The Gospel Coalition

My children will not grow up in a country where race is considered a barrier to the presidency.

That fact by itself made me glad as I watched Barack Obama sworn in as the 44th president of the United States yesterday. It gave me a great sense of satisfaction to think about how far our country has come from the days of separate water fountains and lynch mobs.

But the thrill of seeing an era of sinful racism put behind us has faded quickly, for me at least. I hate to be the one to pop the balloon of our collective national pride in this historic moment, but I sense that we as Americans are facing the rise of a new national sin – one that is more subtle and even deadlier than the sins of our past – one that is common to all other empires that have risen and fallen throughout the ages:

A smug sense of self-righteous superiority that usurps the rightful throne of God.

Watching the news over the past few days has been almost sickening. No, it’s not the average citizens fawning over Obama as if he were the Messiah. Or the over-hyped statements from reporters trying in some way to capture the “historic nature” of the events and speeches taking place. Annoying as the now blatantly subjective news coverage has been, that is not what has bothered me the most.

Instead, the truly troubling aspect of the new era we have just inaugurated is the underlying assumption among so many in our country that now, finally, we have truly arrived. A new age has dawned!

We are now above racism in our land. We have put behind us the terrible sins of our past and we are moving forward into a new world of hope and peace. We have recaptured the moral high ground in our world. We are unstoppable, unbeatable, unassailable!

We deceive ourselves. Our rhetoric reveals an imperalistic mindset grounded in smug self-righteousness and a false sense of superiority.

World, look at us now! We are the biggest. We are the best. And we are nice now. We are above racism. We are above the sins of our forefathers. We are above the notion of sin itself.

We are so enlightened that the writers of our newsweeklies can thumb their noses at six thousand years of human history (and almost every other civilization in the world today) and decide that same-sex marriage should be legalized.

We are so enlightened that we can eliminate whatever might stand in the way of our sexual exploits or prosperity-seeking, even if that means the sacrifice of another 50 million unborn children.

We are so enlightened that we can restore Science back in its proper place (meaning that it’s okay to create human life in order to destroy it, as long as we, the powerful, can benefit somehow).

We are the enlightened ones who bring justice and freedom and peace to the world.

You could hear it in Bush’s audacious speech after 9/11, in which he claimed that “we will eliminate evil from the world.”

You could hear it in John McCain’s claim at one of the 2008 debates that the “United States of America is the greatest force for good in the world.”

You can hear it even now in the speeches of Barack Obama: We are the world-changers.

Behind the clamor of the adoring media and the sight of swooning fans in Washington, D.C. – we can see that what truly unites us as a nation is a sense of superiority over the rest of the world, a belief in America as our savior, a naïve assumption that our cause is always right.

The Tower of Babel is going up right before our eyes.

But how many leaders have to come and go before we realize the truth that only Jesus Christ is Lord?

How many examples of government injustice have to take place before we realize that Christ’s Church is still the greatest force for good in the world?

How many towers have to fall before we realize the truth that his kingdom is the one that will never fail?

We live in a day when hope has dawned, yes. But not because we have elected a new president. Let the Church never forget:

Peace has broken out because of the cross – God’s resolution to our war against him. Hope has dawned because the tomb of a certain first-century Jew has been emptied of its contents. Justice will reign because of the Church who anticipates his return and dominion.

Nations rise and fall, but the Word of the Lord stands firm forever.

Click here to listen to Bill Feltner’s radio interview with Trevin regarding this post.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

“We are not as strong… as we think we are…”

That powerful line from an old Rich Mullins song comes to mind as I think about evangelicalism in America today, especially after having read a new book by Christine Wicker: The Fall of the Evangelical Nation: The Surprising Crisis Inside the Church (2008, Harper One).

Is evangelicalism dying? Christine Wicker thinks so, and she says she has the statistics to prove it. Wicker starts off her book with a grim prognosis:

“Evangelical Christianity in America is dying. The great evangelical movements of today are not a vanguard. They are a remnant, unraveling at every edge. Look at it any way you like: Conversions. Baptisms. Membership. Retention. Participation. Giving. Attendance. Religious literacy. Effect on the culture. All are down and dropping. It’s no secret.” (ix)

What is so devastating about Wicker’s book is the way she picks apart our inflated numbers so she can demonstrate the small size of the remnant truly committed to evangelical beliefs. She whittles down the official number of Southern Baptists (16 million) by focusing on church attendance . She then whittles down our number of baptisms by pointing to the frequent practice of  ”rebaptizing” those who have already been baptized in our own churches (ouch!). She whittles the number down even further by taking into account inflated church numbers caused by church hoppers.

Wicker demonstrates with statistics that “image is everything” when it comes to evangelicalism. The number of evangelicals in our country is astoundingly low. We’re not 25% of the population. We’re nowhere close. At best, we make up 3.7%. One of the purposes of Wicker’s book is to “take back” the voice of the religious from evangelicals:

“The majority of American Christians have been so marginalized by public rhetoric and news coverage that they don’t even know they are the overwhelming majority of Christians and that they are the Christians who actually represent American religious values, not the religious right.” (55)

I wish I could say that Wicker’s bias inclines her to overstate her case in order to make a point. But I can’t. She’s right. As she painfully takes us into the world of megachurches, evangelism initiatives, house churches and the religious right, she ably demonstrates that evangelical power is crumbling.

At times throughout her book, Wicker (a cautious outsider who still considers herself linked to evangelicalism) provides insight that is spot-on. Take for example her reaction to Willow Creek’s Reveal study, which concluded that one out of four people at the church was stalled or dissatisfied with their spirtual growth:

“Willow Creek pastors believe they have a solution. They must stop playing the role of parent and start playing the role of coah. Willow Creek leaders say mature Christians need to learn to feed themselves instead of relying on the church to feed them. There is only one problem with that solution. The majority of these dissatisfied Christians are already reading their Bibles, praying, giving, witnessing, and serving. They love Jesus and their lives are centered around him. They are able to feed themselves. It is their church that isn’t able to feed them.” (122)

Other times, Wicker’s prescription is just plain wrong. She believes the underlying problem of the evangelical downfall is in our distinctiveness (165-6). The problem for Wicker is that evangelicals are hung up on distinctive beliefs that should be jettisoned for heightened popularity in contemporary society.

Of course, the mainline denominations who, over a century ago, took the advice Wicker espouses now have church buildings that are emptier than our own. No… our problem is not that we are too different; it’s that we are not different enough. It is our lack of distinctiveness that has led to this crisis.

But regardless of some of Wicker’s faulty prescriptions, her descriptions of an inflated evangelical bubble are painfully accurate. That’s why church leaders need to read The Fall of the Evangelical Nation. We need a good dose of realism that cuts through all the hype of evangelical power and prestige. Rich Mullins was right. We’re not as strong as we think we are.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Every January, Southern Baptists mark the sad anniversary of Roe vs. Wade by celebrating the sanctity, or sacredness or human life. Instead of mourning the American “culture of death,” we look hopefully to the future and celebrate the God who cherishes his creation.

Scripture often refers to God as the God of the fatherless and the widow. “God executes justice for the fatherless and the widow” (Deut. 10:18). “Father of the fatherless and protector of widows is God in his holy habitation” (Ps. 68:5).

In Bible times, as in many places in our world even today, widows and orphans were the most vulnerable people in society. They were people without a voice. To be orphaned was to be abandoned. To be a widow with no immediate family members was to be impoverished.

But God declares that He is the Father of the fatherless and the protector of widows. He is the God of the oppressed. He is the one who hears the cries of those who have no voice. And that is why we, as Christians, are pro-life. We are pro-life, because our God is pro-life.

We believe human beings have a right to live – because of who they are – as image bearers of God – not because of what they do – as productive members of society. We do not judge the worth of a person by their usefulness to society. But sadly, our culture is beginning to do just that.

Human embryos are disposable – maybe useful for future medical research. And thus an embryo’s value is found it what it can be used for, not in what it is.

The unborn have no voice. They cannot yet think or reason, so their rights depend on the circumstances of the mother. They have value only if they are “wanted,” and they can be terminated if they are “unwanted.”

The senior citizen battling dementia – what useful purpose does she serve for society? Why not allow her to die? After all, euthanasia provides “death with dignity.” Society thinks the elderly have no value in who they are, as fellow human beings who bear the image of God, but in what they can do to serve society.

We must fight against our society’s mindset with the most powerful weapon in the Christian arsenal – compassion. We must make it clear that the reason we prize human life is because God prizes human life – at all stages.
The human life of an embryo in a science lab
The human life of an unborn baby in development
The human life of an expectant mother faced with a crisis
The human life of a mentally handicapped child
The human life of a man in a vegetative state
The human life of an elderly woman in a nursing home

Our approach to abortion is the compassionate one. We stand up for those who have no choice, those who have no voice. Through the work of pregnancy support centers, we walk alongside hurting mothers, helping them through pregnancy after they decide to preserve their baby’s life. We are there to counsel the other women who feel the enormous burden of guilt after having taken their child’s life.

Our approach to the elderly is the same. We do not agree with the term “death with dignity,” because no death is ever dignified. Death is a mar on God’s good creation. It is our greatest enemy.

But our Savior – the one who raised the widow’s son, congratulated the poor, raised up the oppressed and gave voice to the voiceless – He himself defeated death on Easter morning, unleashing God’s new creation into our world.

And that is why we are pro-life. In God’s eyes, every human life is precious. Every human being bears his fingerprints. Every person – from the embryo to the elderly – deserves life.

May God give us the courage to show the love of the Father to the fatherless.

written by Trevin Wax. © 2007 Kingdom People Blog

O God of Beginnings,
You are the Creator of all life. 
May you by your Holy Spirit
and by the voice of your church
lead your people to rescue innocent children from death
and bring those who participate in their death
to true repentance
that they may taste of your goodness and mercy.
Overcome evil with good
in the hearts of those who reject your truth.
Rebuke the enemy for the sake of innocent children
and for your sake, O Lord.

O great King of Kings,
let your kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven
for the sanctity of all human life.
You have said that your kingdom is justice, peace and joy
in the Holy Spirit.
Where there is unrighteousness
let righteousness come to bear,
where there is hostility
cause your peace to reign supreme,
where there is sorrow
bring joy in the hearts of people.

Lord Jesus Christ, 
as you hung on the hard wooden cross,
you asked that those who were putting you to death
might be forgiven.
Please, O Lord,
help us to offer that same forgiveness
to those who participate in abortion, euthanasia,
the destruction of embryonic life
and who by other means violate the sanctity of human life,
that in all things
the world would know the height, the depth,
the breadth, and width of your love,
your mercy and your grace;

Hear our prayers as we cry out to you
to end the merciless shedding of innocent blood in our nation
and throughout the world.
Through death you have conquered death
and through your life we experience eternal and everlasting life.
Cause life to spring forth in the hearts of all people
and bring forth a love and respect for life
that will dominate our culture.
May your kingdom and church apprehend
and overtake the culture of death
that has prevailed through deceit and selfishness;
may the Seed of the woman crush the head of the serpent
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen

- Priests for Life (adapted)

“If we are inclined to share our personal testimonies [when proclaiming the gospel], so be it. But let us be sure to incorporate our own personal stories within the biblical story of Jesus. Our own testimonies are worth little if they do not include the historical truth claims that form the heart of the Christian faith. If we fail to preach Christ, we are leaving The Self on the throne. We are giving testimony about ourselves, not God.”

- a quote from my forthcoming book, Holy Subversion: Allegiance to Christ in an Age of Rivals

Check out Tony Reinke’s tips on reading:
   On Reading
   Capture Reading Time
   Read with a pen in hand
   Read with purpose in view

What kind of preacher are you?

If you’re interested to know what I think about the Piper/Wright debate on Paul, you can check out the comments on my interview with Wright from Tuesday. Or you can click over to Nick Mitchell’s blog, where my comments are now a blog post!

Those who like D.A. Carson will be excited to see so many audio resources available here.

Seminaries are feeling the effects of the financial crisis.

Ministering to the imagination

The ESV Study Bible has already sold out. Is anyone surprised?

Collin Hansen reviews Driscoll’s Death by Love. This book has now moved to my “must-read” list.

Next Week at Kingdom People: We’ll be talking with Russell Moore about the pro-life movement today. I’ll also be taking a look at a book that says that evangelicalism is falling apart.

Featured prominently on my desk are framed, black-and-white photographs of two influential Southern Baptists:  John A. Broadus (1827-95) and E.Y. Mullins (1860-1928). I admire Broadus’ passion for preaching and the legacy he left as one of the founders of Southern Seminary. I admire Mullins for his denominational statemanship and his advocacy for religious freedom for Baptists in Romania. 

Not too long ago, I ordered a used copy of William Ellis’ 1985 biography of E.Y. Mullins entitled: A Man of Books and a Man of the People: E.Y. Mullins and the Crisis of Moderate Southern Baptist Leadership. I was intrigued by the title given to Mullins: “a man of books and a man of the people.” Evangelicalism could use more pastor/theologians and theologian/pastors. We need more men like D.A. Carson, John Piper, and N.T. Wright – ministers who serve both the local church and use their gifts in the academy. E.Y. Mullins’ leadership in the early part of the 20th century provides a model of how bridging the gap between library and pew can be done effectively.

Ellis portrays Mullins as a level-headed moderate leader who fought the extremes of fundamentalism throughout his tenure as president of Southern Seminary. The fundamentalist leaders at the turn of last century (men like T.T. Eaton) were highly critical of Mullins’ leadership. Ellis casts Mullins as the calm, collected leader who staved off the fundamentalists who might have succeeded in taking over the (generally moderate) Southern Baptist Convention.

Ellis’ book was published in 1985 during another critical time in Southern Baptist life. I cannot help but wonder how much the events of the 1980′s may have influenced Ellis’ agenda in writing this book. It seems to me that Ellis seeks to portray Mullins as the kind of moderate leader needed to stave off what could be considered the fundamentalist excesses of the Conservative Resurgence.

The most fascinating information in this biography comes from Ellis’ access to Mullins’ correspondence. The letters and Baptist newspapers of the time show that Southern Seminary was frequently criticized by people on the right and the left. According to some critics, Mullins was opening the door to liberalism within the seminary faculty. According to others, Mullins was unwilling to let go of key evangelical doctrines and subscribe to more “enlightened” views.

There are several historical facts about Mullins that do not quite fit Ellis’ portrayal. First, Ellis writes as if the Baptist Faith and Message that Mullins drafted in 1925 was an attempt to keep the heated debate over evolutionism from becoming a core Baptist conviction. But the comprehensiveness of this confession goes against the idea that the creation/evolution debate was the primary motivation for crafting such a document. In other essays, Mullins argued that Baptists were not a free-lance club and that Baptists shared a confessional identity. 

The problem for Ellis is that Mullins’ advocacy of confessionalism does not square with his image of Mullins as the level-headed moderate. So the confessional aspect of Mullins’ legacy winds up being underrepresented in the book. 

Secondly, Ellis describes Mullins as moving towards fundamentalist convictions late in life. Weary from the fight against the denominational conservatives, Mullins eventually succumbs to the fundamentalist agenda, leaves behind his social-gospel liberalism, and becomes an advocate for more conservative views.

But I believe Ellis’ explanation of Mullins’ later years to be inadequate. Is it not more plausible to believe that Mullins only appeared more conservative in his later years because the evangelical and Baptist Conventions with whom he had long held loose associations were moving towards liberalism? I seriously doubt that after decades of criticism from the fundamentalist wing of the SBC, Mullins could no longer withstand the attacks and therefore became a fundamentalist himself. It is more likely that Mullins was always a theological conservative, though one who did not share the fundamentalist attitude.

Third, Ellis mourns the fact that Mullins seemed to have lost his emphasis on the social implications of the gospel – an emphasis featured prominently in his writings at the beginning of last century. But again, there is a better, more plausible explanation of this apparent “loss.” Perhaps in the early 1900′s, Mullins saw a lack of social concern as a major issue in SBC life. But by the 1920′s, Mullins noticed a bigger problem on the horizon – doctrinal error. Therefore, he shifted his emphasis, even if he never intended to neglect social concerns. In fact, his late-in-life push for Prohibition directly counters Ellis’ view that Mullins’ concern for social issues disappeared.

Mullins is an intriguing individual in Southern Baptist history. He took positions that defy easy categorization. He cannot be neatly fitted into a liberal/moderate/conservative framework. Trying to figure out his view of evolution is difficult. At times, it seems he advocated neutrality on the issue. At other times, his disavowal of evolution was more a disavowal of naturalism, which leaves no room for a personal Creator God.

Regardless of one’s view of Mullins’ legacy, Ellis’ book ably demonstrates that he was a talented administrator, important theologian, hard-working denominational leader, and powerful preacher. Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of Mullins’ life is that this “man of the books and man of the people” could succeed at wearing all of these hats at the same time.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Related Posts:
Edgar Young Mullins: An Intimate Biography
E.Y. Mullins Gravesite
A History of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

English-speaking Christians have access to a variety of valuable resources designed to aid in Bible study. Some Study Bibles seek to be comprehensive, like the masterful ESV Study Bible that everyone is raving about (for good reason). The ESV Study Bible contains an entire library of information within its pages.

Other Study Bibles seek to find a niche audience and provide a unique voice among the many Bibles available. While the more cynical among us might decry the use of the Bible for marketing and monetary purposes, those of us who choose to see the bright side will affirm the informational value that comes from some of these niche Bibles. Thomas Nelson has recently released two noteworthy study Bibles that will, in most cases, not be on the same pastor’s bookshelf, but which nonetheless offer a unique contribution to evangelical discourse.

The first is The Orthodox Study Bible: Ancient Christianity Speaks to Today’s World (pictured left). My time spent in Romania (a country that is predominantly Orthodox) helped me appreciate some of the Orthodox contributions to theology that often go unnoticed in the West. So I have been enjoying this Study Bible immensely, even when I disagree with the Orthodox interpretation of certain texts.

The most interesting aspect of this study Bible is that the Old Testament (and Orthodox intertestamental books) are translated from the Greek Septuagint, not the Hebrew Masoretic texts. If you have ever wanted to read in English the Old Testament that most of New Testament writers quoted from, you are now able to do so. The New Testament takes the text of the New King James Version, based on the same manuscripts as the King James.

The footnotes in this Bible are informative. The contributors often quote ancient church Fathers in the footnotes, giving additional insight into how the texts were interpreted and preached in the first few centuries. Take this footnote on Acts 20:9 about Eutychus, who fell asleep during Paul’s preaching:

St. John Chrysostom upholds Eutychus as an example for young believers. While some young people stay up into the night for the purposes of entertainment, drunkenness or immorality, this young man tried to remain awake in order to hear Paul preach the gospel.

I had never thought of Eutychus as an example to follow, but now that I know Chrysostom did, I might rethink the way I preach this passage in the future. These kinds of interesting quotes from the church fathers abound in the footnotes.

Not surprisingly, the Orthodox editors reject the Roman Catholic understanding of Peter’s primacy with a footnote that could be found in any Protestant Bible:

Peter/Rock is a play on the word for “rock” in both Aramaic and Greek (petros/petra). This rock refers not to Peter per se, but to “the faith of his confession” (John Chrysostom). The true Rock is Christ Himself (1 Cor. 10:4), and the Church is built on the faithful confession of Christ.

The Orthodox Study Bible also includes several mini-essays that explain important doctrine and theology. Protestants who wonder about the Eastern Orthodox position on justification by faith will find a helpful comparison of Protestant and Orthodox views. Some famous icons (that are beautiful, I might add) are also included throughout the Bible.

The other Thomas Nelson release is The Chronological Study Bible. This Bible takes the text of the New King James Version and rearranges it in historical order – illuminating the flow of the Bible’s storyline. In order to help the reader along, the editors include “Transition” boxes that explain the story.

I was glad to see that the editors chose not to harmonize the Gospels, even if they did have to divide them up in order to make Jesus’ life one continuous narrative. Take the temptation of Christ, for example. In this case, the editors place all three of the Synoptic Gospels’ Temptation accounts one right after another. This makes for jolted reading, but I was glad to see each Gospel account included separately rather than harmonized at the expense of the distinct voices of each Gospel author.

In disputes about chronology, the editors choose to give a voice to both sides of the debate. Take, for instance, the Exodus narrative. Whereas the editors could have simply decided on one of the proposed dates, they instead give both points of view and leave the matter somewhat ambiguous.

You will probably not want to take The Chronological Study Bible with you to church on Sunday morning. Trying to find a certain book of the Bible can be quite daunting. Gone is the traditional placing of Bible books. Instead, you look for a Bible passage by thinking about what time span the event took place in. This Study Bible will be most helpful for those who want to read through the Bible chronologically, taking in the historical situatedness of the Bible books and events.

I am always amazed to see the amount of resources available in English for those who want to study the Bible. It is a unique privilege to live in a time when we can so easily access the Scriptures. These two study Bibles help us on our journey by providing important information and scholarship.

Related Posts:
Theron’s Story - Why I Left Evangelicalism for Eastern Orthodoxy
John’s Story – Why I Left Eastern Orthodoxy for Evangelicalism
Book Review: The Narrated Bible in Chronological Order

Today’s interview with N.T. Wright (Bishop of Durham) concerns his new book: Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision.

Justification represents Wright’s response to John Piper’s  The Future of Justification (see my commentary here) and is scheduled for release in the UK in February by SPCK and in the U.S. in May by IVP.

My previous two interviews with Bishop Wright can be accessed here and here.

Trevin Wax: How does this robust discussion on justification between you and John Piper help the church to better fulfill its purpose in the world?

N.T. Wright: How does the robust discussion between me and Piper help the church to better fulfill its purpose in the world? Well, I hope it will, and that’s part of the main point of what I’m saying.

My anxiety about what has now been seen as the traditional Reformed view (though there are many traditional Reformed views!) is that it focuses all attention on ‘me and my salvation’ rather than on ‘God and God’s purposes’, which – as we see in the Gospels, and in e.g. Romans 8 – are much wider than just my salvation. This book, for me, thus follows from Surprised by Hope and the other things I’ve been writing in the same vein.

More generally, I hope that the book will alert people to the fact that the underlying discussion is really about taking Scripture seriously – (a) the whole Scripture, not just selected parts, and (b) Scripture as the final arbiter, over against all human traditions including our own! That cannot but help the church in its purpose in the world . . .

Trevin Wax: What would you say are the key differences between you and Piper on justification?

N.T. Wright: Well, I set justification within the larger Pauline context, where it always comes, of God’s purposes to fulfill his covenant promise to Abraham and so to rescue the whole creation, humankind of course centrally included, from sin and death. Piper holds that Abrahamic context at arm’s length.

Second, I understand justification as basically a law-court term, where it means the judge’s creative declaration that a person is ‘in the right’ in terms of the lawcourt, whereas Piper holds that justification involves the accrediting to a person of the moral, not the forensic, ‘righteousness’ of Christ – something Paul never says (as J. I. Packer admits).

Third, I understand Paul’s doctrine of justification as eschatological, that is, the justification of the faithful in the present time is both the fulfilment of the long story of Israel and the anticipation of the eventual verdict to be delivered on the last day, as in Romans 2.1-16 and 8.1-30.

Fourth, in line with many Reformed readers of scripture, including Calvin, I understand Paul’s doctrine of justification to be of those who are ‘in Christ’, whereas Piper and others don’t make that a central element in justification itself. Conversely, for Piper the center of justification is the ‘imputation’ of ‘the righteousness of Christ’, seen in terms of ‘righteousness’ as a kind of moral achievement earned by Jesus and then reckoned to those who believe. I believe that this is an attempt to say something close to what Paul actually says in Romans 6, namely that the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is ‘reckoned’ to those who are ‘in him’. Putting it the way Piper (and one part of the Reformation tradition) puts it is a pointer to something which is truly there in Paul, but one which gives off misleading signals as well.

Finally, for Piper justification through Christ alone is the same in the future (on the last day) as in the present, whereas for Paul, whom I am following very closely at this point, the future justification is given on the basis of the Spirit-generated life that the justified-by-faith-in-the-present person then lives. In fact, the omission of the Spirit from many contemporary Reformed statements of justification is one of their major weaknesses.

Trevin Wax: What do you hope this new book will accomplish?

N.T. Wright: I hope it will clear up many misunderstandings, and show that the version of the ‘new perspective’ which I embrace and expound (there are as many quite different versions of the so-called NP as there are expositors of it) is not at all inimical to the real concerns, including personal salvation, substitutionary atonement, and so forth, of the ‘traditionalists’.

I hope, too, it will send the next generation of thoughtful Christians back to Scripture itself, not to this or that tradition.

Trevin Wax: How does this short book relate to the longer book on Paul that you are currently writing?

N.T. Wright: The longer book is intended to be a full-scale treatment of Paul’s theology, integrating traditional ‘theological’ topics with the political and philosophical ones which are implicit in his work. I sketched what I intend to do in Paul: In Fresh Perspective, particularly chapters 5, 6 and 7. Imagine each of those chapters on a grand scale (e.g. about 200 pages each!) and you’ll see what I have in mind.

The debate with Piper functions as a sub-debate within the middle one of those chapters. I didn’t want to have to go into that much detail on that particular debate in the big book, since there are so many other debates out there that need to be engaged . . .

Trevin Wax: Do you see a ‘middle ground’ being reached in recent discussions? A post-new-perspective equilibrium or sorts?

N.T. Wright: No, not an equilibrium. A lot of confusion, rather.

I think there’s a danger in ‘old perspective’ supporters still trying to run an implicit ‘conservative versus liberal’ debate on this one, trying to accuse NP folk of some of the failings of an older liberalism. Better to see the historical and theological quest to understand Paul going wide open to encourage everyone to get back to reading the texts in their proper contexts. If that means going beyond this ‘perspectives’ language, so be it. But it is sometimes helpful to put down some markers as a shorthand way of signposting key moves.

One of the truly worrying things about Piper is his insistence that we should be wary of reading Paul in his Jewish context . . . which basically means that we end up reading him as though he was really a 17th-century theologian born out of due time . . .

Trevin Wax: What is at stake in this debate over justification? If one were to adopt Piper’s view instead of yours, what would they be missing?

N.T. Wright: What’s missing is the big, Pauline picture of God’s gospel going out to redeem the whole world, all of creation, with ourselves as part of that.

What’s missing is the big, Pauline view of the church, Jew and Gentile on equal footing, as the sign to the powers of the world that Jesus is Lord and they aren’t.

What’s missing is the key work of the Holy Spirit in enabling the already-justified believers to live with moral energy and will so that they really do ‘please God’ as Paul says again and again (but as Reformed theology is shy of lest it smack of smuggling in works-righteousness again).

What’s missing is an insistence on Scripture itself rather than tradition . . .

For further reading, check out my summary statements of Wright and Piper’s positions in the June 2009 issue of Christianity Today.

Trevin Wax interview with N.T. Wright. copyright © 2009 Kingdom People Blog.

“Look at the birds of the air:
they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns,
and yet your heavenly Father feeds them.
Are you not of more value than they?”
- Jesus, from the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:26)

The current economic downturn is hitting rural America hard. Cities and towns that are populated by blue-collar, factory workers in various types of industry are feeling the pinch of tightening budgets. People are fearful for their jobs. Millions are already out of work. Many retirees have watched a large percentage of their savings and investments vanish in the past few months.

When we estimate the importance of life in terms of finances and material possessions, we can easily despair at the thought of our “value” and “worth” plummeting. But Jesus reminds us that our worth is not in our portfolio or bank account.

God is the God of the helpless, forgotten, and those considered least important in the eyes of the world. As Jesus condemned worry and instructed his followers to trust God in all things, he told them to look at the birds of the air. God gives them food and sustains them, even if they don’t work and earn their way. If God takes care of the birds, who have done nothing to deserve such care and consideration, will he not care for his children?

Our value in the eyes of God does not shift with the changing sands of economic tides. Our worth is not measured in what we do for God, but in what God has done for us. 

This is God the Father who sacrificed his only Son upon the cross that we deserved.

This is God the Son who willingly took on flesh and lived among us.

This is God the Spirit who prompts our hearts and brings us back into eternal, unending fellowship with our Maker.\

It is the costly actions of God that give us our value. We measure our worth according to the love by God!

In these difficult times, we – the people of God’s kingdom – need to be reminded of our true citizenship and true identity. The uneasiness of worry surfaces in our hearts when we take our eyes off the kingdom and forget who we are in Christ. We are royalty. Our older Brother is the King of the world.

Consider the kindness of God toward even the soul-less animals of His creation. And then remember: we are loved, chosen, and saved by the King of Kings, who holds our life in His hands.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog