Comments on: David Mathis Critiques N. T. Wright on Justification http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/ A commentary on theology, politics, and culture Sun, 12 Feb 2012 06:07:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Mark http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54110 Mark Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:34:59 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54110 Scott, Are there any justifications for restricting "nomos" to merely circumcision, dietary laws, and religious days? This should be good. Scott,

Are there any justifications for restricting “nomos” to merely circumcision, dietary laws, and religious days? This should be good.

]]> By: Scott http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54108 Scott Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:51:21 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54108 Some of us have studied Hellenistic usage of "nomos" - quite extensively, actually. Some of us have studied Hellenistic usage of “nomos” – quite extensively, actually.

]]> By: Mark http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54107 Mark Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:14:28 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54107 I find it humorous that people who are critical of the pro-Piper circle are bannering around Wright and his so-called exegetical masterpieces. I also find it amazing, being formally a theological student myself who has studied the materials written by Dunn, Sanders, etc., think that the NPP view of the law is more biblical. Obviously, many of you who support Wright don't know much about the issues surrounding Paul and early Jewish uses of the Greek word "nomos." I find it humorous that people who are critical of the pro-Piper circle are bannering around Wright and his so-called exegetical masterpieces. I also find it amazing, being formally a theological student myself who has studied the materials written by Dunn, Sanders, etc., think that the NPP view of the law is more biblical. Obviously, many of you who support Wright don’t know much about the issues surrounding Paul and early Jewish uses of the Greek word “nomos.”

]]> By: Erick http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54087 Erick Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:16:08 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54087 Wright is not ignorant of the exegetical details of the texts in the Pauline Corpus, but one of the issues associated with his method is too much synthesis and not enought biblicism or sticking to the text. This is why there is alot hashed together in one of his sentences concerning creation, end times, righteousness, justice, etc,etc. For instance, it would seem as though he simply ignores the close contrast between "sin" and "righteousness" in 2 Cor 5:21. There is an exchange here. Christ becomes sin and consequently we become righteousness. It may not be referring to the righteousness "of Christ" (understood as all the good deeds he did on earth) but it sure does refer somehow to the quality or state of being righteous. Wright is not ignorant of the exegetical details of the texts in the Pauline Corpus, but one of the issues associated with his method is too much synthesis and not enought biblicism or sticking to the text. This is why there is alot hashed together in one of his sentences concerning creation, end times, righteousness, justice, etc,etc.

For instance, it would seem as though he simply ignores the close contrast between “sin” and “righteousness” in 2 Cor 5:21. There is an exchange here. Christ becomes sin and consequently we become righteousness. It may not be referring to the righteousness “of Christ” (understood as all the good deeds he did on earth) but it sure does refer somehow to the quality or state of being righteous.

]]> By: John Holmberg http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54085 John Holmberg Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:23:21 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54085 Adam & Tom, It was written in Themelios by a Southern Baptist pastor, subsequently posted by a anti-Wright conservative Southern Baptist. What did you expect? Did you expect any amount of objectivity? For some reason conservatives (especially Calvinists for some reason) think N.T. Wright is the anti-Christ. Liberals think he's conservative. I like this guy! Adam & Tom,

It was written in Themelios by a Southern Baptist pastor, subsequently posted by a anti-Wright conservative Southern Baptist.

What did you expect? Did you expect any amount of objectivity?

For some reason conservatives (especially Calvinists for some reason) think N.T. Wright is the anti-Christ.

Liberals think he’s conservative.

I like this guy!

]]> By: Tom 1st http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54084 Tom 1st Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:41:09 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54084 Yeah, it's pretty unfair to say he hasn't engaged Piper. Also, Wright works from the structure of a passage down to the details. Structural analysis is a perfectly legitimate way of doing exegesis. Furthermore, Wright's book is entirely about doing exegesis from larger structures right down to the very words. Indeed, 2/3 of the chapter titles are merely named after biblical books and they go on to do a lot of exegetical work. I don't care who one thinks is right or wrong here, but this is a pretty slanted criticism...seriously, I think a freshman in highschool could've come up with something better. Yeah, it’s pretty unfair to say he hasn’t engaged Piper.

Also, Wright works from the structure of a passage down to the details. Structural analysis is a perfectly legitimate way of doing exegesis.

Furthermore, Wright’s book is entirely about doing exegesis from larger structures right down to the very words. Indeed, 2/3 of the chapter titles are merely named after biblical books and they go on to do a lot of exegetical work.

I don’t care who one thinks is right or wrong here, but this is a pretty slanted criticism…seriously, I think a freshman in highschool could’ve come up with something better.

]]> By: Adam Omelianchuk http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54083 Adam Omelianchuk Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:32:47 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54083 Wright is *in error Wright is *in error

]]> By: Adam Omelianchuk http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54082 Adam Omelianchuk Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:23:46 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54082 I've been reading through Wright's book (and just finished Piper's) and I think he has been interacting with him just fine. In fact, Piper is the one who writes more topically, while Wright is engrossed in the text. I think Piper's fans (the reviewer works for Piper) wanted a book addressing Piper's bullet points, and what they got was a summary of Wright's views about justification. As far as I can tell the discussion is going like this: PIPER: Wright is error WRIGHT: No I am not. That is about as exciting as it gets. I’ve been reading through Wright’s book (and just finished Piper’s) and I think he has been interacting with him just fine. In fact, Piper is the one who writes more topically, while Wright is engrossed in the text. I think Piper’s fans (the reviewer works for Piper) wanted a book addressing Piper’s bullet points, and what they got was a summary of Wright’s views about justification. As far as I can tell the discussion is going like this:

PIPER: Wright is error

WRIGHT: No I am not.

That is about as exciting as it gets.

]]> By: TM http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54079 TM Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:33:11 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54079 Shocking. I just discovered that the author of that review works for Desiring God. Shocking. I just discovered that the author of that review works for Desiring God.

]]> By: TM http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54078 TM Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:30:41 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/david-mathis-critiques-n-t-wright-on-justification/#comment-54078 It's because Wright is not in the Focker-Burk 'Circle of Trust', so it doesn't matter what he writes, he'll be lampooned. It's funny how some people, like Piper, have attained such a celestial status that whatever they stand for or against, Burk and Company will rally behind him and just hit 'repeat'. I'm quite sure if Piper came out this afternoon in support of saving the Palm Cockatoo, this blog would be consumed with writing about it until Piper gets a new groove. It’s because Wright is not in the Focker-Burk ‘Circle of Trust’, so it doesn’t matter what he writes, he’ll be lampooned. It’s funny how some people, like Piper, have attained such a celestial status that whatever they stand for or against, Burk and Company will rally behind him and just hit ‘repeat’. I’m quite sure if Piper came out this afternoon in support of saving the Palm Cockatoo, this blog would be consumed with writing about it until Piper gets a new groove.

]]>