Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 4 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
The Historic Faith Podcast  /  "The Balance of Faith and Works"  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 4
Dean urges readers to “erase from your mind all the theological baggage” because Clement had “no Catholicism” and “no evangelicalism” to argue against; what “baggage” do you personally feel rising up when Clement talks about justification, works, judgment, and fear, and how might that baggage be preventing you from hearing the apostolic-era assumptions?
Another way to ask: Dean says to set aside our “theological baggage” when reading Clement. What strong reactions do you feel when Clement talks about justification, works, judgment, and fear, and how might those reactions keep you from hearing what people assumed back then?

Direct Answer Dean’s point is that our denominational fights can make Clement sound “controversial” when he was simply stating shared assumptions: grace through faith that produces required righteousness, plus real judgment and fear. The transcript suggests our “baggage” can cause us to hear Clement as taking sides (either “works-salvation” or “easy-believism”) instead of hearing his balanced, apostolic-era baseline.

Support from Transcript:

  • Dean urges readers to “erase from your mind all the theological baggage,” because Clement had “no Catholicism… no evangelicalism… none of that.”
  • Dean describes Clement’s “amazing balance”: “saved by grace through faith,” and that faith gives “power to live a righteous life that is required of us.”
  • They emphasize Clement wasn’t writing a treatise; salvation statements are “along the side” as “what we all believe,” not new theology.
  • David and Dean both highlight Clement’s fear-of-judgment language: “we will have to face the judgment seat of Christ,” and “all things are seen and heard by God.”
  • David says reading Clement answered his questions about whether “obedience play[s]” a role and whether it’s “once saved, always saved,” implying modern categories can distort reading.
Discussion Follow-ups When Clement says “fear,” do you instinctively interpret that as legalism or as biblical seriousness? What would it look like to read Clement first as a peacemaker addressing a schism, not as a combatant in later theological debates?

Jumpstarter 4 of 10
Back Questions Next