argues emphatically that the law cannot bring life. Because of Sin and the dominance of Flesh, the man who receives the Law is radically divided, schizophrenic, in a state of living death, torn apart between his inward desire to obey God and his total inability to do so. In Romans 7, Paul, as a representative Torah-loving Israelite, is on the rack, stretched out and desperate for deliverance. Romans 8 describes the deliverance. What the Law is incapable of doing ?Etransforming flesh into Spirit, overcoming the reign of Sin and Death that is the effect of God?s condemnation ?EGod does in the Son and Spirit.

ROMANS 8:1-4
The ?therefore?Eat the beginning of the chapter raises some difficulties. How does the announcement of verse 1 follow from what Paul says in chapter 7? Obviously, the ?no condemnation?Eis not grounded I Paul?s bondage to sin. Paul does treat sinners as, in some sense, victims of Sin and Death, but this is not the basis for deliverance from condemnation. Rather, the ?therefore?Eseems to reach back to 7:6. As Schreiner has noted, 7:6 sets out the themes of chapters 7-8. 7:7ff develops the ?bondage of the law,?Ewhile chapter 8 develops the service of the Spirit.

8:1 does follow from the end of chapter 7, however. (Again, I?m reliant on Shreiner?s comments here.) At the end of ch 7, Paul is looking forward to a deliverance from the power of sin and death that holds him. His wretchedness is not relieved by the law, but only made worse. But he hopes for a deliverance, one that he characterizes as a future deliverance: ?Who will set me free from the body of this death??E(v. 24). The statement in 8:1, however, is about a ?now,?Eand v. 2 makes it clear that what happens ?now?Eis the ?setting free?Ethat Paul said he was hoping for in the future. The word for ?set free?Ein 7:24 is not the same as in 8:2, but the notion is the same: Both speak of liberation from death, of rescue and deliverance. 8:2 seems clearly to be referring back to the hope of 7:24, but announcing that the future hope of deliverance is now in effect. For those who are in Christ Jesus, deliverance is realized; there is now a rescue, now a new exodus.

What is extremely curious and interesting here is that the future deliverance that is now realized for those who are in Christ Jesus by baptism is the ground on which Paul announces that there is no condemnation. Note the sequence in 8:1-2: There is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus because the law of the Spirit of life has liberated you from the law of sin and death. There is a present deliverance, the breaking in of a future deliverance in the now; and because of this deliverance, this future deliverance made present, there is no condemnation for those in Christ. In short, the ?no condemnation?Eis declared in view of future deliverance now made present.

There is yet a closer link between the deliverance and the declaration of ?no condemnation.?E The word for ?condemnation?Eis KATAKRIMA, a word used in legal contexts to refer to a verdict of guilty. In courtroom settings, to ?condemn?Emeans to ?pass a guilty verdict.?E And the word has that connotation here. It is a forensic term. But what Paul is talking about is not merely a forensic declaration, a verdict of not guilty. The sequence of Paul?s discussion makes that impossible. To verse 1 we can pose the question, Why is there no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus? And verse 2 answers, Because the Spirit has delivered from sin and death. The deliverance from the power of sin through the Spirit is the ground for the verdict of no condemnation. The ?no condemnation?Eis not just a declaration about the status of those who are in Christ; it is also a declaration of their deliverance from Sin and Death.

Paul goes on to emphasize that those who have been liberated from Sin and Death through the Spirit do what the Law requires, and are not only righteous in status, but also actually perform righteousness. The declaration of ?no condemnation?Ethus embraces not only the status of the person, but is a declaration that describes or effects the liberation from Sin and the power to walk in newness of life. This has important implications for how we are understanding justification in Paul?s thought. Condemnation, KATAKRIMA, is the opposite of justification, and a declaration of ?no condemnation?Eis essentially a declaration of ?justified.?E But the declaration of ?justification?Ehere is grounded in a future deliverance from Sin and Death that has been made a present reality in Christ Jesus. We might say that the justification implied in v 1 is a declaration not only of status but of deliverance (as in Rom 6:7), that it is a declaration that effects a deliverance and doesn?t merely affect the status of the person who is justified.

Lest this view be taken as outside the bounds of Reformed orthodoxy, I refer you to some quotations from John Murray?s commentary on Romans, posted on this site on October 25, 2004.

ROMANS 8:2
The liberation language of v. 2 is once again language of exodus. The Spirit sets free form bondage to sin and death. But the specific language of v. not only opposes Spirit/life to Sin/Death, but opposes the ?law?Eof the Spirit of life to the ?law?Eof sin and death. Do we have here an example of Paul using ?nomos?E(law) in a sense other than ?Torah?E Or can some sense be made of the idea of a ?Torah of Spirit and Life?Eas opposed to a ?Torah of Sin and Death.?E Unapologetically, perhaps insanely clinging to my assumption that for Paul ?nomos?Emeans ?Torah,?EI suggest the latter (as
do Schreiner and Wright). We have already encountered a ?divided law?Ein Romans 7, the division between the ?different law?Eand the ?law of sin.?E There, I took the ?law of sin?Eas shorthand for the Mosaic system insofar as it was coopted by Sin and Death and used to kill rather than give life. Sin and Death hijacked the law, and turned it into its opposite. This would mean then that the ?law of the Spirit of life?Ethat sets free is the Torah and its system now operating in the sphere of the Spirit. For those who are in the Spirit, Torah has the power (as Psalm 19 already recognized) to convert the soul, to make wise the simple. Through the Spirit, the ?righteousness?Eof the Torah is being fulfilled among those who are not under Torah.

ROMANS 8:3
Verse 3 is full of cool stuff. The main point, of course, is that the Law was undermined and made ineffective because of flesh, a shorthand way of talking about men and women under the reign of Sin and Death that characterized the OC. Made ineffective by flesh, by Sin, the Law cannot give the life it promises. But God did what the Law could not do, and He does it through the condemnation of sin on the cross and the consequent gift of the Spirit.

In order to deal with flesh, and the reign of Sin, God sent His Son in the ?likeness?Eof sinful flesh, so that the judgment against Sin could be carried out in the Son. The ?likeness?Ehas occasioned some problems because it appears to qualify the real humanity of Jesus. But that?s not the point. ?Likeness?Ecan mean ?identity?E(Schreiner), so that the point is that Jesus participated fully in the cursed world of the OC, and that He came under the law. Perhaps too ?likeness?Eis a way of reminding us that though Jesus came in sinful flesh, came with ?dilapidated humanity?Eas one of my seminary professors put it, He was not a sinner. But it was necessary for Jesus to come in sinful flesh in order to accomplish what needed to be accomplished. Had the Son come in some other way, He could not be the one who received the condemnation for sin. He has to identify with us in our slavery to Sin and Death if the condemnation of Sin is going to be carried out in Him.

As many commentators have suggest, the phrase ?for sin?Erefers specifically to the sin offering (Leviticus 4). By presenting Jesus as a sin offering, God ?condemned sin in the flesh,?EPaul says. God carried out the sentence against Sin and Death by making Jesus a sin offering that received the sentence of Sin and Death. This verse also connects back to the argument of ch 7. Throughout ch 7, Paul argues that the Law is good, and that the ?I?Emight agree with the Law in the inner man. The force of the argument is to indict Sin as the culprit, as the one who keeps the ?I?Efrom doing what he desires to do. The purpose of giving the law, in fact, is to show that Sin can even coopt something that is holy, righteous, and good. The history of Israel and the law is designed to show Sin to be utterly sinful. And this sets up for what Paul says in 8:3: Sin stands condemned because of what it did to the Law, through the law, by effecting death through what is good. Chapter 7, then, can be seen as part of Paul?s prosecutorial case against Sin; and in 8:3, Paul says that the Judge who does right has carried out a righteous sentence against Sin. Sin deserves to be condemned.

Paul?s language of ?condemnation?Eis judicial. God is acting as judge, and refuses to condemn those who are in Christ. And He can rightly do this because He has carried out the penalty against Sin and Death on Jesus the Sin Offering.

If the ?for?Eat the beginning of v. 2 is ?because, on account of,?Ethen we have this sequence: There is no condemnation now because the Spirit has liberated us from the law of sin and death. That is, the liberation from the power of sin and death is the basis for the verdict. This is certainly a possible construction, but it implies that the justification ?Eno condemnation ?Eis grounded in something God has done for us rather than in something that God has done outside us. It seems best to take ?gar?E(for) as epexegetical, which means that the liberation from the law of Sin and Death is equivalent to the ?no condemnation.?E There is no condemnation IN THAT God has liberated from the Law of Sin and Death. The whole scenario is forensic, but it is not limited to the passing of a verdict. The choices before the interpreter seem obvious: Either the declaration of no condemnation is founded on the liberation that God performs; or, the condemnation is the same as the liberation that God performs. On either scenario, it is clear that Paul is using ?justification?Eterminology in a different sense here than is done in Protestant dogmatics.

Condemnation and justification are clearly contrasted in the two other occurrences of ?condemnation?Ein the NT (5:16, 18). In that passage, ?condemnation?Eincludes not only the verdict of ?guilty?Eor the declaration ?dying you shall die?Ebut the carrying out of that verdict in the actual sentence of death. This is evident from the parallels running through the passage:

by the transgression of the one the many died (v 15)
the judgment arose from one [transgression] to condemnation (v 16)
if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one (v 17)
as through one transgression to condemnation to all men (v 18)
through the one man?s disobedience the many were made sinners (v 19)

The result of Adam?s sin can be described as ?death?Eor ?the reign of death?Eor ?being made sinners?EOR ?condemnation.?E Adam?s sin did not just result in God saying ?you are guilty?Ebut resulted in God bringing the punishment of death. That IS the condemnation from which those who are transferred to Christ are liberated. Conversely, in Romans 5, justification must be the reversal of condemnation in both senses. This is why Paul describes justification in 5:18 as ?justification to life.?E It is the opposite of condemnation to death.

ROMANS 8:4
The result of the condemnation of sin in the flesh, and of God doing what the Law could not do, is not the removal of the Law from consideration. Rather, through the work of Jesus, what the law aimed at is actually done: the righteous requirement of the law is fulfilled in us. This doesn?t mean that we are still under the law; and it doesn?t refer directly to specific commandments of the law. But the law aimed at a certain kind of life, a certain way of life, a certain kind of person. That is now being carried out among those who have received the Spirit of God. Paul elsewhere talks about love being the fulfillment of the law. Those who live in love, who have the love of God poured out in them by the Spirit who is Love, are doing what the law aimed at. Alternatively, one could say that the law aimed at Christ, and now that the Spirit dwells in us, we are fulfilling the law in the sense of being Christlike, being truly human. Though some commentators see verse 4 as purely forensic, it is clear that Paul is talking about the actual behavior of Christians. He talks about their ?walk?Eby the Spirit, and not about the imputation of the righteousness of Jesus to them.

Bible - NT - Paul

Previous Post

April 2, 2005

Interpretation and Jokes

Next Post

April 2, 2005 John Paul II

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 Corinthians 1-2 Samuel 1968 Abelard Abortion Abraham Acedia AD 70 Adam Smith Addiction Advent Advertising Aeneid Aesthetics Africa African Christianity African Church African religion Age Aging Agriculture Airline industry Alabama Alasdair MacIntyre Albania Alcohol Allegory Alms Alternative Medicine Ambrose America American Christianity American culture American economy American Evangelicals American Foreign Policy American history American Literature American Military American Politics American Religion American Revolution Anagogy Analytic Philosophy Anamnesis Ancient Egypt Ancient Greece Ancient history Ancient Near East Ancient Religion Angels Anglican Church Anglicanism Animism Anointing of the Sick Anselm Anthropology Anthropomorphism anti-Catholicism Antiquities Antonio Lopez apocalypse Apocalyptic Apocalyptic language Apostles Creed Aquinas Archeology Architecture Arianism Aristotle Ark of the Covenant Art Art History Ascension Aseity Assurance Athanasius Atheism Athens atonement Attention Attributes Augustine Austin Farrer Authority autonomy Avant-garde Awe Bach Ballooning Balzac Banking Bankruptcy Baptism Baptists Baseball Basketball Bavinck Beatitudes Beauty Behavioral Economics Being Benedict XVI Benjamin Benjamin Franklin Beowulf Berkeley Bernie Sanders Bertrand Russell Bestiary Bible Bible - criticism Bible - NT Bible - NT - 1 Corinthians Bible - NT - 1 John Bible - NT - 1 Peter Bible - NT - 2 Corinthians Bible - NT - 2 Peter Bible - NT - Acts Bible - NT - Colossians Bible - NT - Ephesians Bible - NT - Galatians Bible - NT - Gospels Bible - NT - Hebrews Bible - NT - James Bible - NT - John Bible - NT - Jude Bible - NT - Luke Bible - NT - Mark Bible - NT - Matthew Bible - NT - Paul Bible - NT - Philippians Bible - NT - Revelation Bible - NT - Romans Bible - NT - Thessalonians Bible - NT - Timothy Bible - OT Bible - OT - Amos Bible - OT - Chronicles Bible - OT - Daniel Bible - OT - Deuteronomy Bible - OT - Ecclesiastes Bible - OT - Esther Bible - OT - Exodus Bible - OT - Ezekiel Bible - OT - Ezra-Nehemiah Bible - OT - Genesis Bible - OT - Habakkuk Bible - OT - Hosea Bible - OT - Isaiah Bible - OT - Jeremiah Bible - OT - Job Bible - OT - Joel Bible - OT - Jonah Bible - OT - Joshua Bible - OT - Judges Bible - OT - Kings Bible - OT - Lamentations Bible - OT - Leviticus Bible - OT - Malachi BIble - OT - Micah Bible - OT - Nehemiah Bible - OT - Numbers Bible - OT - Pentateuch Bible - OT - Proverbs Bible - OT - Psalms Bible - OT - Ruth Bible - OT - Samuel Bible - OT - Song of Songs Bible - OT - Torah Bible - OT - Zechariah Bible - OT - Zephaniah Biblical Law Biblicism Billy Graham biography Biology Biololgy Biotechnology Blasphemy Blindness Blog news Blogging Blogroll Bloomsbury Group Bob Dylan Body Body symbolism Boethius Boko Haram Bonhoeffer Book of Common Prayer Books Botany Boundary Brexit Britain British History British Politics Bruce Springsteen Buddhism Bureaucracy Burial Business C. S. Lewis C. S. Peirce Calendars Caliphate Calvin calvinism Camille Paglia Canon Capitalism Cappadocians Carl Schmitt Catholic Social Teaching Catholicism Catholicity Causation cemeteries Cervantes Charism Charismata Charity Charles Dickens Charles Hodge Charles Simeon Charles Taylor Charles Williams Chaucer Chermistry Chess Chesterton Chiasm children China Chinese Exclusion Act Chivalry Chopin Chretien de Troyes Christendom Christian Democracy Christian reconstruction Christianity in Britain Christianization Christmas Christology Chronology Church church and state Church architecture Church Calendar Church history Church of England Church Year Cicero Circumcision Cities City of God Civil Religion Civil Society Civil War Civility Classical Theism Classics Climate Change Clothing Coleridge Colloquy of Marburg Colonialism Color Comedy Comenius Commodity Communio Communism Community Comparative religions Computer Science Confederacy Confessionalization Conflict Congregations consciousness Consecration Conservatism Constantine Constitution consumerism Contra Faustum Conversion Coriolanus Cormac McCarthy Cosmology Cosmopolitanism Council of Trent Counter-culture Counter-insurgency Courage Courtly love Covenants Crafts Craftsmanship Cranach Creation Creativity Creator-creature Credit Crime Crime and Punishment Crisis Critical scholarship Criticism Cross Cubism Cultural theory Culture Culture War Dance Daniel Dennett Dante Darwin Dave Eggers David David Foster Wallace David Hume David Jones Deadly sins Death Debt Dechristianization Decolonization Deconstruction Defoe Deja vu Democracy Denis de Rougemont Denominationalism Derrida Descartes Developmental psychology Devils Diocletian Discipleship Disenchantment Disgust Diversion Diversity Divine energies Divine Impassibility Divine Simplicity Divine Warrior Doctrine dogma Dominion Donald Trump Dostoevsky Douglas Campbell Douglas Farrow Dreams Dualism Durkheim Dystopia E.M. Forster Early Christianity Early Modern Europe Easter Eastern Europe Eastern Orthodoxy Ecclesiology Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Eden Edgar Allan Poe Edmund Spenser Education Egypt Election Elites Emergence Emma Emotion Empire England English History English Reformation Enlightenment Entertainment Entrepreneur environmentalism Envy Epic Epiphany Episcopals Epistemology Epistles Equality Erasmus Ernst Kantorowicz Eros Eschatology Eternity Ethics Eucharist Europe Evangelicalism Evangelicals and Catholics Together Events Evil Evolution Exile Face Fairie Queene Fairy Tales Faith family Family and Marriage Fantasy Farming Fashion Fasting Fatherhood Fear Femininity Feminism Fertility Fetishization Feud Feudalism Feuerbach Fiction Figs Film Finance Finland Fire Flag Flags Flannery O'Connor Flood myths Folly Food football Foreign Affairs Foreign Policy Foreknowledge Forgiveness Foucault Fracking France Francois Mauriac Franz Rosenzweig free will Freedom Freedom of God French Revolution Freud Funerals Future G. K. Chesterton Gambling Gaming Gay Marriage Gender gender identity Genealogy Geography George Berkeley George Eliot George Herbert; Poetry George Romanes Gerald Manley Hopkins Germany Gethsemane Gift Gifts Giorgio Agamben Global Christianity Global economics Globalism Globalization Glorious Revolution Gnosticism God's sovereignty Gods Goethe Golf Good Friday Gospel Gospels Gothic Gothic architecture Grace Grammar Gramsci Gratitude Greek Literature Greek Philosophy Greek Religion Greek Science Gregory of Nyssa Guillermo del Toro H. Richard Niebuhr Haiku hair Hamann Hamlet Handicap Handles Hands Hans Urs von Balthasar Happiness Harold Bloom Harper Lee Harvest healing Heaven Heavenly treasure Heavenly treasure Hebrew Bible Hebrew language Hegel Heidegger Hell Hellenism; Judaism; Revelation Henri de Lubac heresy Herman Dooyeweerd Hermeneutics Herod Heroic Heroism Hesiod Hidegard of Bingen Hierarchy Hieronymus Bosch Historicism Historiography History History - Early Modern History - Middle Ages Hoaxes Hobbes Holiness Holy Saturday Holy Spirit Home Homeless Homer Homosexuality Honor hope Horror Hospitality Housing Hugh of St. Victor Human Rights Humanism Humor hylomorphism Hymns Hypocrisy. Iago Iconoclasm Identity Ideology Idleness Idolatry Iliad Images Imagination Immigrant churches Immigrant Religion Immigration Imperialism Improvization Imputation Incarnation Incest India Individualism Indonesia Inequality Inerrancy Infant Baptism Infant mortality Infanticide Ingratitude Innovation Inspiration Institutions Insult Intellectual History Intellectuals Intelligent Design International Politics Internet Intimacy IQ Iran Iran-Iraq War Iraq Ireland Irony Islam Islamic State Islamism Ismail Kadare Israel Ivan Illich J. Gresham Machen J.N. Figgis Jacob Jacques Lacan James Bond James Jordan James Joyce James KA Smith James Wood Jane Austen Jane Jacobs Jealousy Jed Perl Jeff Koons Jeroboam Jesus Jewish War 66-70 AD Jihad Johann Georg Hamann Johannine Epistles John Ashbery John Behr John Bunyan John Calvin John Donne John Frame John Howard Yoder John Knox John Milbank John Milton John Owen John Rawls John Ruskin John Stuart Mill John the Baptist John Webster John Wesley John Williamson Nevin Jonathan Edwards Jorge Luis Borges Joseph Conrad Joseph Ratzinger Journalism Joy Judaism Judaize Judgment Judith Butler Jurgen Moltmann Justice Justification Kalevala Kant Karl Barth Karl Marx Karl Polanyi Karl Rahner Kazakhstan Kazuo Ishiguro Kenneth Lonergan Kierkegaard King Lear Kingdom of God Kitsch Knighthood Knowledge Korea Labor movement Lactantius Lamech Lament Landscape Language Latin America Laughter Law Law and Punishment Leftism Lent Les Murray Levi-Strauss Levites Leviticus Liber Mundi Liberal arts Liberal Theology Liberalism Light Lighthouse Linguistics LIstening Literacy Literary structure Literature Liturgics Liturgy Locke Logic Love Luther Lutheran Lutheranism Lying Lytton Strachey Macbeth Machiavelli Machines Madness Mainline Manhattan Manicheanism Manners Manufacturing Manuscripts Mao Zedong Maps Marcion Marilynne Robinson Marketing Marriage Martha Nussbaum Martin Bucer Martin Chemnitz Martyrdom Marx Marxism Mary Mary Douglas masculinity Mass Materialism Mathematics Maundy Thursday Max Weber Media Mediation Medication Medicine Medieval Church Medieval exegesis Medieval Literature Medieval theology Medieval Thought Medievalism Memory Merchant of Venice Mesopotamian Religion Messianic Metaphor Metaphysics Methodist Mexican-American War Michel de Montaigne Michel Faber Middle Ages Middle East Midwifery Mikhail Bulgakov Military Millennium Mind Miracles Miscellaneous Mission missionaries Mixed constitution Modern self modernism Modernity monasticism Monotheism Monroe Doctrine Monsters Montaigne's Essays Moral philosophy Mormonism Moses Mother Teresa Motherhood Motive Mount of Olives Movies Multiculturalism Murder Music Musicals Mutability Mutability Mystery Mysticism myth N. T. Wright Narrative Nation-State Nationalism Natural Law Natural-Supernatural Nature Nature and culture Nature and Grace Nazi Nazirite Necrophilia Nero Nestorianism Neuroscience Nevin Lectures New Atheism New Testament New York City Newbigin News NGOs Nibelungenlied Nicholas of Cusa Nicholas of Lyra Nietzsche Nigeria Nihilism Nobel Prize Nobility Nominalism Norbert Elias Norman MacCaig nostalgia Novels Numerology Obama Objectivity and subjectivity Occasionalism Odysseus Oil Old Testament Oliver O'Donovan Ontology Origen original sin Orthodoxy Othello Owen Barfield Pacifism Pactum salutis Paedocommunion Paganism Pain Painting Paleoconservatism Palm Sunday Pannenberg Parenting Pascal Passions Passivity Pastoral Care Pastoral theology Patrick Modiano Patristics Patronage Paul Peace of God Peace of Westphalia Penal substitution Pentecost Pentecostalism Perichoresis Pericles Persecution Person Peter Peter Enns Petrarch Philip K. Dick Philip Melanchthon Philosophy Philosophy of Action Philosophy of History Philosophy of language Philosophy of science Phone booth Photography Physics Pictures Pierre Bourdieu Place Planned Parenthood Plants plato Play Plot Plotinus Pluralism Pneumatology Poetics poetry Poetry & Stories Poland police Political Philosophy Political theology Political Theory Politics Pop Culture Pope Francis Popular Culture Populism Pornography Porphyry Post-Colonial Theory Post-Structuralism Postmodernism Postmodernity Potential Poverty Power Practice Pragmatism Prayer Preaching Predestination Prediction Prehistory Premillennialism Presbyterian Priesthood Prince Charles Prison Reform privacy Private Prodigal Son Progress Progressivism Property Prophecy Prophet Propitiation Prosperity gospel Prostitution Protectionism Protestantism Providence Prudentius psalms Pseudo-Dionysus Psychological Warfare Psychology Public intellectual Public Life Public Philosophy Public Theology Publishing Punk Rock Pure nature Puritanism Purity Pushkin Putin Pythagoreanism R.J. Rushdoony Race Racism Radical Orthodoxy Rape Rationality Reactionary reading Realism Reason Red State Blue State Reformation Reformational Catholicism Reformational Philosophy Reformed theology refugees reinhold niebuhr Relationality Relativism Relics Religion Religion and science Religions Religious Freedom Religious Liberty Religious Right Renaissance Rene Girard Republican Party Resurrection Resurrection. Revelation Revelations Revenge Revivalism Revolution rhetoric Richard Flannagan Richard II Richard III Richard Wagner Richard Wilbur Righteousness Ritual Robert Frost Robert Herrick Robert Jenson Robert Mugabe Robert Spaemann Robinson Crusoe Rock n' Roll Rod Dreher Rodin Roman Catholicism Roman Empire Roman Religion Romance Romanticism Rome Rootedness Rosenstock-Huessy Rousseau Rowan Williams Rural America Russia Russian literature Russian Orthodoxy Rusty Reno Rwanda S. Y. Agnon Sabbath Sacrament Sacramental theology Sacraments Sacred Sacred Space Sacrifice saints Salt Sam Harris Same-sex marriage Sanctuary Satan Satire Saudi Arabia Scapegoat Scarcity Schism Schleiermacher Scholarship Science Science and Theology Science Fiction Scopes trial Scotland Scott Adams Scott Cairns Scottish Reformation Scotus Scripture and tradition sculpture Sea Second temple Secularism Secularization Self-Help Self-trust Semiotics Semper reformanda separation of church and state Sermon on the Mount Sex Sex Trafficking Sexual abuse Sexual Politics Sexual Revolution Sexuality Shakespeare Shame Culture Shema Sherlock Shopping Silence Simone Weil Simplicity Simpsons Sin Sincerity Sixties Skepticism Slavery Slavoj Zizek Sleep Sloth Social capital Social change Social Imaginary Social Science Socialism Socialization Sociology Sociology of Knowledge Sociology of Religion Sola scriptura Sonnets Sophocles Soteriology Soviet Union Space Spain Speculation Spinoza Spirit Sport Sports Star Trek State State-formation Stephen Masty Steven Bannon Strangers Structuralism structure Subject-object Substitution Suburbs Suffering Suicide Super-Rich Superheroes Supersessionism Supplication Supreme Court Surveillance Symbol Synagogue Taberancle Tabernacle Tax Taxes Tears Technology Teens Teleology Television Temple Ten Commandments Terence Terrence Malick Terrorism Thanksgiving The South The West Theodore Roosevelt Theogony Theological Education Theological Language Theology Theology - Anthropology Theology - Christology Theology - Covenant Theology - Creation Theology - Ecclesiology Theology - Eschatology Theology - Liturgical Theology - Pneumatology Theology - Soteriology Theology - Trinity Theology proper Theopolis Theopolis Institute Theosis Theresa May Thomas A. Clark Thomas Aquinas Thomas Carlyle Thomas Mann Threshing Thucydides Time Tocqueville Tolerance Toleration Tolstoy Tom Wolfe Tools Torah Torture Toscanini Totalitarianism Trade Tradition Tragedy Transhumanism Translation Transubstantiation Travel Trees Trinitarianism Trinity Trinity House Tristan Troilus and Creysede Trump Trump Truth Turkey Twelfth Night Two Kingdoms Typology Ukraine Ulysses Uncanny Uncategorized Uniform Union with Christ United States Unity University Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Value Vatican II Vengeance Vico Victorian Age Victorian Literature Vienna Violence Virgil Virgin Birth Virginia Woolf Vladimir Nabokov Vladimir Solovyev Vladimir Solovyov W.H. Auden Walls Walt Disney Walt Whitman Walter Benjamin Walter Lippmann War Wars of Religion Washington DC Wealth Weddings Will William Carlos Williams William Gilpin William Golding Wine Wisdom wonder Word of God Wordsworth Work Works World Council of Churches World History World War I World War II Worldview Worship Wrath Writing Youth Youth Ministry Yuja Wang Yves Congar Zimbabwe Zwingli Zygmunt Bauman

Select a Month January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who baptized Jesus?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Paul Peter John the Baptist Elijah