Almost done with Wright’s book. Just one more installment after this. One of Wright’s arguments is that righteousness is not imputed to us because righteousness “is not that kind of thing.” But this is just modernist reductionism. And because Wright is an orthodox Christian, he refuses to give way to that kind of reductionism elsewhere. …
Hans Brinker and the Text
I am listening through a series of lectures by N.T. Wright on Jesus, and am enjoying them very much. I am working through this book of his on justification, and am frequently bewildered at how someone as astute as Wright could be missing the kinds of things he is missing. I have said something like …
Paul Right Off the Grill and Still Hot
In the next section (pp. 185-190), I continue to be edified by what Wright affirms, and mystified by what he denies. This is the section where he discusses the surrounding context of Romans 3:28, which says, “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Describing the run-up …
A Little Theological Stir Fry
I got some questions on this N.T. Wright business last night that made me think of a couple things, things that should be tossed into the theological hopper. So here goes. The first is that the theological criticisms I have made of the “union with Christ” model as a stand-alone model for imputation are criticisms …
Tea Kettle Charges of Heresy
One of the things I appreciated about John Piper’s critique of Wright was that he didn’t go straight to tea-kettle charges of heresy just because he encountered something in Wright on the subject of justification that he thought was unclear, for whatever reason. And after looking at it closely, Piper concluded that Wright was a …
No Need to Replace the Furniture
The next section of Wright’s book (pp. 169-176) was glorious in what it affirmed, and weirdly disappointing in what it denied. He does a fantastic job in situating the point of the discussion that swirls around “let God be true, and every man a liar.” As Wright puts it, the problem with Israel’s sin is …
Part of the Temple Belonged to Them
I don’t really have a lot to say about Wright’s next section (pp. 158-168), a section focused largely on Romans 2. Just a few things. Wright makes some worthy points about the general neglect of Paul’s eschatology of justification. The doers of the law will be justified (Rom. 2:13). Might not mean what it appears …
Excursus on Union with Christ
I used the word excursus in the title so that people would know that I was going to be scholarly in this one. Or maybe try to be scholarly. Or, better yet, try to act scholarly. You know, I think I am off to a bad start. In the comments on this series of posts …
At Least Not in Paul
As his section on Romans begins, Wright continues to reason beside the point. He begins, not surprisingly, with Romans 1:16-17 and with a discussion of what is meant by the “righteousness of God.” He says that, in effect, if we just read this verse without all the blinkers created by seventeenth century debates, we could …
A Jedi-Knight Mastery of Pauline Theology
The last part of Wright’s chapter 6 is his section on Ephesians. My comments here will be more scattered than extensive, for reasons that will probably become obvious. First, we are to page 151 and it has been striking just how little interaction with John Piper there has been. This book has been a good …