The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright

My rating:

add to my books

The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright

by John Piper

3.21 · rating details · 110 ratings · 26 reviews

N. T. Wright, a world-renowned New Testament scholar and bishopof Durham in the Church of England, has spent years studying theapostle Paul's writings and has offered a "fresh perspective" onPaul's theology. Among his conclusions are that "the discussions ofjustification in much of the history of the church-certainly sinceAugustine-got off on the wrong foot,

...more

Paperback, 239 pages

Published November 1st 2007 by Crossway Books (first published 2002)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

There is a good chance some of your friends read this book. Sign in to see!

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

This book is currently not featured on any Listopia lists. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 285)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Apr 12, 2011

Ben De Bono rated it

· review of another edition

Before I discuss the content of the this book, I want to briefly talk about the book itself and my feelings on whether or not it should have even been written. If you've looked at the rest of my Goodreads page, you can tell pretty quick I'm a fan of N.T. Wright. I find his theology to be a breath of fresh air. Because of that there's a part of me that is a bit annoyed that John Piper felt the need to write an entire book critiquing N.T. Wright.

On the one hand, I don't believe Wright (...more

like 1 like

· see review

Apr 21, 2011

Jason rated it

Shelves: church

I read and gushed over Wright's "Justification" which is a response to this book, and so I figured I should read this book as well.

I will confess that I went into it ready to disagree with Piper in anyway that I could. Had he said that the sky is blue, I would have argued with him. Had asserted that the sky is indeed up, I would have scoffed. Piper disagrees constantly with some of my favorite authors and people who articulate things which I have thought for a long tim...moreI read and gushed over Wright's "Justification" which is a response to this book, and so I figured I should read this book as well.

I will confess that I went into it ready to disagree with Piper in anyway that I could. Had he said that the sky is blue, I would have argued with him. Had asserted that the sky is indeed up, I would have scoffed. Piper disagrees constantly with some of my favorite authors and people who articulate things which I have thought for a long time, so I am always ready to fight with anything he says. I'm also not a Reformed theology guy. I have some GOOD friends who i love an appreciate in that movement, but overall, it's not particularly something I want to be a part of or associated with. I might as well be as upfront as possible about this.

First of all, I am really pleased to observe that on some accounts of Piper, I have been wrong. In this book, while he goes after Wright, the New Perspective on Paul and does so with bad info and bad assumptions, there is none of the rudeness and not as much of what I think is the inappropriate antagonism that has become somewhat of a hallmark of Piper and those who really follow him (read up on the Rob Bell debate). Here Piper affirms that he appreciates Wright, he takes Wright seriously as a scholar and that in fact there's a great deal that Wright is correct about. What I assumed about Piper based on other things I have seen him say (in fact the afternoon I finished this, I found him saying some incredulous things) was not present here. He is a faithful pastor writing with his best understandings of how the gospel works in order to see the most amount of people come to knowledge of truth that he can. That is affirmable and should be held up and celebrated.

That being said, Piper's book here simply isn't as compelling as Wright's is. Wright does a better job of making sense of the entirety of the scriptures, of dealing with difficult Pauline sections and quite simply of making a compelling argument. I've said elsewhere that Piper brought a knife to the gun fight. He is simply, in my view, outgunned in this debate. Wright's argument is not nearly as proof-texted (with texts ripped from context) and creates an overarching theme which always stays true to the biblical narrative.

Wright's most telling comment about Piper here is true - he's asking 19th century questions through 16th century interpretations of 1st century documents. And Piper concedes this - I knew I was done with the book, when Piper criticized Wright for attempting to use the extra-biblical first century texts to understand the cultural setting in which Paul was writing. Piper says time and again that we should and only need to go back to the time of the reformers, that we should let them and their interpretations determine what the text means, and let the text itself determine what the text means, and if 1600 years between Paul's writings and Calvin's meditations have distorted the meaning of the word - justification, for example - he doesn't deal with that. A footnote on p. 36, in Chapter 2 really highlights the disconnect for me. Piper would say that the Biblical context gives us all we need to understand how a word is used, and Wright would say that the non-biblical texts allow us to see how the culture informed the use of that word. It seems to me that where you come down on the answer to THAT difference will in fact drive all other decisions about whose side you take in this debate. Piper appeals to the reformers, and Wright appeals to his understanding of the 1st century. Given the absolute necessity of Christianity as a historical event - it HAS to be rooted in the first century to be at all true - I simply side with Wright over this difference. Once that occurred, all the other differences are sort of automatic.

That aside, this is a good read. I think Piper is a good man, I think he loves Jesus and loves his church. He's at that absolute top of the Reformed world in terms of academics and skills, and he comes through in a big way here. Even if you disagree with his ultimate conclusion, I think you come away from this with a bigger understanding of God (one very particular version and understanding of God), and of Piper's devotion and love to God. (less)

· see review

Oct 25, 2011

Travis rated it

In The Future of Justification, John Piper takes on N. T. Wright’s championing of what is commonly called the “New Perspective on Paul.” Piper, who often writes in a very pastoral, if also deep, style, is fully engaged in Bible-scholar mode for this work. Piper takes Wright’s challenge to the historic understanding of justification in the writings of Paul very seriously, and the book that Piper has written shows that seriousness.

Positives

The primary positive that I wi...more In The Future of Justification, John Piper takes on N. T. Wright’s championing of what is commonly called the “New Perspective on Paul.” Piper, who often writes in a very pastoral, if also deep, style, is fully engaged in Bible-scholar mode for this work. Piper takes Wright’s challenge to the historic understanding of justification in the writings of Paul very seriously, and the book that Piper has written shows that seriousness.

Positives

The primary positive that I will mention about this work is that Piper has Paul right and Wright has Paul wrong. John Piper portrays in this book a very clear, very historic, very biblical understanding of what the apostle meant when he wrote of justification. Piper’s defense of justification and the imputation of Christ’s righteousness is spot-on, and thus his book is necessarily strong.

Piper is also extremely respectful and loving in his tone. In polemic works, it is not uncommon to find authors caricaturing one another, taking cheap shots at straw men. Piper is nothing but kind to Wright. He points to Wright’s brilliance and winsomeness quite regularly. Where Piper fears, or hopes, he could have misunderstood Wright, he is quick to point this out.

Negatives

This book is not an easy read. Piper, writing as Bible scholar, is not the most riveting author on the market. Piper’s thoroughness in dealing with the discussion can sometimes make his writing tedious. The scholarly slant in this work can certainly make it inaccessible for some laypersons who might pick it up because they have heard friends recommend, “Read anything by John Piper.”

I also found myself wanting Piper to go into greater depth regarding the Jewish understanding of salvation. Wright, and Sanders before him, argue that second-temple Judaism was not marred by legalism as is often understood. Piper disagrees with the assessment of these men, and does a fine job of pointing out reasons why. Piper does not, however, give us a few pages to explain how Jews of this period understood their salvation or how they were actually saved. I think such an excurses would have been quite helpful.

Conclusion and Recommendation

Because I agree with Piper’s assessment, I am happy to recommend The Future of Justification to anyone dealing with New Perspective on Paul issues. A person who has been convinced by N. T. Wright that the church has, for sixteen hundred years or more, misunderstood Paul, can be aided by Piper’s scholarship. If these issues are before you, you certainly should give Piper’s book a hearing.

However, not every Christian needs to read this book. Many have never heard of the New Perspective. Many have a right understanding of justification and do not need to take up their reading time with an argument against a position that they are not being challenged to refute. This book is neither an easy nor a fun read. If you are looking for something to feed the soul, look to others among Piper’s writings.
(less)

· see review

Jul 11, 2011

Jon rated it

I have read and been deeply impacted by many John Piper books. I was disappointed, because I found in this book that he seems to be arguing a strongly polemical position from a place of passion about preserving traditions. This is ironic, given that the traditions he's arguing to preserve are the traditions of the reformers who argued that we should scrutinize traditional teachings carefully in light of the Bible. Piper argues less from the Bible than from the tradition. My second disappointment...more

like 1 like

· see review

Aug 06, 2011

Kent Maitland rated it

Positive:
Clear, straightforward argumentation that leaves no question of what Piper thinks about the New Perspective on Paul.

Negative:
Slight proof-texting; Excessive appeal to what the 'majority' of church history believes.

Bottom Line:
Piper presents a very clear, concise, and informative objection to the New Perspective on Paul, even if the objection is largely ineffective.

Disclaimer:
I myself am NOT a proponent of the New Perspective on Paul. How...more

· see review

Mar 15, 2009

Susan rated it

I have heard numerous Pastor's quote N.T. Wright and with the quote state his title which convinces the audience to think, "ooooh, aaahh, this Pastor is reading some impressive theologian with impressive titles so he must have really good things to say" but unfortunately, the hearer doesn't research any further into what the person being quoted believes or if what is being fed to them is good solid food and not a trendy sushi bar smorgasbord called a new “fresh perspective”. (I'm leery...more

· see review

Jan 25, 2011

Dwight Davis rated it

· review of another edition

I wish there was a 2 and a half star rating, that would be more accurate to my assessment of this book.

Overall, this was okay. I thought Piper showed a few places where Wright could be a bit more clear and he raised some good objections. However, I also thought he was incredibly unfair to Wright on some points, most especially on Wright's theology of the gospel. I thought Wright's definition of the Gospel was great, and I think it was irresponsible of Piper to basically say that Wrig...more

· see review

Apr 16, 2010

David rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: bible, theology

For those who enjoy subjects such as these, the books by Piper and Wright on justification are a treat. Piper's book came first, a response to Wright's writings on justification which Piper contends are not true to the Biblical witness. I appreciate the humility and respect Piper writes with in this book. Piper does a great job of putting forth the traditional Reformed understanding of justification: the righteousness of Jesus Christ is imputed to human sinners.

Overall I found Pip...more

· see review

Jan 31, 2008

Lee rated it

Unimpressive, this book reminds me of Piper's efforts in Counted Righteous in Christ, where he takes on Robert Gundry and, in my opinion, loses. The exegesis is too forced, much too plastic, and seems to stem from theological bias against anything seemingly 'new' and 'fresh'. Things old or traditional are not always right because they are old or traditional. Maybe a 'new/fresh perspective' is not wrong because it is new. Maybe the historic doctrine of justification needs "distorting", ...moreUnimpressive, this book reminds me of Piper's efforts in Counted Righteous in Christ, where he takes on Robert Gundry and, in my opinion, loses. The exegesis is too forced, much too plastic, and seems to stem from theological bias against anything seemingly 'new' and 'fresh'. Things old or traditional are not always right because they are old or traditional. Maybe a 'new/fresh perspective' is not wrong because it is new. Maybe the historic doctrine of justification needs "distorting", or maybe Wright is describing the "New Testament writers' original intent" (see book synopsis). Wright certainly believes his vew of justification is biblical. Yet Piper, who claims to be setting right the "biblical" view of justification, relies at various points on arguments from his personal reasoning and not the biblical text. For example, "In my judgment, what [Wright] has written will lead to a kind of preaching that will not announce clearly what makes the lordship of Christ good news for guilty sinners or show those who are overwhelmed with sin how they may stand righteous in the presence of God" (p.15). And, "It is difficult to know how a sinner could hear the announcement of the cross and resurrection as good news without some explanation that by faith it makes a person forgiven and righteous before God" (p.20). These are not textually grounded arguments. They are arguments from personal reason. And perhaps even more to the point, Piper admits, "My temptation is to defend a view because it has been believed for centuries. [Wright's] temptation is to defend a view because it fits so well into his new way of seeing the world" (p.17). He revels in the ideas of Luther, Owen, and Leon Morris, calling them much more "illuminating" than Wright (p.25). I wonder if Luther in his own time was considered to have come up with a "new way of seeing the world". It'd just be nice to read a 'fresh' response to Wright & Co. that doesn't assume itself to be true by reason from the outset.(less)

· see review

Dec 23, 2011

Joseph rated it

I liked this book. I read this book and then read Wright's response. After reading both back to back, I wish I would have read more of Wright on his view beforehand as it is referenced throughout. I agree with Piper's view of justification, but I think he misunderstands Wright at points. Wright even says so at points himself.

· see review

Aug 22, 2009

Adam Shields rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: gave-up

I really appriciate how Piper is trying to make sure he accurately reflects what Wright believes, not only by using a very well cited quotes, but also a pretty generous reading. His intent is to make sure that Wright would not have any issues with the way that Piper explains what Wright believes.

All that to say, I really respect Piper for putting together a pretty academic responce to Wright and keeping it pastoral in concern and at least so far, bending over backwards to tell peop...more

· see review

Aug 01, 2011

Timothy Bertolet rated it

Good book, easy read for anyone who wants to understand more about the New Perspective on Paul. Piper is gracious and clear. Sometimes he adds a few to many caveats as he tries to understand what N.T. Wright says--but he engages the issue without a condescending tone.

· see review

Jun 10, 2011

Steven Wedgeworth rated it

Piper isn't totally off base, but he's got some unfortunate imbalances of his own.

· see review

Jun 20, 2011

Josh rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: nonfiction, theology, reformed

A great and balanced explanation of and response to NT Wright's views on Paul and justification. Piper explains which charges against Wright are valid and which are not, which errors he falls into and which he does not, and which Wright's views may lead into even though Wright himself doesn't go there. It definitely helps me understand why there are such mixed views of Wright in evangelicalism. As his response, Piper provides an excellent defense of penal substitutionary atonement.

· see review

Aug 20, 2009

Devan rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: theology

Not bad for understanding Wright's covenantal theology in relation to the evangelical Reformed view of justification, but my time would have been better spent on other books this summer. See my review of N.T. Wright's "Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision" as well. Essentially, Piper and Wright seem to be talking past each other. Doug Wilson has some helpful thoughts on his blog: http://www.dougwils.com/?Action=Search&s...

· see review

Aug 04, 2008

John Rabe rated it

A very thorough and careful response to N.T. Wright's pervasive and influential contra-reformational teaching that Paul's use of the term "justification" is about ecclesiology rather than soteriology. I'm about halfway through and taking it carefully. It is a substantial work--as evidenced by the fact that Wright himself saw fit to write an 11,000 word response to Piper's first draft. It's also a model of charitable theological disagreement.

· see review

Dec 17, 2009

Mark rated it

· review of another edition

My second time through this book was probably even more helpful than my first time through. It is obvious that Piper isn't out to win a debate--he truly believes that true and right doctrine is being attacked by the New Perspective on Paul and he provides a very helpful response to this way of thinking. I am very thankful that Piper wrote this book. It has helped me tremendously when thinking through these issues.

· see review

Jul 27, 2011

Daniel Alvers rated it

Excellent work from a man who seeks to glorify God, by defending orthodox Christianity from what some people think are "new ideas." I think imputation of righteousness is a must for true Christianity and true understanding of grace. I like pipers clear spoken works given in the blur that some are trying to create regarding the propitiation of Jesus Christ. An excellent book.

· see review

Apr 11, 2010

Ejkotynski rated it

· review of another edition

Piper's response to N.T. Wright is thorough and convincing. His footnoting is excellent. He only gets a four star because he is far more convincing at critiquing Wright's new ideas than in presenting his positive arguments for "imputation." His scriptural references on that note are far from conclusive.

· see review

Dec 31, 2010

Mike Knox rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: non-fiction, theology

I read this book a long time ago (early summer maybe?) and I won’t be taking time to review it. Except to say that John Piper has gone to great pains to hear Wright out and understand him. This book is a model for how to disagree with someone.

· see review

May 20, 2010

Chad Barnes rated it

· review of another edition

Piper has humbly, yet thoroughly argued against Wright's perspective on justification. Great and fair read on the "new perspective" on justification.

· see review

Nov 22, 2011

Taylor rated it

Shelves: bible-theology

I am inclined more toward Piper than Wright about Paul and Justification.

· see review

Jun 01, 2009

Jerry rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: theology

A much needed and well-crafted response to NT Wright's justification errors.

· see review

Sep 20, 2010

Thomas Kong rated it

· review of another edition

Read part of it. Need to come and read some of the chapter again

· see review

Jun 08, 2009

Robert rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: christianity-doctrine, religion, _read_arts-sciences

A very intricate sandcastle.

· see review

Feb 10, 2012

Steve rated it

Feb 08, 2012

Mason marked it as to-read

Feb 06, 2012

Luke Bray marked it as to-read

Feb 05, 2012

Ryan Tindall added it

Feb 05, 2012

Kasey Cox marked it as to-read

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (6)

More editions...

Genres

Religion > Theology

26 users

Christian

2 users

See top shelves...

Readers Also Enjoyed

About John Piper

John Stephen Piper is a Calvinist and Baptist theologian, preacher, and author, currently serving as Pastor for Preaching and Vision of Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis, Minnesota. He is the author of numerous books, including ECPA Christian Book Award winners What Jesus Demands from the World, Pierced by the Word, and God's Passion for His Glory, and bestsellers Don't Waste Your Life and T...more

More about John Piper...

Books by John Piper

Desiring God: Meditations of a Christian Hedonist

Let the Nations Be Glad!: The Supremacy of God in Missions

When I Don't Desire God: How to Fight for Joy

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Pin It

Trivia About The Future of Jus...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

title link	preview: The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright
avg rating	preview: The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright Goodreads rating: 3.21 (110 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1458761.The_Future_of_Justification?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266808334m/1458761.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1458761.The_Future_of_Justification?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright by John Piper[/url]

The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

combine Other Editions (6)

Genres

Readers Also Enjoyed

About John Piper

Books by John Piper

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About The Future of Jus...

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (6)