Well, I just wonder what Wright and Co. do with "The Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many" (Mk. 10:45). Or, since Wright works mostly on Paul, "Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; that we might become the righteousness of God in him." (II Cor. 5:21).
Now, I have no quarrel that Paul was bothered by the "nationalism" of the First Church of the Hebrews or whatever vis-a-vis the Gentile believers, but one reason why he is so concerned is that both Jew and Gentile share a common redemption in Christ.
This whole article this post links to is like a game of 'telephone' gone horribly wrong. Save yourself a few minutes and avoid it. The blog is summarizing points of an author who has jumped to extreme and erroneous conclusions about Wright, the Reformation, and Christian faith. I encourage everyone to read Wright for themselves. I suggest 'Simply Christian'.
2 comments:
Well, I just wonder what Wright and Co. do with "The Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many" (Mk. 10:45). Or, since Wright works mostly on Paul, "Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; that we might become the righteousness of God in him." (II Cor. 5:21).
Now, I have no quarrel that Paul was bothered by the "nationalism" of the First Church of the Hebrews or whatever vis-a-vis the Gentile believers, but one reason why he is so concerned is that both Jew and Gentile share a common redemption in Christ.
This whole article this post links to is like a game of 'telephone' gone horribly wrong. Save yourself a few minutes and avoid it. The blog is summarizing points of an author who has jumped to extreme and erroneous conclusions about Wright, the Reformation, and Christian faith. I encourage everyone to read Wright for themselves. I suggest 'Simply Christian'.
Post a Comment