Tuesday, January 06, 2009

N.T. Wright Blurbs

IVP USA has uploaded endorsements for Wright's new book. It includes a very colourful blurb from Scot McKnight which has prompted some discussion over at Between Two Worlds and Heidelblog.


Paul L. Johnston said...

Dr. Bird:
Thanks for your level-headed responses and calming thoughts on the Between Two Worlds comments. I was disappointed with the over-reaction in the comments, some of whom I know personally. The crowd that has gathered around Piper and Carson seem very reactionary, threatened by those who don't endore everything they say. Piper carried himself in a better manner, when he wrote his book about Wright. I hope these followers will pay attention to his manner as well as his writings.

Anyway, I appreciate your balanced judgment.

Paul Johnston

Tremonti said...

This is a first for me...a commotion stirred by a blurb and from a scholar that usually does not attract this type of attention. I think the talk about name calling is a bit harsh. I just felt that McKnight was just generalizing here and not merely pointing fingers at certain people. I guess I'm just biased. Some interesting thing going on here.

Tony Stiff said...

For what its worth I thought your comments at Justin Taylor's site were well put.

Thank you.

Mason said...

Thanks for pointing these out, although reading some of the responses may have made my morning a bit more aggravating than I had intended.

I’ve read most of what Wright has put out, and am more or less on the same page with these issues that he is (a bit closer to his version of the NP than I am to Sanders or Dunn for example). Yes I did read “Justification and Variegated Nomism”, the first volume of which seemed to do more to reinforce Sanders than it did anything else except in the conclusion. Also, when Piper’s “The Future of Justification” came out I studied that as well, so I’m not uncritical about this.

Though I disagreed with Piper on a great many levels, I did appreciate that he was relatively respectful and gracious in his book, unlike many or most of the opponents I hear both scholarly or online. It saddens me to see the reactionary, hostile, name calling that passes for a real argument for some people.

And, seconding Paul, thank you for your calm reasoned responses.