-
Fresh Perspective is Right Mar 16, 2006 (67 of 73 found this helpful)
N T Wright has a great writing style that is lucid, insightful and informative. Scholar and student both, can read his books and not be overwhelmed by technical jargon and vocabulary. He brings his great insight into Paul to light in this book that everyone who will attempt to get a grasp on Paul will need to start here (after the Bible of course).
Wright begins by discussing the three worlds of Paul, which were Jewish (this one was foundational), Roman, and Greek. Wright shows how that Paul works out the fulfillment of Israel in Jesus and that being true Israel means that one has put their hope and faith in Jesus and not the Law or Temple. Wright carries this thread throughout his discussion on Paul.
The book has two parts. Part one is themes and they include Creation and Covenant, Messiah and Apocalyptic, Gospel and Empire. Part two is structures and the structures he sees are entitled rethinking God, reworking God's people, reimagining God's future, and then the conclusion, which he has called Jesus, Paul and the Task of the Church.
In Creation and Covenant Wright works out the idea that God created man, man then got himself in a mess through the fall and then God acts to restore his creation through covenant. Abraham and his seed were give the vocation of restoring what Adam had lost by being light to the world. The problem, as Wright so rightly points out, was that the solution (Abraham or Israel) became part of the problem, precisely because the Law was not equipped to change humanity. In the end Jew and Gentile stand unrestored and sinful and in need of redemption.
In the section Messiah and Apocalyptic, Wright shows that Jesus as Israel's true representative has accomplished for humanity what the nation of Israel had failed to accomplished. For Paul the plan of God for Israel had been unveiled and Jesus was the plan all along. God had vindicated the Messiah (Israel's true representative) by resurrecting him from the dead.
The message of Gospel and empire was the proclamation that Israel's Messiah has become Lord of the world. The message is a threat to Caesar, because Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.
In the second part of the book under Structures Wright speaks of rethinking God and particularly monotheism in light of the person of Jesus. Wright maintains the traditional orthodox view of the divinity of Jesus (nothing to fear here despite what some have said about Wright on this subject), but he holds this in tension with Jewish monotheism. In this same section Wright holds that Paul does not proof text when quoting scripture (the Old Testament), as Sanders suggests, but that Paul takes the full context of the passage into consideration and Wright insists that Paul's message holds continuity with the overall narrative of Israel. I am suggesting the Wright is right on this and that Wright has effectively torn down not only the old liberal or moderate views on this, but the conservative views from the old perspective as well.
In the section on Reworking God's People Wright covers the topic of election. He does not speak of election here in the old Calvinistic perspective, but that God has elected Jesus as Israel's true representative and that they that are in the Messiah are therefore in the elect. If you miss what Wright is saying here then you will miss what is perhaps his biggest contribution and that is that God's people are constituted around faith in Jesus and not circumcision, the Torah, Land, or Temple. He suggests that Paul has reworked God's people around the Messiah and the Spirit. In other words it is no longer the Temple made by hands that the Spirit or presence of God dwells but now in the Temple of believers in the Messiah (Jesus) and it is no longer the Torah that guides the life of Israel, but the Spirit that is to be walked in and the its members are to be led by.
In the section reimagining God's future Wright sees Paul's central po
-
A Solid Survey of Paul's Theology Mar 5, 2007 (25 of 25 found this helpful)
This book grew out of a series of lectures that Dr. Wright gave on the apostle Paul. He begins with a brief overview of the Roman and Jewish and Greek and Christian worlds in which he lived. He follows this up with a chapter on how Paul's understanding of creation and covenant informs his work on the Christ hymn in Colossians 1 as well as the first 11 chapters of Romans. He underscores how Paul redefines God's covenant with Abraham in Genesis 12 and Genesis 15 as to include Gentiles today, forming one people of God with Israel. He shows how Paul's exposition of the gospel in Romans is a working out of his understanding of the Abrahamic covenant.
There is also a helpful chapter where Wright shows how Paul is underscoring that Christ is the true emperor of the world, and that it is His empire that we belong to, not the empire of Nero.
Wright goes on to talk about the concepts of Messiah and apocalyptic. He contends that apocalyptic in Paul refers to the revelation or uncovering of the mysteries of God in Christ. He disagrees with Kasemann and others who see apocalyptic as a term simply describing the end time.
In part two of this book, Wright discusses how Paul reimagines the Jewish Shema in 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Ephesians 4:4-5 and in Philippians 2, and how this was expressed later on in the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity.
He also shows how the concept of the people of God has been reworked by Paul to include both Gentiles and Jews. There is also a section where Paul reimagines God's future as being all in all and ruling forever in Christ. He rejects the dispensational model of Jesus coming back to rapture us into heaven where we will forever live with God. He points out how the image of the parousia is that of a people leaving the city to meet their king, and then escorting him back into the city. Therefore, we will meet Jesus in the air and then accompany Him back to the earth.
I thought I was going to disagree at first with Dr. Wright about justification in Paul. But he shows how God declares the sinner to be righteous in Christ when he responds to the call of God and accepts Christ and the gospel (Romans 8:29-30).
I think that this is a very solid outline of Paul's theology. Like Ben Witherington, Wright believes that Paul's thought world is part of the matrix of God's story of creation and covenant and redemption as found in key OT texts such as Genesis 1-3, Psalm 19, Isaiah and Joel. The book is academic, but very readable, and the informed layperson will enjoy it.
-
A Good Overview of Wright's Essential Work on the Pauline Epistles Apr 29, 2006 (33 of 35 found this helpful)
This book is not actually another stab at the "New Perspective" issues on the part of Wright; rather, it is a type of condensed culmination of Wright's work up to this point. However, for those who have not read any of N.T. Wright's works, I would not recommend beginning here.
This book is actually a "tweaked" compilation of Wright's Hulsean Lectures presented at Cambridge University. Wright declares that he revised the lectures a bit for book form, and added chapters to complete the overall thought of the lectures. What is more, Wright, through out this book responds to his critics on certain points. But, the main thrust of this book seems to be a general overview of Wright's work up to this point.
Wright reviews Paul's historical setting in first century, second Temple Judaism, then Wright moves into a discussion of creation and covenant and how these play an important role in Paul's epistles and what Paul is attempting to communicate to his audience regarding Jesus' claims (especially the act of the resurrection). It is actually in this section where Wright, point by point, book and verses by book and verses, details Paul's letters in light of certain Old Testament narratives and God's work in the world to set creation right in the covenant made wit Abraham and the Jewish people.
From these two chapters Wright moves into a discussion of the Messiah (of course, Jesus) and Paul's apocalyptic language and how these things are vital in Paul's covenant theology and their steady progress of historical fulfillment, as Wright declares. Then Wright finishes up this part of the book with the actual gospel and the Roman empire/rule. This, of course, as Wright points out, is the context within which Paul is working and writing. This entire first section, Wright uses to set the groundwork for the environment, thinking, politics, etc. within which Paul is working and writing.
The final section of the book, Wright takes the first section and details why Paul is saying the things he is saying in his epistles. The first section is quite important to understanding the second part. Thus, the book works in a type of systematic exegetical fashion. Once again, Wright intention in this book is not to rehash old "New Perspective" arguments, or attempt to respond to his critics within the context of the "New Perspective" (although he does so on occasion). Rather, Wright, it seems, in this work is laying out on the table, in a nice systematic fashion, his life's work on Paul and Paul's epistles.
The reason I say that this is not a good book to begin with for those who have never read Wright, is the fact that Wright assumes in most of this work that his reader understands the issues he has been dealing with for 30 plus years, and so he does not always simplistic develop his way to his point. Often times Wright simply comes out and begins to discuss certain issues without setting the stage for the reader, assuming the reader has at least a basic understanding of what is going on.
That being said, however, this is a nice overview of Wright's work regarding Paul, and it is new and improved in certain areas, where when you read (for those who have read Wright's previous works) where Wright has improved, changed, and reworked his thinking a bit on certain issues to a higher level.
One of my more favorite chapters in this book is seven, titled "Reimagining God's Future." In this chapter, Wright details Paul's eschatology, especially in light of the purpose and work of the Holy Spirit. These issues Wright has discussed in previous works, but as collectively and succinctly as I think he has done in this work. The chapter alone is worth the price of the book. Overall this is a great addition to my library, I highly recommend it to anyone interested in New Testament studies or those interested in N.T. Wright's work.
-
A good, if technical summary Jan 23, 2007 (20 of 21 found this helpful)
Readers should not be confused. Despite its slim appearance, this is not another accessible _Tom_ Wright work. Published under his academic moniker, this is in many ways an updating of _The Climax Of The Covenant_ and _What St. Paul Really Said_ with an up to date survey of contemporary Paul scholarship, and the introduction of some compelling thematic approaches to reading Paul's work.
The book was adapted from two series of lectures, and reading it I often suspected it would have more impact for those attending those lectures who were more easily able to raise questions and debate among themselves the answers. In places the book can be overly dense for the amateur reader as it skims through technical arguments. But it is by no means out of reach to those of us who don't read theology full time. While it doesn't have the immediate application that Wright's more populist works do, with its sparse length and careful use of themic metaphors, _Paul: In Fresh Perspective_ is a quick and satisfying way to get up to speed with Wright's latest thinking in this area.
-
A post-Reformation masterpiece Mar 4, 2009 (9 of 9 found this helpful)
Before I comment directly on N. T. Wright's book Paul: In Fresh Perspective, let me give an abbreviated theological travelogue. I grew up in South America; my parents were conservative evangelical missionaries. From birth through high school I was thoroughly indoctrinated in a dispensational, premillenial, Pietistic view of the Bible and the Christian life. In Bible school I took my first course in systematic theology. Before long I was a committed adherent of Reformed (covenantal, Calvinistic, amillenial) theology. That commitment still holds firm over 40 years later.
A little over 10 years ago (about 30 years after philosophy grad school), I began reading philosophy again, especially Christian philosophers. I reread Etienne Gilson, Josef Pieper, and some of the scholastic philosophers; I also began reading G. K. Chesterton, James V. Schall, Peter Kreeft, Simone Weil, Jaroslav Pelikan, and other nonevangelical authors. I subscribed to the journal First Things. I also began reading the early church fathers. Throughout this time, I continued reading more traditional authors from the Reformed tradition, but my intellectual data bank was acquiring some significant diversity.
About 5 years ago, Kenneth E. Bailey (Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes, The Cross and the Prodigal, etc.) spoke at a conference hosted by our church. That experience led me to read a number of Christian books that illumined the Jewish background of Jesus and the New Testament writers (The Gospel according to Moses by Athol Dickson, Our Father Abraham by Marvin R. Wilson, New Light on the Difficult Words of Jesus by David Bivin) and then to several books from a solely Jewish perspective (God in Search of Man and Man Is Not Alone by Abraham Joshua Heschel). Meanwhile, I read a number of books and journal articles about the effects of postmodern thought on Christian thinking and Christian ministry.
A question began nagging at my mind: If some recent Christian scholars have been influenced by postmodernism, what effect did modernism have on the Reformers? Some evangelical authors are concerned that Christianity may be hijacked by postmodernism, but is it possible that to some extent the Reformers were prisoners of modernism?
No one helped me answer those questions. In fact, no one was even asking them. Then I encountered N. T. Wright. I began reading The New Testament and the People of God a few months ago. He asks and discusses issues that none of my favorite Reformed authors even noticed. When I took a break from that longer book to read Wright's Paul: In Fresh Perspective, I devoured it in a few days.
Perhaps if I'd encountered N. T. Wright 15 years ago, I would have written him off as a threat to Protestant orthodoxy, if not an outright heretic. But I'm not the same person I was then. Though I still hold to most elements of Reformed doctrine, my eyes are open a bit wider now. Wright's treatment of Paul's theology is reasoned and reasonable. He takes no unwarranted liberties with the text. His historical approach is revealing and satisfying. His inferences from his textual studies are not outlandish. The book sheds light on passages that had been puzzling or problematic to me. I highly recommend this book!
Let me close with another personal detour. When I was attending a Christian (read fundamentalist Protestant) elementary school, the teacher presented a church history chart. The accompanying text indicated that "true" Christian teaching left the church right around the time of Augustine and didn't return till Martin Luther! All those "Catholic" years had nothing to contribute to Christian doctrine or practice. I hesitate to say this, but some of the more shrill evangelical responses to N. T. Wright remind me of that chart.
The Protestant Reformation did not "recover" the teachings of Jesus. The early Reformers were well acquainted with the history and teachings of t