First, critics of the “two-kingdoms” ethic should reckon with the company in which it puts them. Mike Horton explains. Could it be that they are moved by the same sets of concerns and categories of analysis or even of exegesis? Second, it . . . Continue reading →
New Perspective(s) on Paul
Horton Responds to More Caricatures By Wright
At the WHI blog.
Dan Wallace Critiques Wright's Exegesis, Rhetoric, and Scholarship
Here.
Helm on Wright and the Reformation
Here is the fourth part of Helm’s review of Wright’s latest.
Horton Contra Wright
N. T. Wright wants us to think that his approach to Paul is more faithful to Paul, but is it? ps. Here’s audio from Gerald Bray on the argument between Piper and Wright (HT: Justin Taylor).
Tom Wright's Shadow Boxing
With the Reformation. Mike’s review continues.
Wright Caricatures Opposing Views
So says Mike Horton as he continues he review of Wright’s latest: “As typical throughout this volume, Wright both caricatures the opposing view and transforms an important insight into the main point. It is in the Gospels that we first encounter questions . . . Continue reading →
Wright Misses the Trees for the Forrest
So says Kevin DeYoung. When one knows a priori what a passage has to mean, in light of a grand theme that one has discovered in Scripture, before one ever gets to a given passage actual biblical exegesis is imperiled.
Helm Continues His Critique of Wright
At Helm’s Deep.
Horton Reviews Wright (pt 2)
At the WHI blog.
Horton Reviews Wright
This hitherto unpublished review is appearing on the new WHI blog.
Works of the Law as Boundary Markers?
Have I not over-emphasised the social and national dynamic behind Paul’s language and seriously underplayed Paul’s analysis of the radical helplessness of the human situation and his concern for the salvation of the individual?” For my part, I have no desire to . . . Continue reading →
Blomberg on Wright and Christ's Obedience
Yesterday Craig Blomberg posted a strong endorsement of Tom Wright’s latest book. (Update: The more complete review is now online). I expect to review Wright’s historical claims about Calvin this summer. For now I want to focus on the significance of Blomberg’s . . . Continue reading →
Doctrine Without Scripture?
It appears that Mike Bird has offered some criticisms of our May 2004 faculty Statement on Justification. I reply below: Michael, I imagine that you are referring to the statement adopted by the faculty and board of Westminster Seminary California. A bit of . . . Continue reading →
On Replying to Moralists (2)
Part 1 When I say “moralists” I mean primarily the doctrine that God justifies the sanctified because they are sanctified or that we are justified by grace and cooperation with grace. This is the bottom line of the NPP. Justification is re-defined . . . Continue reading →
The Old Perspective on Paul
Most modern NT study of Paul tends to be myopic. The “history of exegesis” tends to go back to the 1970s and occasionally a little farther. This isn’t my assessment, it’s Tom Wright’s. I agree with him. I tried recently to do . . . Continue reading →
What Justification By Faith Apart From Works Does Not Mean
Creed or Chaos Explains.
N. T. Wright and Richard Baxter
Paul Helm compares the two.
Still Trying To Figure Out The NPP?
Kim Riddlebarger has a series of lectures available for download.
Audio: Kim on the NPP
At the RB