Because of debates about the New Perspectives on Paul (NPP), I (Andrew) had steered entirely clear of N.T. Wright. My only reading of him was to better understand his views on Paul so as to not misrepresent him while critiquing the NPP. This was actually pretty unfortunate since his work on the gospels is quite… Continue reading Good news for the pagans
Why does Paul use Abraham as part of his logic in Romans 3-4? Bruce says that Paul is showing how the "righteousness of God apart from law" is attested by the law and prophets -- Abraham's story is Paul's first example. In Rom 4, says Bruce, "Paul undertakes to show" how the gospel is in… Continue reading Wright v Bruce Part II
As I have noted before, N.T. Wright posits a future justification based on works. Let's parse that out. He says that the good news is that those who believe in the gospel are presently "in the right" and have "the status of being God's covenant people, the people already declared to be 'in the… Continue reading So What’s the Good News, Anyway?
Something recently hit me concerning Wright's definition of righteousness in Romans 1.17. I'll quote his definition of righteousness and contrast it with another book I've been reading. I'll let you comment or think about the ramifications. "God's covenant with Abraham was always intended as the means by which the creator God would rescue the world from evil,… Continue reading N.T. Wright and Exegetical Fallacies?
Wright on future justification: "This declaration [justification] will be made on the last day on the basis of an entire life (Romans 2.1-16); ...the means of...present justification is simply faith" (Tom Wright, Paul For Everyone: Romans Part One [Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2004], 169). See also page 31: "Sometimes Christians have imagined that Paul's doctrine of 'justification by… Continue reading Ridderbos and N.T. Wright on Future Justification