Jump to content

N.t. Wright


Recommended Posts

In looking for reviews on Jim Wallis' books, I stumbled across a couple of books by NT Wright.

 

I haven't ever read anything by NTW. I own the book he co-authored with Borg, but haven't read it.

 

Reading the reviews on a couple of his books has me intrigued. I did a google search and read a few articles that have me even more intrigued.

 

His view on the historical Jesus and Paul are different than anything I've ever heard of before.

 

Has anyone here read him? If so what books and what are your opinions?

 

Any info or insight would be appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Admin:

 

How come 50% of the time, when a new post is created, the title of the post has it's letters changed from uppercase to lowercase?

 

It's happened to me 3 times now!

 

I purposely watched this time to see if it would do it and it did. :blink: The post was NT Wright, not Nt Wright.

 

Weird!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm active in another forum that uses the same software as this one, and it does the same thing with lowercase and caps.

 

Apparently the software thinks that every word in a title should begin with a capital letter, but any acronym in the title it will treat like a word-- first letter capitalized and the rest lower case-- even when the letters are separated by periods, as you did here.

 

Like Des, I am sorry that I don't have a comment on the book. You want to share with us what you find intriguing? I'm now intrigued by your intrigue-ment :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NT Wright is a biblical scholar. One websight called him something like an evangelical Anglican? I HAD to read that one wrong.

 

His views have made evangelicals uncomfortable for quite a few years. It has to do with the way he looks at Jesus and Paul from a Jewish perspective.

 

One reviewer on Amazon said that if his views took hold within Protestantism, it would do away with Protestantism. (An exaggeration).

 

I don't know the difference between the terms premillenial, post-millenial, dispensationalist, preterist, partial preterist, soteriological, ecclesiogical, justification ... yada yada yada.

 

The book I'm interested in is on Paul and how the scriptures that seem to say that faith is all it takes to reconcile to God are not the whole picture. Paul was a Jew. What he had to say had to do with Judaism and we need to quit reading the Bible with 16th century reformation lenses on.

 

NT Wright is a serious Biblical scholar and a specialist in Pauline theology.

 

BroRog? XianAnarchist? Pacigoth? Any input?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aletheia,

 

I haven't posted in a while, I mainly just lurk here occassionally, but since I have read N.T. Wright, I thought I would weigh in.

 

I've read his book about the historical Jesus. Wright does claim to be an evangelical so you got that part right from what you've read. What I loved about this book was that he really focused on the person of Jesus and delved into what his words and actions really meant to his contemporaries. Too many books about Jesus nearly caricaturize him instead of treating him like a flesh and blood person. Several people in my study group had a hard time with the book especially when Wright proposes that Jesus did not actually "know" he was God. It was one of the freshest books I've ever read.

 

Sophia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Aletheia - there's a great teaching co. class on the New Testament that discusses a lot of this - authorship, perspectives, different audiences/messages in different gospels. Historical Jesus and one on Paul too. Lots of $, but they all are guaranteed to go on sale at least 1 time per year! :>

 

I hadn't heard of NT Wright... I'll have to look for one of his books once I get over the fascination of comparing the notes in my NIV study bible to the ones in my New Interpreters Study Bible!!! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sophia,

 

Thank you very very much for offering your opinion. I'm excited to read his books both on Jesus and Paul.

 

Cynthia,

 

Oh yeah, I plan on getting the New Testament Teaching Co lecture as well as the "Great Persons" lectures on both the New and Old Testament.

 

Shhhh about the NIB, I told you I was jealous! :angry:

 

Aletheia :P

Edited by AletheiaRivers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"BTW - Beach - he's reading God's Politics and says Wallis writes positively about progressive christianity."

 

That IS good to hear. Jim Wallis may indeed be able to change the hardass thinking of some more light Evangelicals...and that IS good..but I wondering how long it will take for the far right to blast him for not siding with them. <_<

 

PS. Have felwell or any other extremist critized him yet? Just curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beach,

 

I quoted part of the following article on the Evangelical thread. It was a debate between Falwell and Wallis in which Falwell tells Wallis that he's "as Evangelical as an oak tree".

 

As Evangelical As An Oak Tree by Jim Wallis, Editor-In-Chief

SOJOMAIL - A Weekly Email-zine of Spirituality, Politics and Culture

July 14, 2004

 

I debated Jerry Falwell yesterday on Tavis Smiley's National Public Radio show. The subject was the current talk about "values" in the presidential election campaign. Tavis first asked Falwell to name a "short list" of the values issues that were important to him. It turned out to be a very short list indeed. All the Religious Right leader could talk about was the gay marriage amendment. That was it.

 

I pointed out that overcoming poverty was a values issue, as was protecting the environment, as was fighting unnecessary wars on false pretenses, as was the abuse of Iraqi prisoners. As he often does when he fears he might lose a debate, Falwell eventually began to interrupt what I was saying and moved into personal-attack mode, saying that I was "as much an evangelical as an oak tree." The television preacher from Lynchburg has such a way with words. :rolleyes:

 

But then he really got vicious. He challenged me: "You voted for Al Gore, didn't you, Reverend? Admit it! Admit it!" he demanded. "You didn't vote for George Bush, or George Bush Sr., or even Ronald Reagan!"

 

He had me. I was finally exposed on National Public Radio - a Christian who hadn't consistently voted for Republican candidates. How could I ever again claim to be a follower of Jesus Christ, who, as we all know, was pro-rich, pro-war, and pro-American?  :rolleyes:

 

It was an absolutely partisan and theocratic moment. There is only one way that Christians can possibly vote: That's exactly what Falwell was saying. And that's exactly what the Religious Right is saying. And they say the only values issues are things like gay marriage and abortion. Forget everything the Bible says about the priority of the poor, about Christian peacemaking, about respecting God's creation, or about the image of God in every human being - including our enemies.

 

I happen to think that both abortion and gay marriage are important issues, but they are not the only issues. Many Christians are getting tired of the tirades of the Jerry Falwells who repeatedly claim that all values issues have to do with sex and that every Christian must vote for their Republican friends. Family values are important to many Christians, but so are social values. And many Christians are pro-family without being anti-gay the way Falwell is. And many of us believe that a deep commitment to the sacredness of human life requires a consistent ethic of life, which also regards the destruction of war, the death penalty, and the scandal of global poverty as deeply moral concerns, not just abortion.

 

The future of American politics should be a real discussion of values; that would be a very welcome development. And we may be reaching a "tipping point" when many other Christians and the media who cover faith and politics will decide that the Religious Right should no longer dominate the discussion. Let them have their say, but let other Christian voices be heard. The control of right-wing fundamentalists over the "values" conversation may be coming to an end. And the uncritical alliance between the Religious Right and the Republican Party should be named a theocratic mistake and idolatrous allegiance (as is any religious left's uncritical alliance with the Democrats).

 

Later in the day, my friend Tony Campolo called and I told him what Falwell had said. Tony is a Baptist preacher and as evangelical as you can get, but he will not likely be voting for George W. Bush. Imagine that. We agreed the next time either of us is in a debate with Falwell, we will name him for what he really is - a fundamentalist who has stolen the word evangelical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haven't ever read anything by NTW. I own the book he co-authored with Borg, but haven't read it.

If it is The Meaning of Jesus, then you will really want to read that book. It is an excellent pairing of progressive and evangelical thought. When reading the book, something to note: Wright is more concerned with preserving what the texts are saying. Meanwhile, Borg is more concerned with how our context can make sense of the texts. So the emphasis for Wright is on the ancient texts, while the emphasis for Borg is on the postmodern thought category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is much about NT Wright that I like and agree with. I have read most of his books and have been to lectures that he has given. Of course, I don't agree with him on everything, but then again I don't agree with any scholar 100% (not a bad thing).

 

Honestly, I think Wright's positions are unique. There are some liberals who may say that he is a fundie/evangelical, but I don't think that is accurate. Then there are fundies who say he is a liberal, and I don't think that is true either.

 

He gets the conservative label because he seriously believes in the historicity of the resurrection, the virgin birth and the miracles. However, he gets the liberal label because of what he says about atonement theology and more specifically the second coming. I was very much into 'Jesus and the Victory of God'. If only his view on eschatology and apocalypticism was accepted by conservatives, we wouldn't have to deal with all this 'left behind' hysteria. I also liked The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering who Jesus was and is. Wright is not a traditionalist, he totally challenges the evangelical concept of hell on more than one occasion.

 

At one level, Wright is in entire disagreement with other scholars like Crossan and Borg... in the sense of how historically parts of the gospels are understood. However, that seems to me to be primarily an academic dispute. The implications of what one believes matter more to me, and (in my opinion) the book Wright and Borg co wrote reflects this very well. In regarding what it means to be a Christian and follow Jesus, it seems to me like Wright and Borg are in basic agreement. And I get the same impression when reading Crossan.

 

We can argue over whether or not the resurrection is literal, symbolic or both but what does it mean? That is, ultimately, where I think progressive Christianity has to take the issue.

 

There has been much discussion about 2 different ways of seeing Christianity, and sometimes it is drawn on the line of literal vs metaphorical debates, and, while the debate is not entirely unavoidable, that is not ultimately where I draw the line. I would agree very much with Borg who draws the line between a lens of purity issues and a lens of Christlike compassion. Is Christianity mainly about a culture of dos and donts, of heretic and orthodox beliefs, and using things like war to force ourselves on the world? Or is it about becoming Christ like through transformation and love?

 

Since I take the latter option, that shapes how I view everything. And that alone is enough for a true fundamentalist to fork me over into the 'liberal heretic' camp. If you asked my old fundie church about where I went 'wrong' it was when I started going to Tony Campolo seminars. It was there that Christianity became real for me. And ultimately, meaning is found in praxis not theory.

 

Therefore, I can read Tony Campolo and NT Wright and Mother Theresa and St Francis of Assisi and John Crossan and Marc Borg and Henri Nouwen and John Spong and Jim Wallis and (etc etc) and when I do, I find agreement and unity not division and disagreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also liked The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering who Jesus was and is. 

 

 

Yes, this is the N.T. Wright book I was talking about. I thought it was terrific. I'm also reading the Jim Wallis book. It's definitely worth the read. I like how he tries to move the discussion of Christian values from homosexuality and abortion to the true Christian values of aid to the poor and peacemaking. He has a lot of criticism of the Bush adminstation, especially decisions surrounding the war in Iraq. I think that's what conservatives are going to focus on and miss the entire point of his book.

 

~Sophia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is much about NT Wright that I like and agree with.

 

"He gets the conservative label because he seriously believes in the historicity of the resurrection, the virgin birth and the miracles. However, he gets the liberal label because of what he says about atonement theology and more specifically the second coming."

 

I am not sure who NT is suppose to be. Can you remind me again? Thanks. Whoever he is..these statements you said of him..sounds like my beliefs. I believe in the mircles of the Bible as real and not 'myths' also. But ovbiosuly I reject the conservative faith's elite/ members-only salvation theory and I reject their view of the rapture or that the earth is going to be burned up.

 

"I was very much into 'Jesus and the Victory of God'. If only his view on eschatology and apocalypticism was accepted by conservatives, we wouldn't have to deal with all this 'left behind' hysteria. I also liked The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering who Jesus was and is. Wright is not a traditionalist, he totally challenges the evangelical concept of hell on more than one occasion."

 

This sounds good. I think I'd like to hear more about this person and his books.:)

 

"We can argue over whether or not the resurrection is literal, symbolic or both but what does it mean? That is, ultimately, where I think progressive Christianity has to take the issue. "

 

Do you mean Progressive Christianity SHOULD make an issue on the resurrection or that they should NOT?

 

"Therefore, I can read Tony Campolo and NT Wright and Mother Theresa and St Francis of Assisi and John Crossan and Marc Borg and Henri Nouwen and John Spong and Jim Wallis and (etc etc) and when I do, I find agreement and unity not division and disagreement."

 

I find strong agreement amoung all in many elements but I may disagree with all strongly on say, that all mircles must be thrown out the wondow, especially the resurrection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NT Wright is great. I mean yeah he is pretty evangelical, but by no means is he a fundamentalist.

I read the book he did with Borg, The mean of Jesus. I loved it. You will not only be surprised by what Wright says, but by what Borg says also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beach

I am not sure who NT is suppose to be. Can you remind me again? Thanks.

 

The name of the author is N.T. Wright.

 

I mentioned in the first post that he is a theologian that I'm interested in reading.

 

He did a book with Borg called "The Meaning of Jesus".

 

He has also authored several books on viewing Jesus and Paul in their historical Jewish context as opposed to the view we've been taught since the reformation.

Edited by AletheiaRivers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service