Living Oracles
Find us on Facebook
  • Meditations
  • About
  • Audio
  • Contact

The Problem of N.T. Wright

4/3/2020

0 Comments

 
I cannot comprehend the adulation accorded to Nicholas Thomas Wright.
 
He may be a giant of the theological and academic world but that is no guarantee of his soundness or pastoral worth. It is from the context of the parish that I critique this man where puzzlement and confusion over his teaching is prevalent.
 
Wright writes smugly of his new and revolutionary insights that correct traditional teaching from the age of Augustine. He consigns the teaching of the Reformation, and especially Luther, to the dark cellars of medievalism. He liberally insults the old cronies who adhere to the traditional doctrines of soteriology. All the way through his theological meanderings and muddle he denies the essential and key doctrines of the faith that attaches us savingly to the God of our rescue from moral perversion and condemnation.
 
Academics may like to play theological chess with him and glorify their reputations by clinging to his coat-tails but he is slowly impregnating the minds, even of intentionally loyal advocates of Holy Scripture, with notions that ease them away from the truths of divine revelation.
 
I continue with some scribblings from some occasional notes that lie on my desk, and which I hope to amplify with more deliberation and evidence. I simply take the opportunity, following his disastrous comments in Time magazine to launch forward from the starting blocks.
 
I realize that this contribution is insufficient but my disgust with said author is huge, and I believe the danger he poses to authentic Christian faith is enormous, seeping into the thought of so many transfixed by his reputation and celebrity.
 
Just these thoughts for now:
 
There is something very dubious about NTW. On the basis  of the "analogy of faith", so-called. He counters the authority of Scripture, tearing fundamental theology to shreds. I think his method is sinister. His enchantment with a particular subjective inclination is so destructive. He arrogantly dismisses the mind of the Church, long established, on human acceptance with God (the ministry and revolution by the hand and wit of Luther is not a valid analogy whatsoever).
 
Even Catholic history manifests a basic orthodoxy in the procedure of controversy between the Reformed and the Romans. Hans Kung points to the different theological concerns of the people of God in various eras, and the theme of getting right with God is persistent in the history of Catholic thought. The evangelical conversion of Cardinal Contarini and the Italian “spirituali” (including Micheangelo) testify to the lively thought on justification in Roman circles. The two sides in 16th century debate recognize common issues and intent on the topic  which definitely do not match the novelties of N.T. Wright. The two contenders for truth share a common purpose as to how sinners reconcile with God.
 
For Wright justification is not a salvific matter at all, but a formal identification with a community that ostensibly recognizes the kingship of Christ, but that due status of the Lord Jesus stems from his salvific achievement (Isaiah 53, especially vv 9-12). There is no warmth for the soul in Wright’s theologizing, for many of us still feel the weight and burden of our sin and seek the pardon and acceptance of the Lord whom we have offended so unjustly and unworthily, even if it is a medieval feeling in the thought of some - especially among unbelievers.
 
Wright affords  no pastoral consolation, no personal security to the anxious and convicted soul. He cheapens valid Christian experience with snide asides (more later). We simply have a contract with a God  who has ceased to insist upon certain Old Testament ordinances. We lose our assurance of reconciliation with God, pending the verdict on our attachment to him disclosed at the final assize. That’s the way I see it, if I understand Wright aright. But then, how can anyone be sure that they have grasped his meaning, as it changes, at least in presentation and many denials,  as a weather-vane? We all know the origin of confusion.
 
I believe Wright is fascinated with a subjective (subconscious) emotional impression that invites him to seek notoriety for the sake of personal significance. His advocacy of his view makes him big. It is all a project of self-love. If he really compared Scripture with Scripture, and did not treat of it with dash and cavalier enthusiasm (for his interpretation reveals many leaps and gaps in his application) he would be just one of the crowd of unsensational biblical expositors without a distinctive name. Again, he is frequently insulting and patronizing to the ordinary chaps who seek faithfulness to the Word of God rather than astounding and dazzling originality.
 
A comparison of this man with the pastoral and biblical skill of Martin Luther is warranted.
 
RJS
0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

      Join the mailing list.

    Subscribe

    Picture
    ...more articles.

    Archives

    January 2021
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    February 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    March 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    August 2014
    June 2014
    April 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010

    Categories

    All
    Adolescence
    Ambitions And Acquisitions
    Anglicanism
    Antinomianism
    Ascension
    Augustinianism
    Calvinism
    Celebrity
    Cheap Grace
    Christian Toy Store
    Companionship
    Confidence
    Conviction
    Death Of The Grown-up
    Desire
    Discrimination
    Electing Love
    Faith
    False Prophets
    Fellowship
    Grace
    Helplessness
    Ignorance And Inadequacy
    James Ussher
    Legalism
    Liturgy
    Longing
    Love
    Means Of Grace
    Mercy
    Moral Destitution
    Moralism
    Moses
    Pop-culture
    Prayer
    Predestination
    Pride
    Reliance
    Ritual
    Sacramentalism
    Samaritan
    Self Righteousness
    Sin And Temptation
    Social Justice
    Speech
    Thirty-Nine Articles
    Works

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.