Search results

What do you think he means by "works of the torah"? To be clear, what do you think Wright believe Paul means by "works of the law"?

That might be your motive here, but when you try to expose his error, you do so via strawmen. Thus my challenge goes unanswered. I've yet to really see people here accurately present his views much less dismantle them. It's easier to take down the strawman.

Now you misunderstand me. I'm not saying Wright is correct or incorrect in his views. I'm saying that it appears you are forcing your understanding of Paul in Wright's explanation. What Wright means and what you mean concerning Paul is not the same. Therefore, your critique of him has not been...

I think I see where the confusion is happening. I'm not sure you understand what Wright believes Paul to mean by "works of Torah". You think it means "becoming morally acceptable before God on judgment day just as obeying conscience would have for its aim becoming morally acceptable before God...

This only disqualifies you from having a valid opinion. To be so close minded prevents honest dialogue. So be it. Your welcome.

The sacraments aside, since you've not provided a quotation to prove that (that I have seen). What do you do with Romans 2 and the judgment of God based good works? Since justification IS a legal term and Romans 2 IS a courtroom setting (giving us the context for how Paul defines...

This is not synergism, unless you mean synergism in the sense of sanctification. Synergism in the sense that after initial justification, there will be good works to follow. Do you disagree with that? And Calvin (I think he qualifies as a reformer) said, "It is not our doctrine that the faith...

2 things: Wright claims to only give a "bare definition." And his definition is simply a lexical definition not meant to be what you classify as a "Biblical definition." Point in fact, Paul assumes the lexical definition. Rom. 4:5–8 isn't actually a definition of justification either. So you are...

Before I respond to you OP, I want to address something you said in a previous thread. But let me begin by scolding you for not providing citation for quotation. Good dialogue cannot happen without this. I can't expect you to follow my arguments that I provide unless I provide the means for you...

It would be extremely helpful if you not only quoted him but also provided the link of the quotation. I humbly request that because I suspect he is not talking about Rom 4 but Rom 2. And I think he may be presenting the arguments of Judaism of his day ("attempt to confine grace to one race")...

I conflated a couple of your posts: Ok... he does not believe or teach soul sleep. He simply points out the misappropriated focus on a disembodied existence in heaven (life after death) rather than the biblical focus of restoration and new creation (life AFTER life after death). Defending...

Not at all in regards to soul sleep. And he never claims his view is unique, only that the church has lost its emphasis on new creation and traded it for a disembodied heaven.

Which Central Baptist Seminary are you referring to?

Quite right... however Piper not so much. I'm a big JP fan. And while he does maintain a view on new creation and resurrection (cf. his last few chapters in Future Grace for example), he doesn't seem consistent in his language. I mean that Piper uses heaven language quite frequently without...

Not just heaven... so much of western theology and philosophy comes right out of neo-platonic thinking. Gnosticism still roots its ugly head when people focus on "going to heaven" and ignore the fact that God made us to have bodies, God created a place to dwell with humans (not the other way...

Are we getting so bored with a lack of KJVOers here that we have to bring them in via Kinney??? I may just leave the BB if that is the case.

Hahahahaha... He said "Hell books"

So no semper reformanda??? All the treasures of Scripture have been mined? There is nothing new to discover? We've reached the epitome of knowledge of God's Word??? What's the point in PhD's then, if there is nothing new to contribute to the scholarly community???? I wish you would have told me...

So many things right with this post, Evan! You mentioned Beale! You provided a link to the book you are talking about!! Keep it up!!!

He has it. He hasn't stated whether he's read it yet. He got it at my behest. I always told him that if he was unhappy with it, I'd buy it from him. Wright argues that Christians incorrectly focus too much on life after death (heaven) when they should be focusing on life after life after death...