Tom Wright takes the time to answer a blog post about his views
In case you didn’t know, Tom Wright is considered a living legend in the biblical blogosphere, it would be no exaggeration to claim him as our greatest living theologian.
So imagine our dismay when Jonathan brought us this news:
Extraordinary! Tom Wright actually takes the time to reply to a blogpost about his views on justification and gets completely ignored by those discussing him. And then he even comes back again, but only manages to inspire some guy to tell him to take up blogging. D’oh! I can’t help but feel we missed an opportunity to convert another scholar to the ranks of bibliobloggers, and what a trophy convert he would be.
So to be clear, this was a blog post talking about Tom Wright’s views on justification, Tom Wright himself takes the time to interact and then gets practically ignored by the other commentators!
As Father Stephen notes:
Take note, Bishop Wright actually says in the comment:
I don’t normally look at, let alone respond to, blogsite comments,
Aaaarrrrggghhhh!
November 22nd, 2010 at 3:19 pm
Perhaps people didn’t realize/notice that blogger Tom Wright=theologian NT Wright!
However, the two most interesting things Wright says are surely these: first, “The point … is that by the Spirit those who are already justified by faith have their lives transformed, and the final verdict will be in accordance with that transformation, imperfect though it remains.”
Now that boils down to one of two things. Either (a) that transformation is such that at whatever point they may leave this live, whether now or later, the same verdict will be announced or (b) that the verdict will vary depending on (i) how long they live and (ii) how they live during that time. If it is (a) then Wright and the traditional Reformed position are in fundamental agreement on this. If (b) Wright is in the same position as Roman Catholic theology, and all similar theologies where salvation is by human co-operation with divine grace.
The second significant thing he says is this: “I was simply stating what Paul states [in saying this]“. In other words, according to Wright it is impossible for anyone to disagree with Wright.
November 22nd, 2010 at 6:28 pm
Goy=theologian if only that had been put in my path.
November 22nd, 2010 at 8:26 pm
Hi John,
You’ve made some excellent points. Apologises, I realise that I esplaining to my gran how to suck eggs
when I say, the NT teaches that we were saved, are being saved and will be saved.
Therefore our theosis, our sanctification, or our justification – (dependent of where one’s theological tendencies lean) is of a progressive and ongoing nature.
What I would say perhaps Tom is possibly moving towards away from a more reformed position towards a more Catholic postion. My reasoning, is faith, and the understanding of what faith means. I’m no theologian, nor have I studied Greek, but from what I have picked up is ‘pisteo’ or ‘pisteuo’. Of the varying translations and transliterations, this word, sees to surmount to ‘believe’. Yet, there is so much more, including trust, and the more interesting one is faithfulness. Our faithfulness to willing pick up and bear our Cross and follow Christ and his teaching – our podvig. Now some can argue that this would happen anyway because of Christ’s faithfulness, not because of ours.
Yet, when I look to the Gospels and Christ’s teaching in regard to the Day of Judgment, we see that Christ’s Judgment, and certainly seem to be based on man’s co-operation with divine grace. For me Matt 7 and Matt 25 speaks volumes.
However, perhaps in this instance, Tom Wright is not speaking of savlation per se, but of rewards (even crowns) at the Great Resurrection, by simply reiterating St Paul (almost verbatim) from 1 Cor 3
“But each one should build with care. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames. ”
November 23rd, 2010 at 11:27 pm
But are blogs really the place for serious theological debate?
The sense I get from the blog into which Tom Wright interjects is that the blogger and those submitting comments are far more keen to dominate the conversation with their own views than to try to understand and empathose with the views of other. TNW’s comments appear to get in the way of their navel gazing! If we’re honest I guess most of us have been guilty of similar behaviour…
November 25th, 2010 at 8:48 am
I will try to get back to this topic on my own blog. For the time being I’ve been flat out trying to do some work on a magazine article, and then teaching Revelation to students at TEAM in Cambridge. Apologies.
November 25th, 2010 at 8:56 am
Forget what I just wrote!
Isn’t write simply saying justification is by faith (therefore, although he distinguishes justification and salvation, nevertheless one stands in a right relationship with God – one is ‘dikaios’ – by faith alone, whatever else may be true about one’s life), and that one’s life is the object of a verdict at the final judgement (whether one has born fruit ‘thirty, sixty or a hundredfold’, or saved ‘as through fire’, as in Phoebs’ reference)?
If that is the case, however, then I can’t see what he is saying that is different from classical Reformed theology, but Wright is adamant he is saying something different from that theology.
So right now I am simply confused about Wright! Anyone got any suggestions?
November 25th, 2010 at 8:57 am
PS confused and tired, as I notice I wrote “write” instead of “Wright” in my first sentence.