What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?

3.9 of 5 stars 3.90 · rating details · 415 ratings · 50 reviews

N.T. Wright, a world authority on the life and letters of Paul, responds to A.N. Wilson's claim that it was Paul and not Jesus who founded Christianity. He delivers a devastating critique, contending that Paul was a faithful witness and herald of Jesus Christ.

Paperback, 192 pages

Published June 20th 1997 by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (first published January 1st 1997)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

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

Lists with This Book

The Cost of Discipleship by Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Essential Theology Books for a Seminary Education

91st out of 188 books — 60 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 791)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Mar 26, 2008 Phil rated it 3 of 5 stars

What Saint Paul Really Said

This is NT Wright's somewhat controversial book on the apostle Paul. The controversy basically has to do with the "New Perspective" on Paul described and advocated by Wright in the book. The book, however, looks at other topics as well--discussion of the new perspective only occupies a few of the chapters.
Wright spends the early parts of the book attempting to "place" Paul as a thinker and person. Paul was a Jew. But what sort of Jew? He was a Pharisee. But what sort...more What Saint Paul Really Said

This is NT Wright's somewhat controversial book on the apostle Paul. The controversy basically has to do with the "New Perspective" on Paul described and advocated by Wright in the book. The book, however, looks at other topics as well--discussion of the new perspective only occupies a few of the chapters.
Wright spends the early parts of the book attempting to "place" Paul as a thinker and person. Paul was a Jew. But what sort of Jew? He was a Pharisee. But what sort of Pharisee? He was basically the sort that expected God to act very soon in history to deliver the Jews from their exile, which he perceived as still going on--much prophecy was yet to be fulfilled. Wright thus paints a picture of Paul as one who was very interested in what God was doing to and for and through his chosen people. He then goes on to detail how all of this was restructured as a result of Paul's encounter with Jesus. Wright is at his best here, when he describes how encounters with Jesus had such a profound and history shaping impact on the apostles. He argues very convincingly that Paul certainly believed Jesus was Yahweh himself, and that while Paul played a unique and extremely influential role in shaping early Christianity, he was faithful to Jesus' message and mission, and thus did not "invent" Christianity (the book is subtitled "Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?").
Now for the controversy. As I see it, Wright basically takes two positions on Paul that go against the traditional understanding of the meaning of Paul's letters. First, he argues that when Paul talks about "The Gospel," he's not talking so much about a formula for getting saved, but rather is speaking about the announcement of the good news that, since Jesus was crucified and has risen, he is Lord of the whole earth, and that God has defeated evil through him. Though I think he is right that the word "Gospel" in Paul has perhaps been distorted somewhat in common usage, I think he goes too far in drawing a contrast between a sort of "forgiveness formula" evangelicalism and "how Paul really thought things worked." No doubt there is some tension here, but I think some of the things Wright says are misleading, in that he seems to suggest that Paul didn't really care about individual salvation, but only the broader picture of what God was doing in the world. I doubt Wright believes this himself, but his words come close to saying as much, at times.
The second (and related) controversial position is Wright's understanding of the phrase "justification by faith." According to Wright, "justification by faith" didn't mean for Paul what Luther and the other reformers thought it meant, in that it did not have do with a "transfer" or "imputation" of God's righteousness to us, but was rather a declaration by God that someone is already a member of the people of God. If someone has faith in Christ, they are declared a member of the covenant people and thus have forgiveness of sins and will be vindicated on the last day. Thus for Wright, the doctrine that divided the Church, that caused Catholics and Protestants to mutually condemn each other, is ironically supposed to be a doctrine that should unite all Christians who share a common faith. Though I have some disagreements with Wright's total understanding, I really do think this understanding of "justification by faith" has some truth to it, is liberating, and has potential to bring unity to the Church--but I'm biased because I've struggled a lot personally with the Catholic/Protestant issue. I won't touch this quagmire further, except to say that perhaps Wright has oversimplified and then been further oversimplified by his opponents. One thing reading about this debate has taught me is that these theological issues can be a lot more complicated than they seem at first.
For the most part, I enjoyed the book. I always like NT Wright's vision of history, and the controversy surrounding the Wrights views does not detract from a lot of helpful and insightful information about Paul.(less)

1 like · like · see review

Aug 03, 2011 Mark Sequeira is currently reading it

Wow. Not sure if I could say that Tom (N.T.) could write a better book than "Jesus and the Victory of God" as that book is monumental, and one of my favorites of all time, but this might be it. If indeed Tom intends to write a book like ...Victory of God on Saint Paul and this is just his feeble attempt until he finds the time, then 'look out!' because this book is world changing if you let it sink into your being, but let me clarify, I am speaking of the first half or so. The rest drops us righ...more

like · see review

Jul 22, 2011 Allen Lim rated it 4 of 5 stars

I went into this book with some caution as 2 Christian leaders I respect a lot (Carson and Piper) both seem to have serious issues with the New Perspective...

Having said that, I think Tom writes well... yes some of his ideas are explanations are a bit roundabout.... but when you're dealing with someone as complex as Paul, I guess thats to be expected.

Writing Styles aside, there are clearly some issues in here that need to be thought through. Wright redefines the traditional meanings of "gospel"...more

like · see review

Apr 01, 2011 Ben De Bono rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: favorites, theology

What St. Paul Really Said is probably N.T. Wright's most controversial book. Many evangelicals have gotten up in arms over the views he presents. John Piper wrote an entire book in response to his take on justification.

After reading it, I'm at a bit of a loss to understand what the problem is. His conclusions do differ from traditional evangelical takes on several points, but conclusions aside the book is thoroughly evangelical. Much of it is devoted to a strong defense of the evangelical view...more

2 likes · like · see review

May 17, 2009 Chris rated it 4 of 5 stars

This book is probably not for everyone. For the first third of the book I was a bit bored, as N. T. Wright took on a variety of issues regarding the Apostle Paul which are probably only of significant interest to Pauline scholars. But then he made some really striking points that got my attention, specifically challenging some common Protestant understandings of Paul's writings and bringing a stronger cultural and interpretive understanding. For example, he points out that, to Paul, the term "go...more

like · see review

Aug 14, 2011 Jacob Aitken rated it 4 of 5 stars

(This is from an older Amazon review of seven years ago. While I'm actually quite sympathetic to Wright, it's been seven years since I've read WSPRS and my understanding of the issues now is different from when I first read Wright).

Contrary to many Reformed histrionics, Wright's thesis in this book is not to destroy all Lutherans and reintroduce Mariology, Popery, and candles in worship. He is defending the historic claim that the religion of Jesus and Paul is the same. Wright completely undoes...more (This is from an older Amazon review of seven years ago. While I'm actually quite sympathetic to Wright, it's been seven years since I've read WSPRS and my understanding of the issues now is different from when I first read Wright).

Contrary to many Reformed histrionics, Wright's thesis in this book is not to destroy all Lutherans and reintroduce Mariology, Popery, and candles in worship. He is defending the historic claim that the religion of Jesus and Paul is the same. Wright completely undoes the liberal charge that Paul invented Christianity. He sees Paul, rightly, as establishing the proper continuity rightly proclaiming the victory of Jesus over the world, thus demonstrating to the principalities and powers of the world a new way of being human (181). However, Paul did not repeat everything Jesus said and did--that would contradict Jesus's role as Messiah. Paul is not a prophet like Jesus, so he could not have said everything Jesus said.

To understand Paul, according to Wright, one must understand his background into 2t Judaism. In short, pre-convert Saul trusted in God's kingdom to break into human history and overcome the whole world, by violence if necessary. He lived on passages such as Daniel 2, 7 and 9. Not only would pagans be put to shame but also compromising Jews as well (ie, Christians).

However, upon conversion Paul continued to see the Kingdom of God overtaking the world but in a different way. Israel had failed to be a light to the world and now would face judgment. At the same time, Jesus by his death on the cross and vindication through resurrection, had indeed fulfilled what Israel failed to do. Most importantly, he had been liberated to serve God in a new way (37). If any were to be saved (more on that word later) they would have to submit to Jesus's way of being Israel. Paul saw himself as herald to the King, this Jesus to whom all the Caesars of this world owed their immediate allegiance.

Paul accepted the Divinity of Jesus, according to Wright, but in a different way than phrased by most scholars, liberal or conservative. Paul took the Shema of Dt. 6--stating that God is one--and placed Jesus in the center of it (66). Of course, any Jew would easily see this as asserting that Jesus is the God in whom Israel would be redeemed. Moreover, the Spirit of Christ that is with his church in their gospel message is--to use theological language--the Holy Spirit.

This was good news for the Pagans. Paul was not either/or Jewish or Hellenistic. He essentially Jewish who challenged by way of Parody the pagan worldview, a few examples being his critique of pagan creationism and power/empire. Unlike the pagans Paul denied the divinity of creation and asserted that since creation is from God it relfects God's beauty and goodness, allthewhile DENYING ITS DIVINITY. Paul's message challenged Caesar: Christ, not Tiberius is Lord and King. At the same time Paul offered a critique FROM WITHIN Judaism: it has failed to be Israel and is no different from the Pagans (82-83).

Wright's next two chapters form the central and most controversial section of the book. Briefly stated, Wright is correct in defining dikaiosune theou and justification as legal terms but errs, in my opinion, in saying that they are appropriated through covenant. I really can't go into the disagreements here--that would be a monograph that perhaps needs to be written anyway.

He further defines justification as the symbol by which one is known to be a member of the covenant community.

Paul's ethic--if one wants to call it that--according to Wright, is worshiping God by being the renewed humanity. Such worship can only come from those who have surrendered their lives to the Lord Jesus Christ. We see this renewed humanity through worship, love, resurrection, mission, and Holiness.

Wright ends his work by butchering infidel covenant-breaker Ian Wilson's badly written work on Paul. Wilson just rehashes liberal arguments and Wright roasts them over the fire. (less)

like · see review

Jan 20, 2011 David S. T. rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: own, christian, read-in-2011

Without a doubt the letters of Paul have created plenty of doctrine and discussion in the Church, even in 2 Peter the writer mentions that Paul’s letters contain some things that are hard to understand. N.T. Wright sets out to explore Paul again this time focusing on what he might have thought in a 1st century Jewish context. Overall this book was pretty interesting, it starts with a brief summary of the recent Pauline studies, and it gives plenty of places to go if someone wants to dig a little...more Without a doubt the letters of Paul have created plenty of doctrine and discussion in the Church, even in 2 Peter the writer mentions that Paul’s letters contain some things that are hard to understand. N.T. Wright sets out to explore Paul again this time focusing on what he might have thought in a 1st century Jewish context. Overall this book was pretty interesting, it starts with a brief summary of the recent Pauline studies, and it gives plenty of places to go if someone wants to dig a little deeper. He ties Paul’s zealous Pharisee thoughts to his new thoughts in Christ and how that defines his view of the Gospel which is Jesus is Lord. He also claims that neither Judaism nor later Paul’s later Christian thought were a form of a Pelagian religion of self-help which might disappoint the people who don’t actually read this book and assume that any difference in the idea of Justification in Faith Alone means that Wright is now advocating a new form of Pelagianism. (Although any mention of works will get the label of Semi-Plegianism thrown around, I never got the impression that he believes we’re made righteous because of someone we do, at the same time does anyone truly believe that you can only have faith alone and live an antinomian lifestyle and still be saved in the end?)

My favorite part of the book was the last true chapter(9) which is sort of an application chapter, focusing on changing the world, especially moving away from serving mammon and Aphrodite, and instead serving Jesus as Lord and moving towards ‘the ecumenical task’. He quotes someone saying that ‘One is not justified by faith in justification by faith’. I have to completely agree, I wonder what Paul would think had he seen the split this justification by faith has caused in the church for the past 500 years. Does anyone really think that Christian’s who lived during the first 1500 years aren’t really Christians because they didn’t believe in Justification by Faith Alone as presented by the reformation? Is this doctrine really worth a lack of unity in the body of Christ which according to Paul was supposed to be one body, I don’t think it is.

The subtitle of this book is ‘Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?’ This question is briefly discussed in the last chapter of the book which was apparently added on after the book was completed, and it focuses on a book by A.N. Wilson. Its pointed out that Wilson has some pretty inventive ideas about Paul (some of which are completely off base), but in the decade plus since this book was published Wilson has returned to Christianity, I’m more interested in seeing him write his own critique of his Paul book.
(less)

1 like · like · see review

Jan 27, 2012 Jeff McCormack rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: nt-studies, doctrine, read-2012

I have only read a few of Wright's book so far, but this one stands out as one of the better ones I have read. I am always impressed by the tidbits he gives that get to the cultural and historical root of the subject, and he is loaded with them here.

To view Paul as some kind of heavily influenced teacher of things Hellenistic will guide you down the entire wrong path of understanding every time. I jumped into this book because of how highly it was spoken of by Scot McKnight in his book The King ...more

like · see review

Jan 15, 2010 Luis marked it as to-read · review of another edition

En un grupo de Yahoo, estamos leyendo este libro que tanto impacto y controversio hizo en el mundo de habla hispana, en medio de los circulos Protestantes Reformados, y ahora en medio de los Protestantes Reformados de habla Hispana.

Quisiera dar mi resumen del primer
capitulo.

Aproximaciones al pensamiento de Pablo.

Si hay algo que existe en nuestro contexto latinoamericano, es la
analfabetisacion bíblica. Todos creen que el cristianismo comenzó con ellos, y
terminara con ellos. El porque el primer ca...more

like · see review

Feb 12, 2008 Nick rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: those who struggle with justification, or who liked Hahn's "Father Who Keeps His Promises".

While reading "What Saint Paul Really Said," large portions of the new testament audibly clicked into place within my understanding of the broad, overarching narrative of the Bible. St. Paul was taking up the Gospel message to the Jews and to the Gentiles as the final manifestation of the covenant promises made to Abraham in Genesis 15. Bishop Wright interprets St. Paul in such a way as to place him squarely in this Jewish context, but with a clear grasp not only upon the prophetic "critique fro...more

like · see review

Aug 09, 2011 Skipper Boatwright rated it 4 of 5 stars

This book is far too often not even given a chance. Many people, on approaching this book, have already drawn their lines in the sand as to what they believe or don't believe concerning Wright's new and controversial views. I don't agree with everything Wright puts forth, but the biggest tragedy would be to throw out the baby with the bath water. If anything else, Wright is simply a joy to read, and his biblical theology is fresh and fascinating.

like · see review

Feb 05, 2009 Chris Comis rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: bibliotheca-sacra, theology

Good introduction to N.T.'s thought. Whether you agree or disagree with him, you have to admit that he has definitely done his exegesis, to the hilt. I still need to read his three major works though before I go passing any kind of serious judgment on his scholarship.

like · see review

Jun 10, 2011 Steven Wedgeworth rated it 2 of 5 stars

This book made a lot of people's lives more difficult than they had to be. Perhaps the worst part of the book is the title. Otherwise it would have been read like his other books on Jesus, contra the liberals. Alas, it was not to be.

like · see review

Mar 27, 2012 Dimitri rated it 5 of 5 stars

A well thought out and presented look at Pauline theology. Wright's attention to ancient Jewish history and culture is refreshing and consistently well supported. I can't find much sympathy for those who say Wright comes dangerously close to works-based salvation.

like · see review

Feb 10, 2012 Walt Walkowski rated it 4 of 5 stars

It can be difficult at times to keep up with N.T. Wright in this one, but he makes some compelling arguments for understanding Paul in light of his Jewish background and upbringing.

like · see review

Jan 02, 2013 Geoff Smith rated it 4 of 5 stars

This is a great book on Paul and his theology, written at a semi-popular level. Even if you don't accept Wright's view of justification (I don't), don't pass on this one.

like · see review

Jun 01, 2011 Cameron Blaauw rated it 3 of 5 stars

I read this book a few years ago. Wright has an amazing chapter on the Trinity in this work. It is part of the discussion on the New Perspective on Paul.

like · see review

Feb 15, 2009 Ashley rated it 1 of 5 stars

I think that this was a well written book, but the implications of what Wright said could be damaging to the church.It leans too far toward works based salvation. See John Piper's book for a further explanation. I wouldn't recommend this book. It seems totally wrong to me.

like · see review

view all 5 comments

Scott Wright expressly teases out a first century Judaic interpretation of the law court imagery - no where does he justify his argument with a modern caric...more
Jun 22, 2011 11:23pm

Ashley Scott,
In my understanding, the quote from Wright in my response to Dwight is a clear example of Wright's modern caricature of law court imagery (What...more Scott,
In my understanding, the quote from Wright in my response to Dwight is a clear example of Wright's modern caricature of law court imagery (What Saint Paul Really Said, 98). His description of "righteousness" as a gas that is passed across the courtroom is a supposed description of justification as described by the Magesterial Reformers. No careful exegete talks about the imputation of righteousness this way. That is my problem with his description of the law court. If he is going to argue against the Reformation, he needs to actually understand what the Reformation says about imputation and justification before he critiques it.
Additionally, one of Piper's stronger points is a critique of Wright's definition of gospel. Wright limits the definition of gospel to a declaration that "Jesus is Lord." However, if a person is left without the imputation of righteousness, the declaration of Jesus as Lord is not a good thing, it is a very bad thing, because to be in the presence of a righteous God without a perfect righteousness does not end well. Wright claims that union with Christ "does the job" of the imputation of Christ's righteousness (See Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision, 142) and that there is no need for imputation of righteousness. My problem with this claim is that a person cannot be united with a righteous God unless they are perfectly righteous. The only way this can happen is through the beautiful and marvelous imputation of Christ's righteousness.
In my understanding, one of Wright's largest blind-spots a lack of a focus on sin. Again, at the 2010 Atlanta Evangelical Theological Society conference, someone asked him point-blank how he would tell someone to become a Christian. He said, "The gospel is proclaimed (gospel being: "Jesus is Lord.") The person responds with faith, and now what is true of Christ is true of the believer." The large, glaring omition: any mention of sin. In order to understand our salvation, we must truly understand our sin and repent of that sin. I am concerned for people who are ardent followers of Wright that they are not getting the whole gospel when they hear what he has to say about justification.(less)
Jun 23, 2011 07:23am

Dec 19, 2012 Neil Rogers rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is a heady book that makes Wright's contribution to the New Perspective on Paul clear and accessible to a wider audience. In light of that goal, he often skims through arguments with less development than I would like. Overall, though, his permise is solid and I found his conclusions thoughtful and informative. Best of all, he keeps the gospel, that is, the life, death, resurrection and eternal Lordship of Jesus, front and center, regardless of the fact that this book is about Paul. This bo...more

like · see review

Apr 13, 2012 Bradley added it

If you want a clear book that explains the "fresh perspective' on Paul, this is it.

like · see review

Jul 17, 2009 Nick rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: theology, own, pauline-studies

Though I'm not sure that I agree with everything Wright says or where I stand on the New Perspective of Paul, Wright makes exegesis fun. I really enjoy reading him. This book primarily focuses on the issue of Justification.

like · see review

Jan 13, 2012 Jacob rated it 5 of 5 stars

great starting place for wright and new perspective.

like · see review

Jul 23, 2009 Benjamin Alexander rated it 3 of 5 stars

This was my first Wright book of many. Really rocked my world.

like · see review

Aug 09, 2011 Jay D rated it 4 of 5 stars

A decent introduction to the New Perspective.

like · see review

Feb 19, 2009 Douglas Wilson rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: theology

Great, but troubling.

like · see review

Aug 11, 2009 Steve Hemmeke rated it 3 of 5 stars

Right on, but a little off...

like · see review

Jul 14, 2008 Joshua rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: bible-and-theology

really good. first book i've read specifically about Paul's theology. it has been really helpful for understanding what exactly Paul is trying to communicate in certain places.

Some key points made in the book:

(1) What Paul meant by 'the gospel' was not 'here's how to get saved' or that 'Jesus is the way to heaven' but rather 'Jesus is king, and God, and has been vindicated as the Messiah, and therefore pagan gods are blasphemous nonsenses'.

(more to come)

like · see review

May 02, 2007 Luke rated it 3 of 5 stars Recommends it for: anyone involved in contemporary discussion of the Bible

Shelves: theology, biblicalstudies

well written and convincing, but struggles to convince of a definite need to rework our image of Paul and the Judaism of his day. calls into question Reformational view of justification without attempting to dialog with it. if this understanding is so obvious, why has it only shown up in the mid- to late-20th Century?

is to be commended for its high view of the Lordship of Christ in the message of the Gospel.

a worthy read but not without your thinking cap.

like · see review

Jan 11, 2011 Dwight Davis rated it 4 of 5 stars

Phenomenal book by N.T. Wright. Wright sets Paul firmly in his first century Jewish context to help us better understand what Paul meant. Immensely helpful and while I don't agree with everything in the book, I heartily commend this book to anyone wanting to better understand the apostle Paul.

like · see review

Oct 18, 2012 Karel Castro rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: doctrinal-issues

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 26 27 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 (5)

More editions...

Genres

Religion > Theology

47 users

Religion > Christianity

7 users

Christian

5 users

Religion

4 users

History

3 users

Non Fiction

2 users

Reference

2 users

Spirituality

2 users

Church > Church History

2 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About N.T. Wright

N. T. Wright is the former Bishop of Durham in the Church of England (2003-2010) and one of the world's leading Bible scholars. He is now serving as the chair of New Testament and Early Christianity at the School of Divinity at the University of St. Andrews. He has been featured on ABC News, Dateline NBC, The Colbert Report, and Fresh Air, and he has taught New Testament studies at Cambridge, McGi...more

More about N.T. Wright...

Books by N.T. Wright

Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church

Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense

The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is

The New Testament and the People of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God, #1)

Jesus and the Victory of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God, #2)

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About What Saint Paul R...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

title link	preview: What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?
avg rating	preview: What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? Goodreads rating: 3.90 (415 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/405339.What_Saint_Paul_Really_Said?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348197376l/405339.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/405339.What_Saint_Paul_Really_Said?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? by N.T. Wright[/url]

What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website