Kruse Kronicle

With Justification

—

by

mwkruse
in

Ben Witherington on the Bible and Culture: With Justification

(An excellent review of N. T. Wright's Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision.)

It is never an easy thing to write a rebuttal book if you are genuinely a Christian person.  You keep hoping that people will stop misunderstanding what you have said and written, will think better of ad hominem attacks, and you keep trying the 'turn the other cheek' approach, at least until people think you're being cheeky by not responding to their criticisms.  But finally when there is persistent, and seemingly willful, misinterpretation of what you have said, it becomes the lesser of several undesirable things to respond and clarify your views, with the hope that finally the light will dawn on those who have misread you.  To judge from some of the early reviews on Amazon one would have to say "Abandon Hope".

Of course the sad irony of this situation is that the very people who ought to be most appreciating and applauding the good bishop's work, including on this very subject, are those who are most strongly attacking it–conservative Evangelicals from the űber-Reformed side of the ledger.  In particular he is being attacked by folks like Don Carson, John Piper, and their disciples (e.g. Simon Gathercole).  What makes this an especially noxious and obnoxious situation is that in fact, at the end of the day, Wright is taking a very traditional view of the doctrine of justification, namely that Paul, when he uses the dikaios/dikaiosune etc. word group is largely referring to forensic righteousness, right standing with God established by grace and through faith in the dying and rising Messiah Jesus.  Further, in very Reformed fashion he wants to argue that in Romans and elsewhere what the phrase 'the righteousness of God' refers to is God's covenant faithfulness to promises he made.  Sounds like a good traditional Reformed reading of Paul to most of us. (I should add for those who do not know my work that whilst I attended a Reformed Evangelical Seminary, Gordon-Conwell, I am in fact a Wesleyan Evangelical, and so in the first place there are some ways in which I disagree with Tom Wright's perspective and in the second place I find it bordering on bizarre that he is being attacked by his own close theological kin.  This is truly an 'in-house' fight, and I don't really have a dog in it, except Bishop Wright is a long time Christian friend, and it is not right to stand idly by and watch a brother being unnecessarily attacked.  For what it is worth, I find Wright a far better and more Biblical ambassador for his particular Reformed theological view point than those who are attacking him).

Let us first start with the big picture. …

Comments

6 responses to “With Justification”

  1. James Avatar
    James

    Great post, thank you.
    Doctrine is often used as a bludgeon instead of a rule. I think Tom has given us something long over due in the Western 21 century (or post-Enlightenment/relativistic period) and the slightly muddled and pretentious theology that has come because of it. I welcome his book and appreciate Wright’s strength and candor in sharing it.

    Reply
  2. Michael W. Kruse Avatar
    Michael W. Kruse

    I confess that the apoplectic response of his critics to his understanding justification within the covenant context is borders on the bizarre to me. I’m not a professional theologian who reads the original languages but it seems to me that Wright’s contribution transforms gray scale photo into a brilliant colorful picture. It loses nothing of the old but by placing the previous understanding in proper context it vivifies what was accomplished in Christ’s work.
    How ironic that conservative reformed folks, who so highly value Luther and Calvin … the two mean he placed scripture of all us …, have made Luther’s and Calvin’s theological interpretations over against scriptural analysis.

    Reply
  3. James Avatar
    James

    Dresden James once said that “A truth’s initial commotion is directly porportional to how deeply the lie was believed. It wasn’t the world being round that agitated people, but that the world wasn’t flat. When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.”
    Don’t get me wrong, I am not calling anyone a liar, per say, esp. Luther or Calvin. But Tradition as it has developed over the subsequent years has become something so ingrained that to go back to the root truth means to dig through tens of decades of hard, callous (almost cancerous) growth.
    Jesus warned time and again to beware tradition. Matt. 15:3, “Why do you also disregard the commandment of God because of your tradition?
    Beware those who like to walk around in long robes too! (A statement to be careful of the rabbinical traditions).

    Reply
  4. James Avatar
    James

    If you don’t mind, Sir, I’d like to add you to my blog list.

    Reply
  5. Michael W. Kruse Avatar
    Michael W. Kruse

    “If you don’t mind, Sir, I’d like to add you to my blog list.”
    I’d be honored. Is blog.timordei.org a team project?

    Reply
  6. James Avatar
    James

    Yes, it is. Myself (pen Robin) in Tokyo and Dave in Australia. Thanks!

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Michael W. KruseCancel reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading