1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured NT Wright false teacher?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by evangelist6589, Oct 20, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Top Posters
Page 4 of 8
  1. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But you watched the video. Did Wright use justification to refer to those in the covenant or outside? You are using your definitions again to misrepresent what is said.
     
    #61 JonC, Oct 22, 2016
  2. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Glad you brought that point up as I forgot. That is what makes his view so objectionable. First, he denies justification is about individuals (the ungodly) then he takes the doctrine and jerks it out of its proper context and applies it to assurance not of personal acceptance before God, but assurance of part of his detestable "covenant community" that he expliclty explains how it is entered in his article on the eucharist.

    So, to answer your question he is a two-fold heretic on this doctrine as he mutilates it beyond recognition. He is a heretic because he rips it out of the INDIVIDUAL context of Romans 4 (I suppose Abraham is an individual???). He is a heretic because he misapplies it as assurance of community membership.

    How in the world can you not see he is perverting this doctrine completely into Romanism.
     
    #62 The Biblicist, Oct 22, 2016
  3. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    The biblical doctrine of justification is ALL ABOUT the individual's right relationship before God (Rom. 4:1, 23-5:2). It is NOTHING about assurance of covenant community- NOTHING. Your WORKS are all about ASSURANCE of covenant community and that is precisely what Wright's doctrine is about MERGING works with justification just as he bluntly spells out in his article on the Eurcharist.
     
    #63 The Biblicist, Oct 22, 2016
  4. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well, like I said, I'm not here to defend the guy. Heck, I find value in the works of people like Karl Barth, John Wesley and C.S. Lewis so we will never agree.

    I have had a rough day. Had my 17 yr old dog put down and got a call that a good friend and coworker died last night in his sleep. So again, if you want to discuss moral righteousness based on the Law vs a righteousness based on Christ, His death, burial, and resurrection then I'm game. But I have no interest in discussing what someone might or might not mean by what he says. He has clarified enough for me to both disagree with him and with your assessment of his words. So, if you are interested, start a thread and we will go from there.
     
    #64 JonC, Oct 22, 2016
  5. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Let me approach this from an different angle. Suppose I was to redefine "grace" to mean God's unmerited favor that consists of God producing works through you by His power, by the Holy Spirit and thus you are saved by grace without works - meaning without works originating from your power. That judgement day would such God produced works would declare you just. That is the Seventh Day Adventist view of Justification.

    What the Seventh Day Adventists have done with regard to grace is on the same scale as what Wright has done to "justification".
     
    #65 The Biblicist, Oct 22, 2016
  6. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    No, I too can take the fish and leave the bone. However, when we look at categories that determine the true nature of salvation and they are heretical, I will look for my meat in other categories of their doctrine.

    Well, that is about as good a peace offering as I could hope for (lol). Sorry about your good old dog. I love dogs and I lost quite a few.
     
    #66 The Biblicist, Oct 22, 2016
  7. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    :) Thanks. The dog was a hard thing (I doubt I will have another), but my friend dying took me by surprise. I talked to him yesterday and all was normal. His wife said he has heartburn and went to bed. When his wife went to wake him this morning he was dead.
     
    #67 JonC, Oct 22, 2016
  8. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    I am so sorry. My eyes are not good and without my glasses I can't read good. I missed the part about your co-worker dying. What a hard thing for his wife. I know its a cliche, but you just never know when your time will come. I hope the funeral goes as well as can be expected. Will remember you and yours in prayer.
     
    #68 The Biblicist, Oct 22, 2016
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    NT Wright is a Person who has dobe great work on the Resurrection of Jesus, and should be used to refute those who reject that event, but his NPP is really bad, as he basically states that the church misunderstood Pauline Justification for nearly 2000 years, and that he will correct the reformers..., as he denies

    His views on the Atonement is also lacking, as he denies Jesus death was a substitionary form for sinners....

    He also has a real hard time with Bilbical ineranncy...

    So would say pick and chose what you glean from him, as some areas good, others areas, not so much!
     
    #69 Yeshua1, Oct 24, 2016
  10. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I agree with much here....But one exception as Wright doesn't say the Church has misunderstood Paul for 2000 years. He says the Church has misunderstood Paul for about 500 years. The Reformers are not recipients of divine special revelation any more than the RCC they struggled against. John Piper made this argument against Wright (he tried to reform too years of doctrine). It is a bad argument because that was what the Reformers were doing as well.
     
    #70 JonC, Oct 24, 2016
  11. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,864
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Faith:
    Baptist
    To quibble: Wright's emphasis may be upon the Reformed debate, but he suggests that it really goes back to Augustine and continued to this day (which would, of course, include not only the Reformers but also Aquinas).

    What Paul Really Said, Lion Publishing 1997, p 115

    Ibid., p 119
     
    #71 rsr, Oct 24, 2016
  12. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    True, but we should not hold those men in so high regard that their interpretation trumps another look. This was the spirit of the Reformers when it came to doctrines accepted as biblical but which were in fact not. I just do not think it a good argument. If Wright is wrong it is not because he refuses to accept Augustine, Aquinas, or the Reformers but because he misinterprets Paul.
     
    #72 JonC, Oct 24, 2016
  13. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    true, but the reformers in my understanding of what paul was teaching did indeed hit the head of the nail, and its NT Wright who "missed the mark"...

    Think his main problem is that he is trying to create a theology that somehow can bridge the gap between Catholic church and those who received the reformation, and that cannot be done!
     
    #73 Yeshua1, Oct 24, 2016
  14. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Which I think that he does....
    Judaism at time of Jesus was busted system, God had to send another Covenant in to replace it, so Wright is wrong seeing Pharisees as being all right in their theology...
     
    #74 Yeshua1, Oct 24, 2016
  15. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,864
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I don't disagree that it's not a good argument; I was just pointing out that Wright disagrees with more than the Reformers.
     
    #75 rsr, Oct 24, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    He doesn't seem to suggest they were theologically correct, but that God's redemptive plan was consistent from beginning to end. The new did not nullify the old, it fullfilled it within the one eternal plan of God. And I absolutely agree with him on that point. Both the old and new covenants are within the covenant God made with Abraham.
     
    #76 JonC, Oct 24, 2016
  17. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Wright is wrong about justification in all of his major particulars and neither do we needs Wrights system for a consistent Biblical soteriology.


    Individual salvation has always been applied directly by God according to the "blood of the EVERLASTING covenant" (Heb. 13:20) BEFORE Abraham, DURING Moses and AFTER the first coming of Christ.

    Both the Old and New covenants are EARTHLY ADMINISTRATIONS of the "everlasting covenant." Both have qualified ministers, qualified ordinances and a qualified house of public worship. However, the OLD covenant was an EXTERNAL manifestation of the everlasting covenant whereas the NEW covenant more openly and clearly declares the SPIRITUAL manifestation of the everlasting covenant upon earth. The OLD anticipated the NEW and the NEW anticipates the Kingdom to come but all of it in its entirety is in perfect accord with the "blood of the everlasting covenant which is not completely fulfilled until there is a SINLESS new heaven and earth with a SINLESS new glorified people livng in it.
     
    #77 The Biblicist, Oct 24, 2016
  18. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, I agree with both you and Wright on this point. Both the Old Covenant and the New Covenant reside in a larger Promise. I still like the idea of a wheel with spokes (the old and new covenants being spokes within a larger redemptive promise).
     
    #78 JonC, Oct 25, 2016
  19. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    It is the MEANS that Wright claims that brings us into that COVENANT NEW CREATION relationship that separates him from my view. He specifically identifies his NEW CREATION THEOLOGY as "The Eucharistic theology of new creation".
     
    #79 The Biblicist, Oct 25, 2016
  20. Earth Wind and Fire

    Earth Wind and Fire Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    33,898
    Likes Received:
    1,660
    Faith:
    Baptist
    WHAT? Eucharistic nonsense!!!!!
     
    #80 Earth Wind and Fire, Oct 25, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
Page 4 of 8
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...