Featured Do These beliefs take NT Wright Out From orthodoxy then?

No, I don't think N.T. Wright is unorthodox (although he may be wrong). I'd suggest reading his theology rather than reading on his theology. While many disagree with him, despite their disagreement some (e.g., John Piper) note his commitment to Scripture. What he is saying is not a denial of Paul's words, but a questioning of our interpretation within the context of the epistles (and IMHO he makes some very good observations).

 

From what I've read of him I don't know that he has made that many mistakes. I think that there is validity to many of his observations. Keeping in mind that he is Anglican, there are some areas where I disagree with him and I am not certain of some of his conclusions regarding Paul. What has he wrote regarding the nature of Salvation that you view as a mistake? (I have not read very much of NT Wright).

 

The only criticism that I can think of for NT Wright is that I am not sure that he has defined grace adequately in the Jewish religion. He rightly describes Jewish salvation by grace (salvation, to the Jews, was a matter of Covenant rather than works…and Reformation thought has ignored this fact) but I don’t know that he adequately presents a picture of how they understood that grace (e.g., Arminians, Calvinists and Open Theists all hold to salvation by grace…but they understand that concept differently). Reformation and Lutheran theology does seem to deny the idea of grace that is prevalent in OT Judaism, here I agree with Wright 100%. I believe him to be correct in stressing God’s covenant with Abraham. But I don’t know that Wright’s leap towards a similar view of that grace in Judaism had been defended (or presented/expounded) by Wright.

(Just wanted to say something critical so you can mark that off the bucket list. NT Wright’s view, IMHO, is less problematic than the traditional position - but both take for granted to a degree ideologies within 1st century Judaism that have yet been adequately demonstrated). Wright at least attempts to place Paul's words in context of the early church rather than the Reformation. I may be wrong and I would welcome correction hear (perhaps he has provided what I'm missing and I just .... missed it).

 

If you will provide reference to his material I’d appreciate it. I’m not saying that you are wrong EXCEPT perhaps that you infer that he implies we really have no definite salvation - his writing seems to indicate otherwise (see, for example, Justification: God’s Plan & Paul’s Vision, pg. 250 where Wright states that “all those who are ‘in him’ are ‘reckoned’ to have died and been raised with him, so that from God’s point of view their sins are no longer accounted against them and they stand on resurrection ground” and “The present verdict [justified] gives the assurance that the future verdict will match it”). I do not see Wright denying definite salvation.

 

You may be right and I may be missing something, but I simply do not understand where you find this in his work (it seems so far from what I understand of his theology). I do not agree with him on some issues, but I have not heard or read anything of Wright leaning towards that direction. What did he preach or write that leads you to this conclusion?