becoming

Tom Wright & James Dunn on The New Perspective on Paul:

[link: St John’s Nottingham @YouTube]

Mark Roberts寫出了我的心聲：

Here is my fear, however. John Piper is very influential, especially among the kinds of people who would be troubled by Wright’s take on Paul. I’m afraid that many will buy and read Piper’s book before and even without ever reading Wright himself. Then they’ll quote or paraphrase Piper, without even reading Paul himself. This, I suggest, is neither Reformed, nor evangelical, nor even especially Christian. One who reads Piper should also read Wright himself, and, more importantly, should dive into a fresh examination of Scripture.

….When I read Piper’s critique and any other, and as I continue to wrestle with Wright’s own view, my main question will be: Who does the best job interpreting Paul? If it turns out that the Reformation misconstrued some of what Paul actually meant, that’s too bad, but so be it. If it turns out that we preachers have to revise what we’ve preached about justification and righteousness on the basis of what the Bible actually says, so be it. Of all people, we who stand in the line of the Reformation should seek, above all and at any cost, to grasp the true meaning of Scripture and to stake our lives and ministries on it.

In response to Simon Gathercole’s recent article on CT, Scot Mcknight has started a series to introduce the NPP (New Perspective on Paul) to common readers.

NPP, according to Scot, is “The most significant development, outside of historical Jesus studies, in biblical studies in the last 50 years.”

Be sure to read them all.

————————–

Update (Aug 10 2007): Gathercole’s article is now online. [HT: Mark Goodacre]

In the beginning, God created someone that can write a book faster than you can read. Then He created a list of bloggers that can post summaries and reflections faster than you even aware that the book is actually out!

This is crazy.