Spectooopular - love how Dr Tom synopsizes most of Romans …thoughtfully, deeply, robustly in his first answer …and I’m also thinking, man; where can Dr Preston get more guests like this? He asks one question …and gets to sit back for a 1/3 of the show and get a free university-grade brush up within the answer. So good, and very much appreciated.
Thank you so much for having Tom on! He is my number 1 Christian Author! I’ve learned so much with every book I’ve read of his and JVG was amazing!!! My ten year goal is to read every book of his i possibly can!
So awesome that BZ is gonna be speaking at your conference 🔥 I hope American evangelicals hear his story and journey with an open heart and consider his turn toward a more ecumenical radical faith
@@joelebert9767 I'm not sure I understand the connection you're making between liberalism and ecumenism? But I am almost certain you are an American lol
@@1991jj Ecumenism has as its goal bringing people of different views together, and in the process truth is trampled on. That's the heart of liberalism. Wright is often heard trying to dodge the liberal label, but then attacks and denigrates conservative evangelical positions, while advancing a liberal vision of Christianity.
@@joelebert9767 Christian ecumenism is understanding that the whole body of Christ consists of Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant. As to the Wright accusation you are clearly mistaken. Wright is theologically very conservative. The difference you are discerning is not between conservatism and liberalism (as you define liberalism which is itself already a bit off) but actually an alternative view to FUNDAMENTALISM. In theological circles Wright is conservative as they come. American Christianity have made the mistake of propogating fundamentalist christianity and call it conservative. Truth is not trampled on in Wrights work at all. You can disagree with his conclusions and views. But in no way does that necessarily mean he is trampling on truth. What is more likely the case is that his view conflicts with your rigid fundamentalism that you want to pass off as standard conservative Christianity. Im sorry but thats just plainly false but a common mistake made by American Evangelicals. Broaden your understanding of your own Christian tradition. Ironically, your view is exactly the position taken by those who do not have a Christian ecumenical sensitivity and therefore refuse to learn from other parts of the Body. Again, very American lol
@@1991jj The views of salvation taken by the Catholic, Orthodox, and Reformed positions are very different. Surely they cannot all be true? Isn't the insistence on tolerance over against truth definitional to liberalism? Does what the Scriptures say matter, or do only our theories matter? Remove Wright's theories and read the text for yourself. You'll see he indeed is trampling on the truth. Read Romans without the Tom Wright glasses. You'll see God is teaching about sin and our need for a Savior apart from our own righteous works, because we have no righteousness of our own. Wright denies this firmly. The Catholic church denies this firmly. The Orthodox church has no categories for this.
John Walton and GK Beale also talk about the correlation between temple and creation/the new temple and new creation. Such an amazing idea that encapsulates the whole story of the Bible.
Help all of us bring down Replacement Theology. Help all of us to humble ourselves and realize God’s purpose of Kingdom of Shalom. Help us be warriors to overcome the empires to release the captives.
DAMARA, This might not be the theologian to listen to if that is your belief and request. I believe as an Anglican he probably believes in replacement theology. It would be best not to get upset if this teaching is not compatible with your theology. There are others in the fully Evangelical field who would be more compatible for replacement theory.
Preston: You should try to get N.T. Wright back on, with Paula Fredriksen, to have them discuss back and forth their perspectives. Fredriksen is not an evangelical, but she is fluent in Pauline thought, nonetheless. That would be fireworks!!
Around 55 he advocates wordless lament as the agency for the Spirit to work in the world, as an Anglican I wonder how this impacts liturgy, which is very word-driven? God collaborates with those who love Him.
I have to laugh, I also thought Tom was a liberal high church of England, a Roman catholic, who taught weird stuff.... Today I own two of his works on Romans along with Dr M Lloyd-Jones work on Romans are treasures to me next to my bibles. It's amazing if you give someone a try what you might learn. I appreciate this bible scholar so much now. I could listen to him all day on the scriptures.
I love the idea of Christians entering into a vocation of glorifying God to His creation, it lines up perfectly with Christ’s teaching about being salt & light.
I'm confused. The intro is speaking of the upcoming conference, exiles in babylon. With Joshua Harris as a speaker? Didn't Joshua Harris claim he renounced his faith? Hopefully I'm just confused because now I don't think I want to listen to the video for the second time, which was when I caught that item.
I don't see Harris on the list of speakers, but I'm not sure he wouldn't fit in, seeing some in the lineup. Holding to biblical authority is hard to come by these days.
Great discussion, lots to ponder and reconsider here. I must say I'm a little disappointed that the topic of what justification accomplishes (right standing before God, inclusion in God's people (New Perspective on Paul), inclusion in God's people because of right standing, justification as the antecedent requirement for inclusion in God's people, and so on) didn't come up. That's the "rub" where most orthodox Reformed theologians would take issue with N.T. Wright's approach.
I would even go back to "the works of the law" being seen as "boundary markers" and ponder if they actually were seen as 'badges of honour" or like "wearing the tee shirt" which means they represented a deeper malaise seen in the testament as the Pharisee in Luke 18 (and the comments before v9), the Korban rule, swallowing gnats, etc. But also alongside this the "no going back" of Hebrews. Paul's obvious rage, Then add in the Temple being violently destroyed in the end in AD70. I suspect a lot more was at stake, than just "let's all get along".
What books were helpful for you to read to better understand jewish thought of the time? Because I feel like that was lacking in my my undergraduate degree.
Tom's exegesis of Romans arrives at conclusions that closely parallel those of Teilhard de Chardin. Both are expressing the notion that something is _emerging_ or _evolving_ from an original state and directed towards some God-ordained destination, that Jesus' life, death and resurrection is a fulcrum moment in this process, and that the Church's purpose (and therefore the purpose of each of its members) is to instantiate something of the love of Jesus into the world. In so doing, God's Kingdom grows in the world.
To walk as Jesus walked with the same attitude and mind as to be the indwelling work of the Holy Spirit of God to become Christlike Partakers of divine nature .walking in Spirit and in truth is in Christ. Christ within. It is no longer I who lives but Christ living in and through me. By my Spirit says the Lord. Without me you can do nothing.
just a quick reminder that the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment "thou shalt worship whoever you want" and that the declaration of human rights gives ME more rights than god. is it annoying that the satanic temple has the SAME RIGHTS as the church?
oh brilliant!! criticize the first amendment!! GENIUS let's curtail human rights... now, who shall we get to determine what "speech" should we should limit... who should run your standards for your enlightened theocracy? Rome, we can bring back the iron maiden for those who disagree w transubstantiation? maybe Geneva, disagree with limited atonement and be burned with fresh wood? or how about maybe we could get the Amish so all our curtains will match and no one will have an uncovered head... oh no no, wait, I know... let's get the mormons! we could go with the confession of faith that !“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!!! .. of course the LGBTQ lobby is growing and there is a new group of "Christians" marrying gays and advocating trans ideology maybe they should manage that first amendment for you ... _want them??_ let me know who you pick to whittle down all of human self-expression to *_your particular confession of faith_* standards...and do tell, what will be the penalties for disagreeing with you, oh holy and mighty one! .... lots of Muslims will probably disagree with you... so choose your theocratic foundation for thought police wisely!
Interesting how there is very little exegesis going on here. Just restating and fawning over his theories. Why can't he walk verse by verse through the text? The details destroy New Perspectivism.
