Paul and the Faithfulness of God

Wright's vision of Paul is comprehensive and firmly rooted in the history of the 1st century. His effort to remind the academy of Paul's essential Jewishness is admirable. I am a cradle Catholic that has for many years been involved in Evangelical Protestant fellowships and Wright mostly interacts with the views of the Protestant branch of Christianity. I enjoyed reading him most when he competently points to the many ways contemporary interpretations of Paul have projected Reformation, Enlightenment and modern and post-modern values and categories into Paul's Jewish world context. This is a complex, exhaustive and challenging book that may be the best currently offered. For the chronology of Paul's life and Paul's basic motivations that are grounded in his conversion experience on the road to Damascus, I look to F.F. Bruce's ' Paul, Apostle of the Heart Set Free'. For a systematic reading of Paul's theology, I look to J.D.G. Dunn's 'Theology of Paul the Apostle'. But for a scholarly and intelligent synthesis of these two strains, I look to N.T. Wright. Maybe I just do not understand what all the fuss is over the doctrine of justification but Wright navigates through these troubled hermeneutical waters with great skill and detail. His critique that Reformation and later theologies miss the significance of Paul's foundation in the story of Israel and their covenants by focusing too much on misleading categories like the differences between participationist and judicial or apocalyptic and salvation historical methodologies, is spot on. While I has some struggles getting through the morass of complicated scholarship surrounding some of these issues, I found Wright's necessary repetitions of the problems involved and their solutions ultimately helpful. It was difficult and sometimes tedious plowing through the necessary and careful exegesis of key passages in Paul. May main criticisms of this volume in the series are: 1) That in trying to avoid the stigma associated with Catholicism in academic circles Wright uses the language of community and the unity of the people of God but never come right out and uses very sparingly the word "church"; especially spelled with an upper case 'C'. Perhaps this is due to the contemporary western proclivity for individualism and the baggage of current trends in Church attendance. Nevertheless, Wright's thesis reflects a full flowered EKKLESIA without actually using the word "church". 2) In his chapter on election, Wrights sidesteps the discussion of Calvin's seminal doctrine of predestination. And, 3) similarly, the standard faith versus works argument on soteriology is obfuscated or almost completely absent. Wright is too subtle and sophisticated to come out and state for the record that he is a synergist as opposed to the monergism of the reformed Christians he seems to be attempting to placate because of the controversies about the new perspective on Paul. Or maybe I have misread Wright and just do not entirely grasp all the nuances of modern scholarship. The strengths of this book are its organization and clear movement through the historical context of Paul's narrative and Jewish/Greco-Roman world and robust treatment of faith in Jesus' death and resurrection as the main marker of membership in the Abrahamic family. Wright fits a great deal into the broad headings of God/monotheism, God's people/election and God's future/eschatology; the central and longest chapters. Wright writes well and often uses a controlling metaphor that is helpful in following his argument. He also has a good sense of humor and respectful attitude toward those with whom he disagrees. This book however does assume a working knowledge of Greek, Christian theology and a classical higher education. It is not a lot of contemporary Christian fluff and pop psychology that passes for non-fiction literature these days; and that is what I like most about it. The idea that to understand Paul, his worldview, his teaching and how that is worked out into his praxis can only be done with a deep appreciation for Paul's love of his very Jewish Messiah, Christ's covenant faithfulness and the story of Israel in the Old Testament and Second Temple Judaism; all make Wrights long volume compelling, worth reading and a major contribution. I will leave it up to more erudite critics who are debating the permutations of justification by faith to decide if Wright's overall thesis is an accurate rendering of the historical Paul. And I think I can safely say that while not definitive, Wright's Paul is a force to be reckoned with.

This masterwork by Tom Wright completes the series of four volumes which addresses the issue of "Christian Origins and the Question of God), written over the space of 20 years. The other volumes in the series includes "The New Testament and the People of God," "Jesus and the Victory of God," and "The Resurrection of the Son of God." Combined, their pages number a whopping 3,753. Bookshelves can sag under such weight. But it's worth it! Never, to my knowledge, has so much valuable interpretation been assembled in one organized collection. That said, there are similarities and differences between the volumes. All together they each provide one seamless proclamation from the beginning of the Bible to its end. Too often the Old Testament (a.k.a. Hebrew Bible) is treated by Christians as the prelude to the real revelation: the ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the early years of the building of the Christian Church. Nothing could be farther from the truth, Wright time and again reminds us in this volume, as Paul very forcefully says in chapters 9-11 of Romans. The Hebrew Bible, and Jewish faith, are the roots upon which our faith is built (11:18) -- cut that root off and we risk being cut off from YHWH (pronounced Yahweh), the creator God and the source of Jewish and Christian faith. To help us make this seamless transitions between the two testaments, Wright uses several powerful, yet subtle, symbolic words. For instance: 1. He rarely uses the word "Christ" when speaking of Jesus, but instead uses the Jewish term, "the Messiah." Christ comes from the Greek, and Messiah comes from the Hebrew. Both mean the same, "the anointed." 2. When quoting texts from the Hebrew Bible Wright uses the name of God, "YHWH" instead of LORD as it is most often translated. This is important because YHWH means "I am what I am" or "I will be what I will be." both meanings are correct. There is no better definition of God than that! 3. When he uses the generic word "God" he capitalizes the first letter in this volume, whereas he left all in lower case in the previous volumes. He made this change because he assumes his readers understand by now that he is speaking of the one creator God of the universe, and the God of Israel. In the previous volumes he explained that people have so many variations of the god they believe in that he wouldn't be sure what god they had in mind. For me, one of its greatest values, however, is Wright's introducing us to the worldview of Paul, which consisted of the culture and worldview of Ancient Greece, Rome, and Israel. All three were instrumental in shaping Paul's theology and mission. Also his description of Paul's Pharisaic life is the best I've seen. Yes, it's long, far too long for my taste, but it is precise and detailed (sometimes to a fault). Yet I recognize that his massive work is aimed primarily not at the general reading public, but for academics to pour over its pages, and enter them into their debates among themselves. If that is your primary complaint, you haven't read many academic treatises. If you want to catch the other side of Tom Wright, read some of his books which are aimed primarily at the general public: "Paul in Fresh Perspective," "Surprised by Hope," "Simply Jesus," "How God Became King," etc. You might think they were written by some other person! Not so. Just a different style of writing, by a master scholar and storyteller. Yes, I'll skip the parts that are too wordy and look for Wright's conclusions along the way. Some reviewers believe that he does not reflect Reformed/Reformation theology. Must we be stuck with 500 year old dogma, doctrine and interpretation? The world has come a long way since then. We don't burn witches anymore either. We are in the midst of a revolution in biblical studies which may, in the end, prove more important then the Reformation. One reviewer gives the book one star because it doesn't agree with his 17 proof texts and apparently believes those trump the hundreds, nay thousands, of texts cited by Wright. It's sad. If the price of the Kindle edition is so close to the paperback edition, shell out a few bucks more for the print edition -- it'll be easier to read and highlight the great passages (which are many).

It will take time to appreciate this great contribution by NT Wright. It will not be overnight! Wow! The breadth and depth of his study is quite amazing. It will take years for the scholarly world to digest his work. No doubt, this soon to be classic is well worth the read and the resultant study that will come as you allow his arguments to register with your own understanding. Those who are quick to judge and dismiss will miss out on an opportunity to dialogue with one of the more engaging exegetes of recent times. This book will challenge you to go back to Scripture and study and check to see if what he says is true. What he is proposing is a slight correction of the mechanics of justification (Reformed and all its variations) as well as the emphasis he believes Paul gives to several major themes within the writings of the Apostle Paul. Don't get me wrong, this work is comprehensive and touches on every major doctrine in Scripture but most of those "touches" will not be controversial. Only the ones that bump up against the concept of justification will bring heat from those who oppose. Well worth the time it takes to read!

Reading this book carefully will help you understand not only Paul’s letters but the NT and the whole story of the Bible. Wright does an excellent job explaining the worldview of Paul, the redefinition of Jewish monotheism around the Messiah and the Spirit, and the encyclopedic context of Paul’s thought. Along the way there is thought provoking analysis of the narrative theology of Romans and Galatians, as well as many other passages in Paul’s letters. There is also a good amount of comparison between Wright’s covenantal view and juridical, participationist, and apocalyptic views of Paul, which results in a synthesis of all of these views in light of the narrative theology of Paul. Highly recommend

Though still reading it, I'm totally pleased with Wright's work here ... a continuation, to be sure, of earlier work, with massive amounts of refinement and new insights into the complicated life of Saul of Tarsus and Paul the Apostle. Wright makes clear that his interests are historical in nature - because all good theology is grounded in history, as we all are. We're not simply religious people, or political people, but people with history, particular history, and to know something of our politics and religion, one has to know something of the history-soup in which we live. For me, reading Wright is always a pleasure - his skill as a writer is without peer, his illustrations are helpful, and often entertaining - and his grasp of First Century Palestine and the Gospel that emerged in that tumultuous period of time is nothing less that stunning. Hats off to Wright, and if anyone wants to understand Paul (beyond the usual Reformation stuff of atonement or the liberal digs at Paul as a woman-hater or gay-hater) will need to spend a lot of time here with Wright.

For over 30 years, N.T. Wright has been researching and writing about the apostle Paul and the historical-social context from which his epistles sprung from. Also, over the past two decades, Mr. Wright has been working on a series of academic works known collectively as Christian Origins and the Question of God. This book is the culmination, the climax, both of that series and Mr. Wright's lifelong work on Paul. It is also a crowning achievement, combining history and theology, as it clearly articulates his views on Paul, the early church, and the question of God. The structure of the book is pretty interesting. Parts I and IV deal with Paul's world and how his message interacted with that world. This includes brief overviews of pagan religion and philosophy, the Judaism of the time, and the imperial ideology of the Roman Empire, particularly Caesar worship, which was beginning to take off in the East in Paul's time. This shows that Paul was not just a product of his times, but also an influencer of those times. But the real meat of this book is in parts II and III, which deal with Paul's worldview and theology. Mr. Wright contends that Paul's theology was important because it was meant to help believers of the time both unify and work out for themselves the meaning of the salvation they (and Christians even today) had found in Jesus Christ. He also argues that his worldview and his theology, while still featuring key characteristics of his Jewish upbringing, were radically re-centered and refocused around the crucified and resurrected Messiah. It is an absolutely fascinating thesis that has many implications, particularly about the importance of works (to use a blunt word) as marking out those who had been saved by Jesus Christ. My favorite quote from this book will help clarify what I am saying: "That is why, among other things, the intermediate state between initial justification and the final verdict is to be marked, again as in Romans 8, by the Messiah-shaped cruciform life of holiness and suffering, by the spirit's transforming work, including the famous 'groaning' in prayer ([Romans] 8.26-27).... Justification is the divine declaration, creating the new status of 'righteous', 'adopted child', because of which the believer can move forward in the Christian pilgrimage. At every stage it utterly presupposes the one-off decisive work of the Messiah; at every stage it utterly requires the work of the spirit. This is the beating heart of redefined election." (p. 960) The only thing that I have against this book is that, in spite of its humongous length, it still feels rather packed. There are points where Mr. Wright says he wishes there was more space to discuss certain things, meaning that there is plenty more that the 1,600 pages he could've said about this topic (I suppose that's why there are two supplemental books for this volume)! This also means that there is a lot crammed into this book and, if you are not careful, you may miss out on some pretty important things. It took me two months to make it through this behemoth and I know that I missed some things. Thus, this is not a book that you want to approach lightly. Indeed, you will want to approach this respectfully and thoughtfully, ideally after reading the previous volumes in this series beforehand and with a Bible next to you to keep looking at the different verses he keeps quoting. I also don't like how he didn't rely on some of Paul's other epistles because of the academy's belief that some of them possibly weren't written by Paul. Of course, I don't know much about Biblical literary criticism and the criteria used by the academy to label some letters as probably written by Paul and others probably not, so I was willing to give Mr. Wright the benefit of a doubt here. However, I believe that careful study of this book and even more careful study of the Bible will have great benefits for all serious students of Christianity and the apostle Paul.

This is NT Wright's capstone to his three volume series (New Testament People of God, Jesus and the Victory of God, The Resurrection of Jesus). After laboriously (we are talking three years of casual reading on my part) setting up his argument for the historicity of Jesus and for the resurrection being the most satisfying explanation of what happened to ignite a Christian sect that is distinct from the modern plea for a mish mash of competing, legitimate Christianities, Wright now is getting on to the business of doing the same for Paul in his role as apostle, evangelist and church father. He begins by setting up the historical background of Judaism in the first century, its praxis, symbols and world view and more specifically that of a Pharisee. And then launches into how that gives character and meaning to much of what Paul was saying in his letters. This is in distinction to what both Catholic and Protestant theologians have picked out from Paul's opus over the last two thousand years, in an effort to define their own theology for the Church as we know it, a rather fractured body. Thus, Wright is part of what is now called a "new perspective on Paul", which Wright convincingly claims is actually, the original Paul. This idea has ruffled feathers in the liberal and conservative branches of the church, causing rebuttals from the likes of Crossan and Piper alike. For Crossan, it would seem, and others of the Jesus Seminar persuasion, Wright puts forth a dangerous argument that Paul's letters have authenticity and authority. For Piper, the emphasis on traditional reformational, salvational grace, known as justification, is weakened to a confusing and unacceptable position for traditional orthodoxy. I've obtained the Kindle version, which is very nice when hauling reading material that is measured in pounds and inches thick to a coffee shop or bed. I hope to have a better understanding of what it is that has stirred up such criticism from such diverse sources. I suspect that Wright will end in a place that affirms orthodoxy, election mixed with free will (or at least participatory belief) and a practiced Christianity that views building the Kingdom of God as more than saving souls, (but certainly not excluding this) and being a part of a redeemed creation. This is something the American church, tied up in dispensationalism, the literal (read concrete beyond belief) scripture reading that constantly puts it at odds with science, needs desperately to hear and consider and use for change. It is also desperately is needed in the halls of liberal academic theology, who seem to have reduced Christian belief, the historical Jesus and the early church to a fairy tail that once swallowed, allows us to be concerned about being like everyone else in the name of appearing tolerant, humanistic and above all intelligent. One can't read through Wright's plea for a way of reading scripture he calls "critical realism" and not at least partly be swayed away from these polar opposite positions. I recommend this read for all believers in the risen Christ and skeptical unbelievers struggling with the "truth" of scripture that believers seem to swallow blindly. Wright sheds a light for both.

One of Wright’s controlling motifs throughout chapter ten’s treatment of justification by faith is the claim that Paul understood final judgment no differently than the Judaism of his period – God judges each man according to his actions. Final judgment, Wright states, “will be on the basis of the totality of the life that has been led. God will ‘repay to each according to their works’. Paul never for a moment undermines this biblical and traditional saying, widespread across the thought of ancient Israel,” (938; cf. 936–42). But it is not entirely clear how Wright can claim Romans 2 – particularly v. 13’s οὐ γὰρ οἱ ἀκροαταὶ νόμου δίκαιοι παρὰ [τῷ] θεῷ, ἀλλʼ οἱ ποιηταὶ νόμου δικαιωθήσονται (“After all, it isn’t those who hear the law who are in the right before God. It’s those who do the law who will be declared to be in the right!”) – as paradigmatic for eschatological justification or judgment, when Paul writes, in the very next chapter (3:21), that Νυνὶ δὲ χωρὶς νόμου δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ πεφανέρωται (“But now, quite apart from the law… God’s covenant justice has been displayed.”). When it is recognized that the judgment in Romans 2’s context is specifically a just judgment in accordance with Torah (v.12, διὰ νόμου κριθήσονται), making sense of the δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ apart from Torah in 3:21 results in considerable tension for Wright’s reading; the pivot of judgment has been altered from a Torah-based judgment, to one apart from Torah. When Paul’s larger argument concerning justification in Romans is further considered in light of 3:10 (discussed above), it seems clear that Paul’s purpose throughout the text has more to do with God’s grace in justification than on any understood Israelite vocation. Paul’s concern for demonstrating God’s grace in justification would also account for the importance of Abraham – a figure Wright is certainly correct in highlighting, covenantal emphasis and all. Romans 4, citing Gen 15:6 – καὶ ἐπίστευσεν Αβραμ τῷ θεῷ, καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιοσύνην (LXX); “And he believed the LORD; and the LORD reckoned it to him as righteousness – reveals Abraham as both the father of the divinely promised worldwide family composed of Jews and gentiles and the supreme biblical example of justification by faith. And this both/and view, with appropriate emphasis on Paul’s understanding of justification as an act of divine grace, would function as a helpful corrective for Wright’s understanding of Romans, which is elsewhere excellent. While it is clear that Wright’s exegesis of Romans accounts for the “redrawing of the symbolic world to include believing Jews and Gentiles on equal terms” (932), it is not clear how it accounts for divine grace, when the context of Romans 4 explicitly discusses χάριν (“gift”) with direct relationship to Paul’s use of δικ- vocabulary, and in antithesis to ἔργων (Rom 4:4–5). Wright has elsewhere countered that: “The point is that the word ‘justification’ does not itself denote the process whereby, or the event in which, a person is brought by grace from unbelief, idolatry and sin into faith, true worship and renewal of life.” And: “The doctrine of justification by faith was born into the world as the key doctrine underlying the unity of God’s renewed people.” Wright’s covenantal emphasis is a welcome fresh reading, but a both/and would make better sense, especially in Romans 4. Wright’s reading of justification is heavily influenced by “covenantal eschatology,” such that it involves the “renewal of all things, the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth” (936). Wright frequently states that justification is God’s “single-plan-through-Israel-for-the-world” in his previous book Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision. This understanding is also revealed at the outset of his lengthy treatment of justification when he explains that the δικ- vocabulary in Paul has its “home within the redefinition of election” (925; though it must be recalled what Wright means by “election,” which includes Israel’s calling, the rectifying of all creation, and putting humanity to rights). “Justification, for Paul, is a subset of election, that is, it belongs as part of his doctrine of the people of God.” The incorporative messiahship discussed previously would account for this reading. The judicial verdict of this eschatological, final judgment of God can be known in advance. Justification has a proleptic, or “in the present time” forensic aspect (944). In the context of table fellowship between Jewish and gentile Christians in Galatians, Wright explains “… the main theme is the fact that God has one family, not two, and that this family consists of all those who believe in the gospel… Faith, not the possession and/or practice of Torah, is the badge which marks out this family, the family which is now defined as the people of the Messiah.” Clearly for Paul, justification exists now.

Essendo libri di studio e conoscendololi bene non c'e molto da dire. Chi è interessato già sa.

‘Something understood.’ With this seemingly modest phrase quoted from George Herbert’s poem ‘Prayer’, Tom Wright ends his immense, scholarly exploration of Pauline theology. It is not one book, but rather four in one, a symphony in four movements. This is not the book for those who want a succinct overview of the subject (he ably provided that some years ago with his excellent ‘What St Paul really said’). Rather, it aims to give us a highly detailed account of Paul, who is primarily to be understood in the context of the first century Eastern Mediterranean world from which he, a formerly zealous Pharisee emerged as the principal representative to the gentile world of the early Christian movement. What is so impressive is the ‘scientific’ way in which Wright has examined (through precise exegetical analysis, with a panoramic awareness of critics and counter arguments) all the available Pauline phenomena and presented them in an economic, elegant and convincing way, which avoids dogmatism and the anachronistic narrowness of later (especially Reformation) readings. He doesn’t allow Paul to be shoe-horned into any ill-fitting theological schemes, but shows the breadth and beauty of Paul’s understanding of Jesus as Messiah and how that fits with the grand narrative of creation and covenant in the Jewish scriptures. Concepts deemed to be central (e.g. the righteousness of God) are reinterpreted and others (e.g. new creation) emerge with a greater force. We see Paul developing as the greatest Christian theologian, not only as we understand better the results (the letters), but also by being inducted into the process (the thinking and theologizing behind them) of his creative endeavour. Another striking feature of Wright’s book is that something this monumental is never dry or tedious. His recipe includes judicious use of humour and poetry and framing mechanisms which keep the mixture lively and engaging, and exemplifies his aesthetic, as well as his theological appreciation of Paul’s achievement. Unsurprisingly, there is something eminently Pauline (symphonic) in the weaving and exposition of so many thematic elements, and in the cumulative sense of richness, depth and clarity of the resulting work. Newsweek magazine once dubbed Tom Wright the world’s greatest living New Testament scholar and here is the proof. As Paul claims with staggering boldness in 1 Corinthians 2.16 ‘we have the mind of Christ’, so we now have in this book probably the best claim yet to have the mind of Paul.

Quel pavé, mais quelle richesses d'informations sur le contexte de Paul. Ce livre fera date dans l'histoire de l'interprétation des écrits pauliniens. On n'en sort pas indemne. Comme toujours, N. T. Wright ouvre de nombreuses pistes de réflexions nouvelles.

Wright deckt viele Bereiche der Gedanken und der Welt von Paulus, richtig klasse

With his comprehensive sweep of the first century context this book gives a coherent historical approach to understanding the New Testament which brings the evidence together with consistency. It brings the story of the New Testament to life. Ken Foster, Parry Sound