Practical Outworking of NPP

[Scott]

I finished Wright's Romans in a Week. As much of his analysis limits the reading of Romans to Jewish / Gentile issues that are not of much consequence in the ordinary believers life today he addressed the issue of what value the New Testament is to modern believers. He said that it was basically not directly applicable.

He had an analogy to how we can use the Bible. He likened the Bible to the first 4 acts of a 5 act play. The fifth act - the act we are in - is not written. We are actors who should be entirely familiar with the first 4 acts - so much that we really understand and relate to our characters. Further, we have an idea of how the fifth act is supposed to end based on hints and foreshadowing in the first 4 acts (the written acts). Therefore, we are left to improvise the 5th act on our own (without written scripts or parts). Because we are so familiar with how to characters should act, we can be confident that we are doing the right thing.

This seems really strange to me. Has he elaborated on this elsewhere that anyone can comment on?

Scott

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

Wow, that is ... disgusting. I'm glad God's Word is so meaningless and unauthoritative!

 

[Poimen]

I did not know that anyone in the NPP camp believed this though I am not surprised. Even Wright, who is more orthodox than Sanders and Dunn, seems to have a different view of inspiration than your average evangelical.

As you mentioned, I think alot of it has to do with about their assumptions as to how important the Jew/Gentile distinction is, and how it plays out in the NT. Therefore one would naturally limit the Bible's authority to speak in an age where that is largely not a problem.

Here's my response to Wright:

Romans 15:4 "For whatever things were written before were written for our learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope."

1 Corinthians 10:11 "Now all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come."

Note especially the last phrase: "upon whom the ends of the ages have come." This undoubtedly refers to all of us since we are all living in the millennium now.

 

[Scott]

As far as I can tell, Wright believes in the inspiration of the scriptures and does affirm that they are authoritative. His understanding of authority seems to differ from ours, though. From the lectures he gave, though, it is clear that others have questioned him about whether his views denied the authority of scripture. He took the defensive on that point in the lecture.

[Edited on 7-19-2005 by Scott]

 

[openairboy]

Originally posted by Scott
Has he elaborated on this elsewhere that anyone can comment on?

Scott

Scott,

This is completely half-baked, seeing how I haven't listened to "Romans in a Week" or completed the article, but I think it may address this issue.

How Can the Bible Be Authoritative? by NT Wright

openairboy

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

James White elaborates on NTW's view of scripture and his predecessors view. You can download it here. It is a 3 part series. It is a three part series on the NPP. I listened to it last November. It was pretty good.

 

[RamistThomist]

CHeck out Doug Wilson's archives on "NT Wrights and Wrongs." It is simply masterful how he exposes Wright's inconsistent view of authority.

 

[RamistThomist]

Check this whole archive out, especially:

NT Wright and Timeless Truths

Can we infer Doctrines?

Authoritative Story

The Text?

I find it ironic (not that it excuses any of his misshaps) that the evil heretic Doug Wilson who is so blinded by NPP writes incisive critiques of NT Wright that are quite helpful in stemming the tide until the more scholarly works are published.