Comments on: More Wrong from Wright http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/ A commentary on theology, politics, and culture Sat, 11 Feb 2012 07:44:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Yvette http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-17600 Yvette Thu, 04 Oct 2007 02:04:44 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-17600 Wonders of Oyarsa, Thanks for providing CONTEXT! Wonders of Oyarsa,

Thanks for providing CONTEXT!

]]> By: Denny Burk » Doug Wilson on the Politics of N. T. Wright http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-17177 Denny Burk » Doug Wilson on the Politics of N. T. Wright Mon, 01 Oct 2007 13:04:53 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-17177 [...] This is likely the first and last time you will see the word “turd” in one of my blog posts. But this is the metaphor that the inimitable Doug Wilson uses to describe the current polarities of the American political landscape. In his commentary “The Fox News Jesus or the CNN Jesus?,” Wilson responds to Joseph Laconte’s critique of N. T. Wright that appeared last week in the web version of The Weekly Standard (see my “More Wrong from Wright“). Wilson’s basic point is that choosing between the “Fox News Jesus” and the “CNN Jesus” is like choosing between cat turds and dog turds. They’re certainly different, but neither one is very desirable. Wilson writes: [...] [...] This is likely the first and last time you will see the word “turd” in one of my blog posts. But this is the metaphor that the inimitable Doug Wilson uses to describe the current polarities of the American political landscape. In his commentary “The Fox News Jesus or the CNN Jesus?,” Wilson responds to Joseph Laconte’s critique of N. T. Wright that appeared last week in the web version of The Weekly Standard (see my “More Wrong from Wright“). Wilson’s basic point is that choosing between the “Fox News Jesus” and the “CNN Jesus” is like choosing between cat turds and dog turds. They’re certainly different, but neither one is very desirable. Wilson writes: [...]

]]> By: Mason Beecroft http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-16880 Mason Beecroft Sat, 29 Sep 2007 01:16:50 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-16880 Nothing like "catholicism" to get in the way of interpreting scripture! What? Even with a small "c"? "Ground control to Major Tom..." Nothing like “catholicism” to get in the way of interpreting scripture!

What?

Even with a small “c”?

“Ground control to Major Tom…”

]]> By: Denny Burk http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-16596 Denny Burk Thu, 27 Sep 2007 23:51:45 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-16596 Dear Matt (in #18), I accept the reproof. I am sorry for the edgy language and have removed it from the post. Thanks, Denny Proverbs 27:6 "Faithful are the wounds of a friend, But deceitful are the kisses of an enemy." Dear Matt (in #18),

I accept the reproof. I am sorry for the edgy language and have removed it from the post.

Thanks,
Denny

Proverbs 27:6 “Faithful are the wounds of a friend, But deceitful are the kisses of an enemy.”

]]> By: MK http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-16580 MK Thu, 27 Sep 2007 22:38:10 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-16580 "One would expect this kind of moral equivalence from a lefty hack. It’s surprising (and disappointing) to hear it coming from and “evangelical” Bishop of the Anglican Church." Do we have to resort to name calling (lefty hack)? Shouldn't it be surprising (and disappointing) to hear name calling coming from a theologian? “One would expect this kind of moral equivalence from a lefty hack. It’s surprising (and disappointing) to hear it coming from and “evangelical” Bishop of the Anglican Church.”

Do we have to resort to name calling (lefty hack)? Shouldn’t it be surprising (and disappointing) to hear name calling coming from a theologian?

]]> By: Bryan L http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-16407 Bryan L Thu, 27 Sep 2007 10:17:57 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-16407 Gunny, The thing that is great about Wright though that I don't know if can be said for the others that you mentioned is that Wright really takes serious the OT context of the verses that Paul quotes and really takes into consideration the narrative of Israel that is in the background of Paul's thought and it's relation to why Paul says what he does. I remember reading an article on a passage in Romans by Schreiner once and he basically dismissed the need to take the actual context of the OT verse into account in interpreting how Paul was using it and basically seemed to suggest that it really didn't matter and that Paul was sort of just proof-texting. Blessings, Bryan L Gunny,
The thing that is great about Wright though that I don’t know if can be said for the others that you mentioned is that Wright really takes serious the OT context of the verses that Paul quotes and really takes into consideration the narrative of Israel that is in the background of Paul’s thought and it’s relation to why Paul says what he does.

I remember reading an article on a passage in Romans by Schreiner once and he basically dismissed the need to take the actual context of the OT verse into account in interpreting how Paul was using it and basically seemed to suggest that it really didn’t matter and that Paul was sort of just proof-texting.

Blessings,
Bryan L

]]> By: GUNNY HARTMAN http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-16367 GUNNY HARTMAN Thu, 27 Sep 2007 05:26:02 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-16367 "Does Wright still have the best commentary on Romans in print?" Obviously, that's a bit of a subjective issue. Personally, when I preached through Romans I really appreciated Schreiner, John Murray, Doug Moo, and Cranfield. MLJ and ML and Hodge also were helpfully in the honorable mention category. For me, and again I'm no hater, Wright would not be in my top tier as far as usefulness. “Does Wright still have the best commentary on Romans in print?”

Obviously, that’s a bit of a subjective issue.

Personally, when I preached through Romans I really appreciated Schreiner, John Murray, Doug Moo, and Cranfield. MLJ and ML and Hodge also were helpfully in the honorable mention category. For me, and again I’m no hater, Wright would not be in my top tier as far as usefulness.

]]> By: jeff miller http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-16366 jeff miller Thu, 27 Sep 2007 05:17:58 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-16366 Wright's catholicism and his "church/state" error get in the way of what would be great interpretation of scripture. Does Wright still have the best commentary on Romans in print? Wright’s catholicism and his “church/state” error get in the way of what would be great interpretation of scripture.

Does Wright still have the best commentary on Romans in print?

]]> By: paul http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-16362 paul Thu, 27 Sep 2007 04:19:22 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-16362 Denny, you've become an artful dodger. I tip my hat to you. On this (and other posts) people have asked you about things, and your only response is to giggle about the Wright word plays. So, here's my question Denny: when it comes to politics, why are you SO one sided. It doesn't even seem like you listen to the other side. You see people on the left, you talk trash. End of story. But let's face it: THE REPUBLICAN WAY AIN'T WORKIN' DOGG! Some fresh ideas might be helpful. Wright is offering them. They might be naive, but listening to all sides in a discussion is the only way to come to the right answer. Especially when the guy who sent us to war in Iraq doesn't know the difference between a Mandala and a Nelson Mandela. By the way, my CD comes out tomorrow. Buy a copy. Denny,

you’ve become an artful dodger. I tip my hat to you. On this (and other posts) people have asked you about things, and your only response is to giggle about the Wright word plays.

So, here’s my question Denny: when it comes to politics, why are you SO one sided. It doesn’t even seem like you listen to the other side. You see people on the left, you talk trash. End of story. But let’s face it: THE REPUBLICAN WAY AIN’T WORKIN’ DOGG!

Some fresh ideas might be helpful. Wright is offering them. They might be naive, but listening to all sides in a discussion is the only way to come to the right answer. Especially when the guy who sent us to war in Iraq doesn’t know the difference between a Mandala and a Nelson Mandela.

By the way, my CD comes out tomorrow. Buy a copy.

]]> By: Kevin Jones http://www.dennyburk.com/more-wrong-from-wright/#comment-16357 Kevin Jones Thu, 27 Sep 2007 04:13:00 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=886#comment-16357 Actually, 3 Lefties make a Wrighty...sorry :) Actually, 3 Lefties make a Wrighty…sorry :)

]]>