Christ And The Judgement Of God: The Limits Of Divine

Christ and the Judgement of God: The Limits of Divine Retribution in New Testament Thought Stephen H. Travis 2nd Edition. Reviewed by Jim West

Travis's book is a critical-exegetical examination of the idea of divine retribution, primarily in the letters of Paul (though Travis does also look at the Synoptics, John, and Revelation). The volume is comprised of Four Parts- Part I- Introduction and Background (pp. 3-52). Part II- Judgement in the Thought of Paul (pp. 53- 216) (the bulk of the book). Part III- Divine Judgement in the Gospel Tradition (pp. 217- 278). And Part IV- Judgement in the Revelation to John (pp. 279-327). it concludes with the usual bibliography and indices. In fairness, Travis's work really should be titled Christ and the Judgement of God in Paul (as hinted at above) because that is clearly his primary interest. His examination of the Gospels and Revelation as well as the introductory material are quite secondary to the core of his argument and to his presentation. The introduction is of course necessary, but only because for Travis it sets the stage for his interest in Paul. Similarly, the treatment of Travis of the Revelation and the Gospels could really simply be appendices. This book first appeared, as the author points out, in 1986 but it has since been expanded and supplemented for its 2008 publication. In the writer's own words, 'This study attempts to lay bare significant elements of New Testament teachings on this topic, focusing particularly on the question: Does God deal with human beings according to the principle of retribution?' (p. 3). In quest of an answer Travis does a tremendous amount of exegetical work. Once he gets past the preliminaries in the introduction, his focus on Paul is meticulous. And he's not afraid to tackle the difficult questions. He investigates, for example, the thorny issue of the fate of unbelievers. In chapter 7- Beyond the Final Judgement, he takes the reader through the issues of universalism, eternal torment, and annihilation of unrepentant sinners. And he finds himself squarely undecided. He opines, 'This survey has shown the impossibility of determining with certainty whether Paul thought that unbelievers would ultimately cease to exist or whether it is appropriate to attribute to him belief in eternal torment' (p. 110). In short, we don't know what Paul thought of the subject. And this is the problem, in my estimation, and the strength of the entire work. We have evidence from the New Testament fairly presented and wonderfully explained and yet we are left, along with Travis, with the unpleasant uncertainty with which we began. We don't know what Paul thought about lots of things. Because it seems that Paul himself wasn't sure. Travis also tackles the problem of whether or not believers can lose their salvation. 'Paul believed it possible for genuine Christians, possible even for himself, to forfeit the salvation which they have already begun to enjoy. Justification is not an irreversible verdict which renders the final judgement unnecessary' (p. 158). That should raise an eyebrow or two. At least until one gets a few lines further and reads 'Finally, however, it must be stressed that Paul nowhere goes so far as to say that any Christian will be finally rejected' (p. 158). So with the one hand Travis gives, and with the other he takes away. And that, in sum, is the way the volume works. We can assert this or that notion of retribution in this or that passage but we may well find another that leads us in another direction. But, truth told, isn't that exactly the problem? The Bible contains theological declarations that come from different

periods for different purposes. Harmonizing them all to one coherent and univocal perspective is impossible. Travis may not give the answers to the questions we all wish we knew the answers for, but he can't, given the nature of the material, be either definitive or dogmatic. This is a volume well worth reading. It raises questions and honestly answers them. Which means that when we are finished with the book all we know is what we don't know. That's quite refreshing given the fact that so many volumes tell us what their authors see in the text rather than what's really there. It is, after all, better to say 'I don't know' than it is to say 'we can clearly assert'.