N T Wright – Justification – post 1

justificationYesterday, on my birthday, I was really excited to get a gift in the mail via Amazon.

I intended to just sit down for a couple of pages, really just a few before going to sleep.  I read 17 pages – up through page 30 – and just couldn’t stop reading.  Of course, it isn’t into the meat of the book at all yet.  But the writing is so good, and Wright is so interesting, that it is just a real pleasure to read.

I am terrible about book reviewing, and I happen to be reading several (many) other books right now.  But this Wright book takes an important priority, as its historical moment of discussion is upon us.

—I am happy to see that Wright is indeed expecting to get done his Book 4 in the Christian Origins and the Question of God – the big book on Paul!—


5 Responses to N T Wright – Justification – post 1

  1. Brenden says:

    Just came upon your site while looking for blogs talking on justification.
    Do you find this book (and or N.T. Wright) finding acceptance amongst those at Covenant?

    • saintluke says:

      From an email correspondence on the topic:

      Thanks for the correspondence.

      You may have noticed, I am not in the PCA; at the moment, I am resting in an Anglican context. I hope my characterization of things at Covenant is a helpful guide; my impression that I would add is that Covenant faculty have always been extraordinarily unified in their work – regardless of differences in theological distinctions. They play nicely together.

      My memory of teachers and students who had a low opinion of Wright was frequently that they [seemed confused about] what Wright thought about a bunch of issues that do matter.

      At the end of the day, behind all the differences in language – Wright does believe that the decretally elect will be effectively called by the gospel into persevering faith, and that salvation is all won by Jesus, and by no means at all by our works.

      People still accuse him of “works-based-salvation” and of denying the gospel. He catches a lot of flack from one camp accusing him of missing the law-gospel distinction, which is rather Lutheran and not truly Calvinist. Wright basically always sides with Calvin over Luther.

      It is also very helpful to remember that there is not a monolithic “new-perspective” and not a single “federal vision.”

      Wright discusses the NPP version of this in the beginning of the Justification book. Doug Wilson discusses the FV part of this in the beginning of the pink Auburn Avenue Theology – Pros and Cons: Debating the Federal Vision.

      Wright is not Shepherd is not Wilson is not Leithart.

      Again, hope this is helpful!

      Luke Welch

  2. joelmartin says:

    The Federal Vision is a conversation. I hope people can have conversations without it being termed heresy.

    • saintluke says:

      Thanks Joel,

      I used to be confronted regularly by a fellow student who like to talk about N T Wright – “The Heretic.”


  3. joelmartin says:

    Absurd, but not surprising.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: