In one of his central misunderstandings, N.T. Wright says that “it makes no sense whatever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, bequeaths, conveys, or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plantiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or a gas that can be passed across the courtroom.” In the …
Why Real Faith Believes
D.A. Carson is next up, and he takes on N.T. Wright’s views on “faith” and “faithfulness.” He begins by acknowledging that the Greek word pistis can legitimately be translated either way. As Carson notes, this is universally acknowledged, but I want to ask a question that can be derived from that simple fact. If the …
Inescapable Imputation
The next article in Tabletalk, by Thomas Schreiner, is the best one thus far. Schreiner advances his argument carefully, and does so without yelling “Great is the Diana of Geneva.” Moreover, the argument he advances exposes the glaring problem with Wright’s treatment of imputation. That problem is that Wright treats it as a problem between …
Eck Rises to Defend the Reformation
In the next Tabletalk article, Derek Thomas asks whether N.T. Wright is a new Luther, whether or not he comes in the spirit and power of Luther. He begins by noting that the accusation that systematic theology distorts exegesis is not a new accusation, and he quotes a sample from Wright’s book on justification. And, …
Bread or Toast?
Guy Waters is next up in Tabletalk, and he asks whether the church has misunderstood justification. He says, “Justification in the present, N.T. Wright claims, is primarily about how you can tell who belongs to the church. It is not primarily about the salvation of the sinner. Wright, of course, is not saying that justification …
Follow the Footnotes
Michael Horton makes some solid points in his article “Justification and Ecumenism.” He takes some fair shots at some of Wright’s positions, and generally hits the target. Unfortunately, the whole thing is undermined by his inconsistency–about which more anon. Horton makes one significant point twice. “Wright distorts the Reformation positions and almost never footnotes his …
Go Boil Your Antinomian Head
Allow me, if I might, to follow up on an important point that has arisen in the discussion following my post on Sinclair Ferguson. There are macro issues involved, so bear with me for a moment. Prior to Nicea, there were good men who were Trinitarian in substance, but who did not use the orthodox …
Now What the Heck?
Sinclair Ferguson says a number of fine things in his piece for Tabletalk. Here is one: “Justification cannot be abstracted from Christ as if it were a ‘thing’ apart from or added to Him. Chrhist Himself is our justification. We cannot have justification without Christ! Nor can we have Christ without justification!” But I have …
And in a Masterpiece of Bad Timing . . .
Congratulations to my colleague Peter Leithart, who has been appointed to a two-year lectureship for the Association of Reformed Institutions of Higher Education (ARIHE). You can read more about that here , on the blog of Roy Atwood , president of NSA. Meantime, in a masterpiece of bad timing, some of the gnats-stranglers in the …
Diligent Oyster Avoidance
The next article consists of J.V. Fesko tackling the “works of the law” in Paul as N.T. Wright construes them, which is to say, as boundary markers. The works of the law for Wright are not the moral good works “which the Reformation tradition loves to hate.” For Wright, the identity markers were things like …