http://www.dennyburk.com/n-t-wright-dismisses-penal-substitution/ A commentary on theology, politics, and culture Sun, 12 Feb 2012 06:07:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.dennyburk.com/n-t-wright-dismisses-penal-substitution/#comment-68288 Alarming Resources at Redeemer | Light of the World Tue, 12 Jul 2011 00:39:27 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=694#comment-68288 [...] N. T. Wright dismisses penal substitution [...] [...] N. T. Wright dismisses penal substitution [...]

]]> http://www.dennyburk.com/n-t-wright-dismisses-penal-substitution/#comment-6680 G.L.W. Johnson Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:41:38 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=694#comment-6680 Excuse me for the way the above reads- it should be-'what NTW said in the past compared to what he is now driving at' Excuse me for the way the above reads- it should be-’what NTW said in the past compared to what he is now driving at’

]]> http://www.dennyburk.com/n-t-wright-dismisses-penal-substitution/#comment-6678 G.L.W. Johnson Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:33:50 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=694#comment-6678 Mark Would my expression 'rallying to his support' accurately describe your assessment?Laying aside for the time being what NTW said in the pass is driving at-do you think that Denny's( and Carson) take has any merit? Mark
Would my expression ‘rallying to his support’ accurately describe your assessment?Laying aside for the time being what NTW said in the pass is driving at-do you think that Denny’s( and Carson) take has any merit?

]]> http://www.dennyburk.com/n-t-wright-dismisses-penal-substitution/#comment-6624 Mark Horne » The objectivity of teaching Tue, 24 Apr 2007 21:58:02 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=694#comment-6624 [...] We are seeing some analysis of Wright that is every bit as amazing as Wright’s defense of Chalke.  Just to point out the obvious, the fact that Wright has a long track record of teaching a vicarious penal substitutionary atonement is not a question that is dependent on anything he said in the last week.  He may have apostatized (I don’t believe it, but it is logically possible) and he may not privately believe what he teaches publicly (don’t believe that either), but the question of his public teaching is to be settled by his public teaching.  And for years thousands of readers (many of whom, like me, probably only recently heard the name “Chalke” and have read nothing by him) have learned that Christ died under the judicial wrath of God that we deserved so that for us who entrust ourselve to him there is now no  condemnation. [...] [...] We are seeing some analysis of Wright that is every bit as amazing as Wright’s defense of Chalke.  Just to point out the obvious, the fact that Wright has a long track record of teaching a vicarious penal substitutionary atonement is not a question that is dependent on anything he said in the last week.  He may have apostatized (I don’t believe it, but it is logically possible) and he may not privately believe what he teaches publicly (don’t believe that either), but the question of his public teaching is to be settled by his public teaching.  And for years thousands of readers (many of whom, like me, probably only recently heard the name “Chalke” and have read nothing by him) have learned that Christ died under the judicial wrath of God that we deserved so that for us who entrust ourselve to him there is now no  condemnation. [...]

]]> http://www.dennyburk.com/n-t-wright-dismisses-penal-substitution/#comment-6596 G.L.W. Johnson Tue, 24 Apr 2007 14:50:44 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=694#comment-6596 Denny You have no doubt seen D.A. Carson's review that is linked by Justin Taylor. As expected, the Wright fan club is already rallying to his support, i.e. Mark Horne who is an out-spoken defender of what goes by the name 'The Federal Vision'. A number of the FV men have assimulated Wright's views on justification along with his formulations on the nature of saving faith and the non factor of imputation. Wright's take on penal substitution will probably find shelter as well in the circles sympathetic to the FV. Denny
You have no doubt seen D.A. Carson’s review that is linked by Justin Taylor. As expected, the Wright fan club is already rallying to his support, i.e. Mark Horne who is an out-spoken defender of what goes by the name ‘The Federal Vision’. A number of the FV men have assimulated Wright’s views on justification along with his formulations on the nature of saving faith and the non factor of imputation. Wright’s take on penal substitution will probably find shelter as well in the circles sympathetic to the FV.

]]> http://www.dennyburk.com/n-t-wright-dismisses-penal-substitution/#comment-6594 N.T. Wright and the New Perspective « John Ploughman Tue, 24 Apr 2007 14:01:11 +0000 http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=694#comment-6594 [...] Denny Burk has a sharp criticism of Wright’s affirmation of the term “penal substitution” without its historical use. I suspect that Bishop N. T. Wright would not appreciate my saying that he has dismissed penal substitution, especially since he himself maintains that he holds to “something that can be called ‘penal substitution.’” But this affirmation is precisely the problem. His definition of penal substitution is clearly at odds with what penal substitution is (at least historically defined). [...] [...] Denny Burk has a sharp criticism of Wright’s affirmation of the term “penal substitution” without its historical use. I suspect that Bishop N. T. Wright would not appreciate my saying that he has dismissed penal substitution, especially since he himself maintains that he holds to “something that can be called ‘penal substitution.’” But this affirmation is precisely the problem. His definition of penal substitution is clearly at odds with what penal substitution is (at least historically defined). [...]

]]>