tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post275592570640039967..comments2023-06-29T02:51:51.236-05:00Comments on 1517: Why is N.T. Wright speaking at Redeemer?Todd Pruitthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08614293087144493430noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-15182331971522975932010-05-03T10:59:24.173-05:002010-05-03T10:59:24.173-05:00Casey,
It's called discernment. I'm sure...Casey,<br /><br />It's called discernment. I'm sure you've heard of it. He's right about the historicity of the resurrection. He's wrong about justification and imputation.Todd Pruitthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08614293087144493430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-10934864281324031922010-05-03T10:38:33.352-05:002010-05-03T10:38:33.352-05:00I find it curious that someone can "appreciat...I find it curious that someone can "appreciate Wright's work on the historical Jesus and resurrection" and yet find his theological positions to be problematic when those positions are grounded in the methodology and conclusions of the aforementioned work. Sounds like having your cake and eating it, too.Casey Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16288271861136590414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-12351219680855333512010-03-26T19:13:27.121-06:002010-03-26T19:13:27.121-06:00Indeed. That is an excellent response by Dr. Wate...Indeed. That is an excellent response by Dr. Waters. Also, Cornelis Venema's book "The Gospel of Free Acceptance in Christ" is outstanding. Dr. Venema dismantles the NPP. Another important ressponse to the NPP is Guy Waters' book "Justification and the New Perspective on Paul." <br /><br />There are other books as well. I highly recommend Piper's "The Future of Justification" and "By Faith Alone" edited by Johnson and Waters.Todd Pruitthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08614293087144493430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-76906282136658937692010-03-26T18:33:18.338-06:002010-03-26T18:33:18.338-06:00Curtis,
Not speaking for Todd, but I recommend th...Curtis,<br /><br />Not speaking for Todd, but I recommend <a href="http://www.reformation21.org/shelf-life/justification-gods-plan-and-pauls-vision.php" rel="nofollow">this article</a> as just one example of the sort of reference you asked about.threegirldadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10514416693800430357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-20338680944256133862010-03-26T14:58:58.105-06:002010-03-26T14:58:58.105-06:00Todd, would you say that the covenant theology pre...Todd, would you say that the covenant theology prevalent among our Presbyterian brothers uniquely opens them up to Wright’s arguments? Based on my limited knowledge, it is in Presbyterian circles where this is gaining the meager foothold it has.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-29366917009339670972010-03-26T09:58:37.989-06:002010-03-26T09:58:37.989-06:00Todd-
"Wright concludes with Sanders that 2nd...Todd-<br />"Wright concludes with Sanders that 2nd Temple Judaism was a religion of grace and that therefore we have completely misread Paul. But the historical data simply does not support this."<br /><br />Anything you can point me to, online or off, that fleshes out more about what you're talking about here? Specifically about how the historical data doesn't support this?<br /><br />Because my understanding of this topic, was that Sanders, Wright, etc. have come to the conclusions that they have ENTIRELY based on the historical data that they've seen?<br /><br />So I'm curious as to what the disagree historical sources are? I'm honestly trying to understand it all more, so I'd love to read up more on where the historical disagreement is coming from.<br /><br />thanks!curtis klopehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06862796795934787470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-6227670946743762502010-03-26T09:01:52.402-06:002010-03-26T09:01:52.402-06:00Curtis,
You and I probably will disagree about th...Curtis,<br /><br />You and I probably will disagree about the degree to which Wright recasts the gospel, "the rigteousness of God", justification, and imputation.<br /><br />Wright concludes with Sanders that 2nd Temple Judaism was a religion of grace and that therefore we have completely misread Paul. But the historical data simply does not support this.<br /><br />So while I appreciate Wright's work on the historical resurrection of Christ, his redefining of justification and other central doctrines of the faith cause we great concern. I do not want his views to be embraced within the body of Christ.Todd Pruitthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08614293087144493430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-6787692633576696112010-03-26T07:57:13.501-06:002010-03-26T07:57:13.501-06:00Todd-
So, to get down to the root of the issue th...Todd-<br /><br />So, to get down to the root of the issue then, what you really have a problem with is the new (old) understanding of 2nd Temple Judaism.<br /><br />I admit I haven't read everything about what has been proposed about 2nd Temple Judaism, however, I think this makes it pretty clear that NY Wright is not some evil doer, trying to lead people astray.<br /><br />He's merely re-reading the Bible, in light of new historical data, and attempting to reconcile the two. If you disagree with the interpretation of the historical data, that's your prerogative. But, I don't think it warrants the vitriol that Wright receives.<br /><br />Do you see what I'm getting at?curtis klopehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06862796795934787470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-12549553403414610062010-03-26T07:45:26.122-06:002010-03-26T07:45:26.122-06:00Curtis,
You are correct. The NPP sees the histori...Curtis,<br />You are correct. The NPP sees the historic reformational understanding of justification as having missed the point because they didn't understand 2nd Temple Judaism. This is based in large part upon E.P. Sander's work. However, there has been some very impressive work since Sanders that has shown his conclusions about 2TJ to be inaccurate.Todd Pruitthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08614293087144493430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-69314477576693943812010-03-26T07:24:01.863-06:002010-03-26T07:24:01.863-06:00The New Perspective isn't really new. Wright w...The New Perspective isn't really new. Wright would say that it is actually an OLD way of reading the text, ie more historically accurrate. And that our current understanding is actually newer...curtis klopehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06862796795934787470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-81727104759570941592010-03-26T07:20:32.761-06:002010-03-26T07:20:32.761-06:00Orlando,
It seems that you are the one who needs ...Orlando,<br /><br />It seems that you are the one who needs to read Wright. He absolutely denies justification by faith alone. This is one of the central features of the NPP. What is more he denies the imputation of Christ's righteousness to sinners. <br /><br />These are some of the reasons why he has been so enthusiastically embraced by the emergent movement.<br /><br />Wright would be very surprised by your assessment of his positions.<br /><br />Justification is not a very good book. He takes cheap shots at men like Piper. You ought to read Piper's book "The Future of Justification" which is a systematic and biblical dismantling of the NPP view of justification.Todd Pruitthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08614293087144493430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1268539650499556740.post-14349248209229053382010-03-25T23:45:11.174-06:002010-03-25T23:45:11.174-06:00Have you read Wright? Have you read Justification?...Have you read Wright? Have you read Justification? Wright doesn't deny justification by faith alone...and he further articulates "righteousness by imputation". You do a disservice with your general and inaccurate statements. Read Wright.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03132440473740431145noreply@blogger.com