NT Wright,re-evaluating Paul?

[Frogster]

Can you answer my question please...

Do you reject the reformation because Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Vermigli, etc were scholars and their reforming work depended upon that scholarship?

Do you receive revelation,or just introject Wright because of a piece of paper?

 

[MamaZ]

Can you answer my question please...

Do you reject the reformation because Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Vermigli, etc were scholars and their reforming work depended upon that scholarship?

So you believe the reformation only came to be bacause some called Luther and Calvin scholars?

 

[dies-l]

I find it interesting that so many are willing to dismiss the work of certain theologians, pastors, and scholars as heresy, yet are unwilling to actually take the time to find out what they are disagreeing with. I have found that the works of N.T. Wright are quite orthodox and exigetically sound, while being quite though provoking. I would encourage those who are arguing against his theology to actually read one of his books. You might just be pleasantly surprised.

 

[ebia]

Do you receive revelation,or just introject Wright because of a piece of paper?

Revelation and study are not an either or but a both/and.

Please note that I have explicitly said one should not automatically accept everything simply because it is based on scholarship, but neither should one automatically reject it.

Now, can you please stop evading the question and answer it.

 

[ebia]

So you believe the reformation only came to be bacause some called Luther and Calvin scholars?

God can and does work through scholars and scholarship just as he works through many other means. Just as God used the scholarship of Luther, Calvin, Vermigli, to reform the church of their time he can use the scholarship of people like Tom Wright to do the same. The reformers would be aghast at the idea that one could accept their work but reject out of hand later scholarship that is potentially reforming. They knew that the church would always need reforming, they said so explicity, and they knew that scholarship would be part of that just as it was part of their reformation.

 

[ebia]

I find it interesting that so many are willing to dismiss the work of certain theologians, pastors, and scholars as heresy, yet are unwilling to actually take the time to find out what they are disagreeing with. I have found that the works of N.T. Wright are quite orthodox and exigetically sound, while being quite though provoking. I would encourage those who are arguing against his theology to actually read one of his books. You might just be pleasantly surprised.

Exactly. If we were talking about John Dominic Crossan then I wouldn't be shocked but the reaction, but ...

 

[MamaZ]

God can and does work through scholars and scholarship just as he works through many other means. Just as God used the scholarship of Luther, Calvin, Vermigli, to reform the church of their time he can use the scholarship of people like Tom Wright to do the same. The reformers would be aghast at the idea that one could accept their work but reject out of hand later scholarship that is potentially reforming. They knew that the church would always need reforming, they said so explicity, and they knew that scholarship would be part of that just as it was part of their reformation.

What does the body of Christ need to be reformed from? It is not the sholarship of men that reforms His Church.. It is Christ himself that builds His Church.. God can even use a donkey to speak forth what He wants to say.

 

[Frogster]

Revelation and study are not an either or but a both/and.

Please note that I have explicitly said one should not automatically accept everything simply because it is based on scholarship, but neither should one automatically reject it.

Now, can you please stop evading the question and answer it.

I did,but your love if intellect has prevented you from understanding.At least I have posted scripture,you are just trying to play semantical cornering games.

Acts 4:13
Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated, common men, they were astonished. And they recognized that they had been with Jesus.

Sooo,what about Peter and John,did they need scholars? Last I heard,fishing was very blue collar,not Princeton!

 

[ebia]

What does the body of Christ need to be reformed from?

You won't know unless you are prepared to listen to people who might have soemthing important to say.

The reformers themselves said the church would need constant reforming, that the "Reformation (TM)" was not a one-off thing but a constant process. Reject that principle and you are as good as back in pre-reformation Catholicism.

It is not the sholarship of men that reforms His Church.

It was through the scholarship of men that God reformed his church in the Reformation. If you reject in-principle God reforming through scholarship then you reject the Reformation itself.

It is Christ himself that builds His Church.

And one of the ways he does it is through scholarship.

God can even use a donkey to speak forth what He wants to say.

But not every ass is speaking for God. (Mat 11:15)

 

[ebia]

I did,but your love if intellect has prevented you from understanding.

Then give a straight answer an idiot like me can understand:
Do you reject the reformation because Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Vermigli, etc were scholars and their reforming work depended upon that scholarship?

At least I have posted scripture,

Perhaps you've missed all the allusions to scripture because I haven't put verse numbers by each one.

you are just trying to play semantical cornering games.

No, I'm challenging the incredible inconsistancy in your position.

Sooo,what about Peter and John,did they need scholars? Last I heard,fishing was very blue collar,not Princeton!

No-one is saying that God only works through scholars.

Though it has been noted that 1st Century Rabbis often worked at a menial job to bring home the daily bread, so it is not impossible that one of those fishermen was rather more scholarly than is generally assumed.

 

[dies-l]

What does the body of Christ need to be reformed from?

I don't know what Wright's answer would be in this instance. However, my answer is that the Church needs to be reformed from superficiality.

It is not the sholarship of men that reforms His Church.. It is Christ himself that builds His Church.. God can even use a donkey to speak forth what He wants to say.

However, God has, throughout history, often used articulate and educated men, such as Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Arminius, and let's not forget Paul, to bring about the reformations that were needed. This is not to say that the education is a prerequisite to being used by God in this capacity, only that it is one tool that God often uses to equip His servants to accomplish His will.

 

[dies-l]

Exactly. If we were talking about John Dominic Crossan then I wouldn't be shocked but the reaction, but ...

There are plenty of scholars that I can think of who I would consider far too liberal to be taken seriously by anyone who respect orthodox Christianity (Crossan among them). Bishop Wright is clearly not in this camp. I actually first became aware of him because of article of his that was given to me by one of my very Conservative Christian friends. I wish more of our Conservative friends would take the time to read his work, rather than insisting (incorrectly) that educated men have never done anything for the church.

 

[MamaZ]

God has also used mere common men such as Moses and Jonah. All men are just common men. Peter was a fishermen for pity sakes..

 

[dies-l]

God has also used mere common men such as Moses and Jonah. All men are just common men. Peter was a fishermen for pity sakes..

I don't think that anyone here disagrees with you on that point. God uses men and women of all types, including very ordinary and uneducated people. But, there are some who seem to be arguing that education automatically makes one suspect or that God does not use educated people. The argument seems to be that, because N.T. Wright takes a well-educated approach to Scripture, he must be wrong. This is frankly absurd! God can and does use education and intellect as one tool in equipping certain of His servants.

 

[ebia]

God has also used mere common men such as Moses and Jonah.

No-one has said otherwise. Though I'm not to sure that your examples are good ones it doesn't really matter because nobody is disputing the point. Indeed, I've given an explicity example of such myself earlier in the thread (Amos).

 

[TheGMan]

Sooo,what about Peter and John,did they need scholars? Last I heard,fishing was very blue collar,not Princeton!

And yet Peter and John would eventually write their epistles in refined Greek. Not bad for a couple of Galilean fishermen.

Scholarship is not essential to respond to HaShem's calling but He uses all things for His purposes. You shouldn't be so quick to dismiss scholars who have worked to understand His revelation.

The Mishley Shlomo says:

Wisdom calls aloud in the street, she raises her voice in the public squares at the head of the noisy streets she cries out, in the gateways of the city she makes her speech: "How long will you simple ones love your simple ways? How long will mockers delight in mockery and fools hate knowledge?

 

[Bro_Sam]

Has anyone heard of this? To me it sounds like some want to "re-evaluate'" scripture.He indicates that we need to learn about first century Judaism. He believes that what Paul meant by justification was an issue of Gentile and Jewish believers getting along and accepting one another. To me that sounds like a watering down of the book of Galatians.And obscuring what justification really is.

It is called NPP,new perspective on Paul.From what I have read on sites already,I dont like the smell of it.I also dont like when a scholar is given to much credence,or is over quoted.


One note I would like to add is this.As far as the climate of the first century goes,we saw the viloence of Paul against the Christians,and then we saw that same collective violence visited upon him,after conversion.So I think that stonings and beatings,give us a good idea,of the times.I say this because Wright indicates that he thinks that there was not a big problem between unsaved Jews,and Christians.

I do know that Todd Friel has discussed his writings at great length, so you might want to look into what Todd has written.

 

[Frogster]

No-one has said otherwise. Though I'm not to sure that your examples are good ones it doesn't really matter because nobody is disputing the point. Indeed, I've given an explicity example of such myself earlier in the thread (Amos).

If you really believed in one receiving revelation,you would not be all that thrilled about intellect.

 

[Frogster]

And yet Peter and John would eventually write their epistles in refined Greek. Not bad for a couple of Galilean fishermen.

Scholarship is not essential to respond to HaShem's calling but He uses all things for His purposes. You shouldn't be so quick to dismiss scholars who have worked to understand His revelation.

The Mishley Shlomo says:

So.....I know a man who speaks several languages,yet he cant understand grace.

 

[ebia]

If you really believed in one receiving revelation,you would not be all that thrilled about intellect.

You're the one creating false dichotomies. I'm happy that God works through scholars like Jerimiah, Luke, Paul, Calvin, Luther, Vermigli, - and through less scholarly people like Amos, Mark perhaps, ... I have made it clear that I don't take scholarship to automatically mean that God is working through somebody, and that God can and does work through 'ordinary' people.

You are the one demanding, against all the evidence of scripture and history, that God can only work through the unschooled.

Can you please stop evading, and properly answer the question I've asked numerous time.