Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision

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

Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision

3.95 of 5 stars 3.95 · rating details · 550 ratings · 88 reviews

Few issues are more central to the Christian faith than the nature, scope and means of salvation. Many have thought it to be largely a transaction that gets one to heaven. In this riveting book, N. T. Wright explains that God's salvation is radically more than this. At the heart of much vigorous debate on this topic is the term the apostle Paul uses in several of his lette...more

Hardcover, 279 pages

Published April 16th 2009 by IVP Academic (first published February 19th 2009)

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

20th out of 188 books — 60 voters

God's Favor - Breath Of Heaven by Michele Woolley

Thought provoking Christian books

48th out of 63 books — 44 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 1,231)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Aug 09, 2011 Chauncey Lattimer added it

A recurring part of my theological training was an emphasis upon interpreting Scripture by means of Scripture. Difficult/vague passages were to be interpreted by those that were more easily understood. And, in keeping with Wright’s quoting of Kasemann, there was to be “an inner logic” to the text. I say all of this because N.T. Wright’s book, Justification: God’s Plan & Paul’s Vision, is a work that approaches an understandably difficult topic (justification) from the perspective of God’s ov...more

2 likes · like · see review

Aug 04, 2011 Jacob Aitken added it

This is Tom Wright’s response to John Piper’s recent work on justification, and we can think Piper for writing that work: without his work Wright would not have written this one. As most know, Wright has been accused in the past fifteen years of denying justification by faith, attacking the Reformed tradition, and probably microwaving kittens. Granted, most accusations that Wright has “denied the gospel” are meaningless (for when is the gospel not at steak for Reformed bloggers?). However, there...more

2 likes · like · see review

Mar 05, 2013 Dave Courtney rated it 4 of 5 stars

N.T. Wright represents himself as somewhat of a misunderstood and polarizing figure. Having spent a substantial amount of time studying the apostle Paul, he speaks in his preface of how the Church at large has tended to interpret Paul’s view of justification wrongly. He challenges the concept of imputed righteousness, which Lutherans and the Reformers tend to see as synonymous with justification, and his book, aptly titled Justification, is a polemic and response to Piper’s vocal protest, even a...more

like · see review

Feb 18, 2013 Todd Miles rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: soteriology

There is probably no other author with whom I disagree whom I enjoy reading more. Wright is a remarkable writer and his ideas and presentation always cause me to reflect deeply on Scripture and the narrative of redemptive history. "Justification" is Wright’s rejoinder to John Piper on the topic of imputed righteousness. As I read Wright, I am in fundamental agreement with him on the passages that are the foundation for his position. But I would say the same for Piper. Because of that, I do belie...more

like · see review

Feb 11, 2013 Eli rated it 1 of 5 stars

N.T. Wright has one strength: emphasizing the need to connect the gospel with the larger story of the Bible. I say, amen to that. How indeed does the gospel of Christ fit with the promise God gave to Abraham? I applaud Wright's concern for this question. Unfortunately, he fails to connect them, and ends up making the Scriptures a confused, mangled mess.

Wright's problem is that he takes a point that is truly lacking in traditional Protestantism and emphasizes it is beyond its due, turning just ab...more N.T. Wright has one strength: emphasizing the need to connect the gospel with the larger story of the Bible. I say, amen to that. How indeed does the gospel of Christ fit with the promise God gave to Abraham? I applaud Wright's concern for this question. Unfortunately, he fails to connect them, and ends up making the Scriptures a confused, mangled mess.

Wright's problem is that he takes a point that is truly lacking in traditional Protestantism and emphasizes it is beyond its due, turning just about everything into the point he is trying to make. He is reactionary and, like all reactionary theology, goes too far with his point. Wright unfairly criticizes the Reformers and speaks too harshly about them throughout the whole book. The issue is simply not as clear as Wright says it is. The Reformers grasped something true - the most important thing of all - the gift of righteousness by faith in Christ. For this they are to be honored, even if they failed to connect this truth with the big story. The answer is not to throw away the doctrine of imputed righteousness, as Wright has done.

Wright basically sucks the morality out of the epistles of Paul. His definitions of righteousness have everything to do with covenant faithfulness and covenant membership and nothing to do with the character of God's perfect love and justice. It seems that the essential teaching of Jesus on righteousness - the Sermon on the Mount - is non-existent for Wright. His interpretation of Galatians utterly ignores the connection between Gal. 2:16 and 3:10, and the Old Testament context of Gal. 3:10 being all about morality. Wright is inconsistent throughout the book, denying one thing only to affirm it later. For example, he argues repeatedly that Abraham is not an example nor illustration of justification, as the Reformers say he is, but then on p. 209 he affirms that he is.

Wright's exegesis is not carefully executed verse by verse, but is very generally pieced together section by section; it sweeps, skips and leaps, grabbing onto words and thoughts and weaving them into the narrative that he has determined is there. His interpretations will not leave you with a clearer grasp of the epistles, but will leave you with a confused picture.

Wright has about four different themes he is setting forth, each one arbitrarily connected to the other: 1) "the righteousness of God" being defined as God's faithfulness to His covenant, 2) "justification" being defined as our identification as covenant members, 3) "the works of the law" being defined as Jewish ceremonies which mark you as God's people vs. faith in Christ as the badge of membership, and 4) the Spirit's work in the lives of God's people as the cause of final justification. Talk about confusing. These things are connected in no organic way. These points end up destroying the moral focus of Scripture, the true doctrine of justification, assurance, and make the Spirit some magical force that is unrelated to the gospel (since there is no gospel left to connect to).

I do not recommend Wright's "Justification" for those who are wanting to really understand the doctrine of justification. It is but an important read for understanding the new perspective debate. The best book by far on the theology of the death of Christ in the New Testament is James Denney's "The Death of Christ". Also read his "The Christian Doctrine of Reconciliation." For understanding the connection between the gospel and the Abrahamic covenant, read "Israel in the Plan of God" by David Baron and "The Divine Unity of Scripture" by Adolph Saphir, as well as Saphir's "Christ and Israel".(less)

like · see review

Dec 09, 2012 Bryon rated it 5 of 5 stars

Author: N.T. Wright
Downers Grove, InterVarsity Press, 2009
Number of pages: 252

Leading New Testament scholar N.T. Wright has taken C.S. Lewis’s seat at the table. As Lewis changed the way people looked at Christianity, read their Bibles and thought about God in the twentieth century, Wright will do the same in the twenty-first. Like Lewis, Wright has a talent for making difficult biblical concepts accessible to the average person.

He is a primary scholar in the New Perspective on Paul. Wright sh...more

like · see review

Mar 08, 2012 Rachael rated it 4 of 5 stars

Wright interprets Paul in light of his Jewish roots, but not to the point of dismissing something new here happening at all. I suppose it goes to show how imbued I am in the New Perspective that I found nothing surprising here and was confused that anyone would find it controversial. The essential point is that by justification Paul means rendering innocent of someone in a law court and this is done because God fulfills God's plan for humanity the way he told Abraham he'd do it. When Israel fail...more

like · see review

Feb 07, 2012 Ryan rated it 4 of 5 stars

Though this felt like I was reading one side of an argument I didn't entirely understand, Wright is funny and clear as he explains his views of Justification vs. those of John Piper. This was Book #1 for our theology book club.

Favourite passages:

God is rescuing us from the shipwreck of the world, not so that we can sit back and put our feet up in his company, but so that we can be part of his plan to remake the world. We are in orbit around God and his purposes, not the other way around.

But par...more

like · see review

Aug 03, 2011 James Korsmo added it

Justification is one of the core doctrines of the Christian faith, and in both evangelical and more mainline circles, it has been contested territory for a generation or more. N. T. Wright's Justification is truty a book to be reckoned with. It is a comprehensive (though, as the author admits, not exhaustive) statement of the place of justification in Paul's thought. Much has been written about this highly anticipated contribution from one of today's most noted scholars, both in appreciation and...more

like · see review

Apr 23, 2011 Ben De Bono rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: theology

A couple years back, John Piper wrote The Future of Justification: A Response to N.T. Wright as a response to N.T. Wright's view on Justification (read my review here). Justification is Wright's counter primarily to Piper but also to his other Reformed minded critics.

It's obvious throughout this book that Wright is somewhat frustrated at needing to write a response such as this. He feels his position has not been understood properly by his critics. I empathize with his position and agree with h...more

1 like · like · see review

Oct 14, 2010 Donovan Richards rated it 3 of 5 stars

There are times when I wish I lived during the era of saints and heretics. As orthodox Christianity developed, people fought over differing theological positions and often resorted to name calling. It is best to view N.T. Wright’s book in a similar fashion. In short, Justification reads as an extended letter snappily written to John Piper in defense of Wright’s position on Paul’s view of justification in Romans.

The backdrop behind this book is the longstanding debate of the “Old Perspective” ver...more There are times when I wish I lived during the era of saints and heretics. As orthodox Christianity developed, people fought over differing theological positions and often resorted to name calling. It is best to view N.T. Wright’s book in a similar fashion. In short, Justification reads as an extended letter snappily written to John Piper in defense of Wright’s position on Paul’s view of justification in Romans.

The backdrop behind this book is the longstanding debate of the “Old Perspective” versus the “New Perspective” of Paul. John Piper holds the classical position known as the “Old Perspective” first developed by Martin Luther. Briefly, this position proclaims that Christians are made right in the eyes of God through faith whereas Jews believe that they are made right by the law or good deeds. Thus, salvation in the “Old Perspective” comes from inward faith and not from outward actions. In contrast, Wright represents the “New Perspective” that understands both the Old Testament and New Testament views of salvation to be part of the same overarching narrative. It is not that Christians are saved by faith and Jews are saved by works; instead, justification is a single act from God in which people are capable of responding faithfully through right actions. The word “covenant” found in the Old Testament summarizes the “New Perspective” well. Wright goes further, however, defining this singular covenantal theme as God’s “single-plan-through-Israel-for-the-world” (p. 106).

While I personally am interested in the subject and know the greater debate which inspired the writing of this book, the text itself spends little time giving the reader the background. Wright begins by lobbing insult grenades toward enemy lines and concludes the book with a long and difficult-to-follow interpretation of Paul’s epistles. I often found myself confused about Wright’s argument because he cites verses without telling us what they say.

On the whole, Justification, is a book for those actively involved in the “Old Perspective” vs. “New Perspective” debate. Without a solid grounding in these issues, a prospective leader will become lost. Although it is a decent book, I can only recommend it to the committed few have already know the basic debate.

Review originally published at http://wherepenmeetspaper.blogspot.com (less)

like · see review

Apr 11, 2010 Ejkotynski rated it 3 of 5 stars

Wright's book is a much better expression of his view of Paul's doctrine of Justification than anything I've read from him in the past. Much of his lack of clarity was cleared up here. I can't really give him even four stars for the following reasons: 1) he doesn't quote context or scripture very well 2) his footnotes are not comprehensive 3) as one other critic has said, he tells people what the reformers said without seeming to actually know what they said - footnotes of primary sources would...more

1 like · like · see review

Nov 05, 2009 Pastoralmusings added it

Whew! What a book! One goes up and then down while reading this book. There's much to be said about Justification that simply cannot be said in a book review. It would give away too much.
Let it simply be said that the New Perspective on Paul is under fire. John Piper fired a huge round when he wrote Counted Righteous in Christ and The Future of Justification. Piper is no light-weight expositor, but should be taken seriously. Wright has done so in many ways. This is Wright's response.
First of all...more Whew! What a book! One goes up and then down while reading this book. There's much to be said about Justification that simply cannot be said in a book review. It would give away too much.
Let it simply be said that the New Perspective on Paul is under fire. John Piper fired a huge round when he wrote Counted Righteous in Christ and The Future of Justification. Piper is no light-weight expositor, but should be taken seriously. Wright has done so in many ways. This is Wright's response.
First of all, I shall mention the good. There is much good in this book. Wright has much knowledge and experience as an exegete. This is obvious as one reads Justification. Wright also seeks to be true to the Scripture. Even those who disagree with him must admit the fact of Wright's seriousness when he approaches God's Word.
What impresses me the most is the fact that behind the disagreement, Piper and Wright have two huge things in common. They both believe that God is working in this world to manifest His glory. They also both believe in the unity of the Bible.
It is the commitment to the unity of the Bible that most impresses me about Wright and Justification. He simply seeks to relate everything. Indeed, everything in the Bible is related. I both applaud and admire Wright on this. He has worked hard to harmonize the various texts that are relevant to the discussion of justification.
The not so good: Wright is not always as charitable to those with whom he disagrees as one should be. His opening comparison between Old Perspective believers and geocentrists was not a wise move at all. It could serve to alienate many whom he desires to reach.
Wright also at times does not seem to quite get the point of Piper. While he states that Piper misses his points (and I think that is indeed possible), he misses Piper's points, too.
In the end, I must say that I both labored over and enjoyed Justification. It's simply an amazing work.
What saddens me the most is that Piper and Wright both could probably sit down together and work through much of this issue. Piper is right that imputed righteousness cannot be diminished. Wright is correct in seeking to bring the writings of Paul into their covenantal perspective. On this I now have much to consider.
Thanks to Adrianna Wright of IVP for this review copy.
(less)

1 like · like · see review

Apr 16, 2010 David rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: bible, theology

Wright's book is a response to John Piper's critique of his views on justification. Unlike Piper's book, this is not a point by point rebuttal to Piper as his was to Wright. Instead it is an attempt by Wright to be as clear as possible on his understanding of the issue. Like Piper, he writes with humility and respect.

This book is an enjoyable treat. Wright firmly sets his interpretation of Paul's letters in the context of the bible's grand narrative. He works to clear away tradition and to put P...more

2 likes · like · see review

May 08, 2011 Tim rated it 4 of 5 stars

Wright offers this book as a response to Reformed critics, especially John Piper, who have consistently misunderstood and misrepresented his ideas. As such there is a bit of polemic here, which I have no general problem with as Wright's argument is solid and his opponent's are thick, but it does distract from Wright's exegesis. Wright is exceptional in his opening up of Scripture and I frankly would have loved even further explication at points. I appreciate his Scripturally and historically bas...more

like · see review

May 12, 2011 Mark Franklin rated it 4 of 5 stars

This is a fantastic book, though be warned: it is not for the faint of heart. Over half the book is the exegesis of Pauline epistles, and thus is not exactly easy reading; it also assumes you have a Bible handy, as Wright does not always directly quote the passages he is working on, just gives references then dives in. I actually appreciated this space saving tactic, as it got more content into a thinner book. Despite the dense exegesis, this is the clearest articulation of Wright's theology I'v...more

like · see review

May 22, 2013 Matthew Colvin rated it 5 of 5 stars

Full disclosure: I read this book very much hoping to see Wright demonstrate how wrong and distorting Piper's and other Reformed OPP approaches are. I spent 9 years teaching Bible and theology to the children of John Piper fans. His theology completely prevented them from grasping certain arguments in Paul and James. But Wright is here to make them notice the cracks in the edifice that they have been plastering over. His method is stated on p. 213: "As often happens, the passage which was initia...more Full disclosure: I read this book very much hoping to see Wright demonstrate how wrong and distorting Piper's and other Reformed OPP approaches are. I spent 9 years teaching Bible and theology to the children of John Piper fans. His theology completely prevented them from grasping certain arguments in Paul and James. But Wright is here to make them notice the cracks in the edifice that they have been plastering over. His method is stated on p. 213: "As often happens, the passage which was initially puzzling turns out to contain the clues to everything else as well."

The biggest benefit to be derived from this book is a reading of Romans and other letters of Paul that is thoroughly convincing in its coherence and deeply rooted in the covenant with Abraham. Again and again, Wright shows that the covenant with Abraham forms the conceptual context within which Paul's arguments make sense, and that OPP exegetes have utterly failed to deal with this context -- especially Piper, with his bizarre misdefinition of "God's righteousness" as "His concern for His own glory". Wright puts paid to this nonsense and shows that the correct definition is "God's faithfulness to His single plan to save the world through Israel." The exegetical payoff from this correct definition is huge, and Wright teases it out in passage after passage until he has an overwhelming number of "solved" passages to set over against the puzzlements generated by OPP readings.

The second biggest benefit to the book is Wright's vindication of the role of the Holy Spirit in the Christian life, and the fact -- taught everywhere in the Bible, yet denied by so many otherwise well-meaning Reformed and Evangelical churches -- that the final judgment of all human beings will be "according to works." His critics, including Michael Horton, cannot abide this. They think that "since justification is by faith, there simply cannot be a final ‘judgment according to works’." Wright replies that "I am frequently challenged on this point in public, after lectures and seminars, and my normal reply is that I did not write Romans 2; Paul did." Bravo.

In sum, this was a very satisfying book, and the general impression is that Piper simply isn't a good enough exegete, nor well enough grounded in a knowledge of the Bible's Jewish background, to go toe-to-toe with Wright. But of course, sometime later this year, the other 1,700-page shoe will drop, with the publication of _Paul and the Faithfulness of God_. And that huge pair of tomes will no doubt shore up the main deficiency of this present book: namely, the fact that it must sometimes move quickly through Paul's arguments without taking the time to sift and read slowly. Wright is perhaps more talented at painting a convincing big picture, but he also knows how to zoom in and do careful exegesis. This volume is mostly about the former, with the helicopter dipping down in many places to show how Wright's reading offers more coherence and better exegetical fruit than the readings of Piper, Westerholm, et al. But PFG will be the hiking tour of the same landscape, and will offer the sort of detail that this book, by its hurried timetable and polemical nature, simply cannot.

Some of Wright's readers fault him for the error that has been alleged by S. Wedgeworth and Doug Wilson, namely, that Wright makes exaggerated claims about the mistakenness of the Reformed tradition and the newness of the NPP and his own work. Now, obviously, Wright is not engaged in historical theology, nor ought he to get down in the mud and wrestle with those whose teaching is "as the scribes" (Protestant Talmudism, I call it -- teaching nothing but what may be found in the Reformation fathers, just as the Talmud is filled with "Rabbi X said in the name of Rabbi Y"). Wright's project is to bring forth what Scripture says and thereby correct this tradition. The two points on which he does so are that it has not noticed that the covenant with Abraham is the sun around which Paul's heliocentric system moves, and that it has failed to understand justification in terms of Christology, Jewish eschatology, and ecclesiology, choosing instead to parse Paul's statements through the anachronistic grid of medieval theologians' ideas about "iustitia" and "merit". I do not think that the Evangelical Amoraim can deny that these two charges are true: certainly the Reformed and Lutheran confessions have almost nothing to say about Israel in connection with justification! But if these charges are true, then the whole project has been carried on in the most anachronistic and implausible way for hundreds of years. So Wright is not overselling the importance of what he has to say.

In the end, I loved this book because I had the same reaction to Wright that I had when I first heard his lectures opposite Richard Gaffin at the 2005 Auburn Avenue Pastors' Conference: "Wow, Dr. Gaffin is a clever man, and his system is a marvel of sophistication. But Wright is talking about what the apostle Paul is talking about." That will never be acceptable to those who only want to do their theology through the traditions of the fathers, or through a celebrity pastor like Piper or Doug Wilson. And so they will give it bad reviews, because Wright isn't shy about goring their golden calves. But if you're tired of passing your eyes over the problem passages and tracing the ridiculous epicycles that "geocentric" exegesis requires; if want to know what the apostle Paul is talking about, read this book.(less)

1 like · like · see review

Jul 10, 2012 Jay Miklovic rated it 4 of 5 stars

The mention of the name NT Wright and the mention of "The New Perspective..." always gets a rise out of some camp. I understand why. While I personally find NT Wright to be compelling, and at the very least thought provoking, others feel that the work he is doing is a direct affront against the scripture as they understand it. I get that.

I am not ready to fully embrace, or to cast aside NT Wright, but I will say that he is without a doubt risky. His theology frightens me in some ways because it...more

like · see review

Feb 11, 2010 Mark rated it 1 of 5 stars

John Piper's response to N.T. Wright's book What Saint Paul Really Said is a gracious yet firm response to Wright's version of the New Perspective on Paul. When I heard that Wright was responding to this book with his new book Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision I was very excited to see how Wright would deal with Piper's humble critiques. Unfortunately, Wright's response is nothing but confusing and jumbled rhetoric. As one critic put it, all Wright manages to do is "hover a foot above...more

1 like · like · see review

Jul 07, 2009 Adam Ross rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: theology

Really, really good. Occasionally Wright will overstate his case, and I agree with Rev. Wilson that there are a number of problems with Wright's rejection of imputation, especially since Wright has to then provide his own form of imputation. We can't escape the concept of imputation (properly understood) because there is no hope for the sinner except that Christ takes on our sin and we are given the crucified and risen Christ.

It was nice, however, to hear Wright criticize a number of other folks...more

2 likes · like · see review

Apr 14, 2011 Jason rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: church

Theology is by default a dry subject. That's not a bad thing - theology is heavy and despite what some say critically important - and so it should be slow moving. It should be precise - one of my professors pointed out that my wife (a lawyer) went to school for 3 years to be precise about language because it really matters in the law, and in his mind, how much more does it matter here - and it should be entered into soberly and humbly because we're discussing things so big and at some level so a...more Theology is by default a dry subject. That's not a bad thing - theology is heavy and despite what some say critically important - and so it should be slow moving. It should be precise - one of my professors pointed out that my wife (a lawyer) went to school for 3 years to be precise about language because it really matters in the law, and in his mind, how much more does it matter here - and it should be entered into soberly and humbly because we're discussing things so big and at some level so abstract that, well, we should be careful about the pronouncements we make. So dry and a bit boring is ok in my book when it comes to theology.

Wright's book here displays that preciseness - in fact, it's a big argument between himself and John Piper on what the word "justification" means in Paul's context. Wright is in this book at his best - Wright is a world class scholar, a pastor over thousands of people in his part of the Church of England, humble to a fault (in the first chapter - "20% of what I say is wrong, I just don't know which 20%), and I believe, correct. This book takes a fairly central doctrine within Christian faith, and locates it squarely within its historical context, which is precisely what he should do.

And it's convincing. After reading this book (after reading chapters 1-2), I cannot figure out why Piper decided to pick this fight with Wright, as he's clearly not equipped for it. Piper brought, in layman's terms, a knife to a gun fight. Most of that has to do with my presuppositions as a historian first - and Piper's insistence on the 16th and 17th century (the Reformers) as the locus for meaning on Paul's use of justification simply loses to Wright's insistence on first century and before, and the first century evidence Wright brings to the discussion.

And, my favorite part of all of it, is that Wright constantly and thoroughly is gracious to those who disagree with him. Despite how Wright is treated (and really, check out the blog world, and see how Wright is condemned), he never dismisses anyone who disagrees with him as a heretic, or as dangerous to the church world in the way that those labels are applied to him. His practice matches his preaching, and that means as much to me as what he says.

For as dry as Theology can be, I think Wright does the best job of making it interesting and relevant. The historical information is invaluable (though, hardly original, as it's laced in all of Wright's other work), and if one is interested in some Christian doctrine, this is a good place to start. (less)

like · see review

Jul 25, 2011 Christopher M. rated it 4 of 5 stars

I was extremely interested in becoming more familiar with the discussions taking place regarding the so-called "new perspectives" on Paul. This is my first real exposure to the most famous of this perspective's champions, and I came into his book extremely cautious. However, I came away pleasantly surprised, for the most part. N.T. Wright is truly a friend of the Gospel, and his teaching tirelessly seeks to put God and his purposes at the center. I found his style engaging and his teaching sound...more I was extremely interested in becoming more familiar with the discussions taking place regarding the so-called "new perspectives" on Paul. This is my first real exposure to the most famous of this perspective's champions, and I came into his book extremely cautious. However, I came away pleasantly surprised, for the most part. N.T. Wright is truly a friend of the Gospel, and his teaching tirelessly seeks to put God and his purposes at the center. I found his style engaging and his teaching sound and well-reasoned. I would immediately recommend this book to anyone interested in learning more about the new perspective-old perspective debate, anyone trying to learn more about this doctrine, or anyone who is looking to expand their horizon with regard to the scope of Covenant Theology.

Now for the criticisms. Wright criticisms of the old perspective seem often quite unwarranted to me, as though he didn't quite understand who he was up against. In fact, many things he points out as errant, do not at all describe any of the Reformed Theology with which I'm familiar, but rather more of mainline protestantism or Dispensationalism. I hate to say it, but he is attacking a straw man for much of the first half of the book. Secondly, I believe him to be in error on a few points. For instance, his claim that law in Paul's writings "always" refers to Torah. Or his obvious Post-millenial bent. Or his overemphasis of ecclesiology at the expense of personal soteriology. I've found many Reformed writers who much more satisfyingly deal with these issues. Also, Wright seems to downplay faith in favor of "faithfulness" even when the text seems to demand the former. However, I found the majority of the book to be very enlightening on the subject to which it pertained, and I look forward to reading more of what Wright has to say. Michael Horton offers a great series of reviews of the topics covered in this book, and I'd recommend those to anyone interested in further commentary.(less)

like · see review

Oct 27, 2011 M Christopher rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: theology

I am surprised to find myself giving this book a relatively low rating. I've heard Bishop Wright speak and read others of his books and found those experiences tremendously thought-provoking and positive. He is clearly one of the finest New Testament scholars and theologians writing today.

But this book suffers from a serious flaw. It was written in response to Wright's critics, especially John Piper. The first half of the book, in which Wright outlines his approach to the subject of Justificatio...more I am surprised to find myself giving this book a relatively low rating. I've heard Bishop Wright speak and read others of his books and found those experiences tremendously thought-provoking and positive. He is clearly one of the finest New Testament scholars and theologians writing today.

But this book suffers from a serious flaw. It was written in response to Wright's critics, especially John Piper. The first half of the book, in which Wright outlines his approach to the subject of Justification, is in large part a defensive polemic. Wright gets downright snarky about his critics, something I never would have expected. It is almost as though, in digging deep into the thought of Paul, Wright has taken on some of the apostle's famed pugnaciousness. Clearly the editors at InterVarsity Press either didn't feel they could reign in the scholar or decided the book would be more controversial and attract bigger sales if they allowed Wright his head. I found the effect to be enormously off-putting.

The second half of the book, however, when Wright actually does the exegesis of the significant passages, is excellent. Wright's deep understanding of Koine Greek, the milieu into which Paul wrote and the apostle's continuing message combines with the author's own vision of the Kingdom of God to provide compelling interpretation of the Scriptures. Wright's focus on the consequences of Justification as well as its mechanics gives this core Gospel message a new life and urgency for our time. As we in the Church hear again and again the demands of the younger generations for a faith that is relevant and active, Wright gives us the tools to turn what has become an individualistic and inward salvation story into an activist faith that seeks to do the mission that Jesus, the prophets and even Abraham call us to pursue.

Recommendation: Read the second half of the book first, then read as much of the first half as you can stomach. Focus on Wright's exegesis of Paul's writing and ignore as much as possible his embodiment of the apostle's famed temper.(less)

like · see review

Jan 16, 2013 Joel Wentz rated it 4 of 5 stars

Wright poses a very compelling argument, primarily based in a covenant-theology reading of Paul. His response to Piper excels where Piper's stumbled, namely in sound exegesis. The entire second half of the book is a sweeping run through both Galatians and Romans (the primary scriptures that have become battlegrounds over this doctrinal debate), and Wright paints a comprehensive picture of what happens when we are "justified".

I highly recommend this book, though I strongly recommend reading both...more

like · see review

Jul 19, 2011 Jacob McGill rated it 4 of 5 stars

This book is worth the 4 stars for 2 reasons: it clearly states his position on Pauline Justification and his winsome rhetorical skills. Those who say that Wright is confusing in this book cannot have entered into Wright's world, and those who think he comes across as crass have either not read much scholarly works, and/or not be familiar with Wright (listen to his last lecture at the 2010 Wheaton Theology Conference and keep in mind that Piper blasted him only a few days before). His chapter on...more

1 like · like · see review

Mar 22, 2012 Brian rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: theology

N. T. Wright's response to John Piper's critique (The Future of Justification) is his most thorough book on Paul yet. It is, in many ways, a masterful unpacking of Paul's thought. Wright shows how Paul's theology of justification is grounded in God's covenant with Abraham and plan to bring redemption to the world through Israel, and ultimately through Jesus. He explores how justification is informed by Jewish law-court imagery, eschatology, and Christology. Wright's unpacking of the narrative su...more N. T. Wright's response to John Piper's critique (The Future of Justification) is his most thorough book on Paul yet. It is, in many ways, a masterful unpacking of Paul's thought. Wright shows how Paul's theology of justification is grounded in God's covenant with Abraham and plan to bring redemption to the world through Israel, and ultimately through Jesus. He explores how justification is informed by Jewish law-court imagery, eschatology, and Christology. Wright's unpacking of the narrative substructure to Paul's thought is, at times, brilliant. And after reading this book, I think that Wright and Piper are actually much closer in their thinking than either one of them may think.

However, confusion and misunderstanding continues, and this due not least of all, to Wright himself. It's unfortunate that he sometimes caricatures positions that he rejects out of hand and misconstrues the thought and theology of his opponents. (Can anyone who knows John Piper seriously believe that there is no place for the Holy Spirit in his theology?!) Wright's reasons for rejecting imputation are not fully convincing. I still suspect that he takes some wrong steps in his exegesis at some crucial points. And his articulation of how justification by faith in the present relates to future judgment according to works is still a little fuzzy and subject to misunderstanding.

With that said, I think Wright's unpacking of the believer's union with Christ comes fairly close to achieving what imputation achieves for Piper and traditional Reformed theology. Not all his critics agree, but Wright should at least be carefully read and listened to before stones are cast.

I've heard Don Carson say before that Wright's problem is in backgrounding what should be in the foreground and foregrounding what should be in the background. I think I understand that critique. But after reading both Wright and Piper (and Waters, and Westerholm, and Carson, and Moo!) I am wanting to see a synthesis of the different insights and strengths these pastors and scholars bring to the table.

I recommend this book to those who are following the conversation on the New Perspective on Paul. If you've read Piper, definitely read Wright. But in my opinion, it would be better to read neither than to read only one side of the argument. 3 1/2 stars.(less)

like · see review

Mar 14, 2012 Brian rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: worth-reading-again, life-changing

This book was absolutely fantastic. The first part of the book contains responses to John Piper, which this book was mainly written as. I have read a few books by Piper but not specifically the one Wright is responding to. This makes the first half kind of frustutating and made me want to give this a lower rating. However the first half is still beneficial because it is where Wright explains much of his interpretive methods. The second half is incredible and will truly change the way you underst...more

1 like · like · see review

Feb 01, 2011 Dmcconkey rated it 5 of 5 stars

You may agree or disagree with N. T. Wright, but to disagree without reading his works is to your disadvantage and loss. Too often we talk about being People of the Book, but spend little time in the Book. Our arguments are based on other people’s thoughts and theology and sometimes even our own. Far too often it is not from the Scriptures and time spent working through from beginning to end. It resembles more a hunt and pick for that which supports our belief or argument and ignore the rest. Th...more

like · see review

Jul 26, 2011 Angus Mcfarlane rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: spirituality

I doubt I understood half of what this was about, but it was worth reading nonetheless, I think. The direct nature of the critique of Piper was unusual for a theological book, but welcome: pretending conflicting views don't exist serves no-one.

I felt the book was relatively readable despite the long sentences and long words needed to address the topic properly. The re-setting of the reformer's question regarding the nature of justification is correct I think; Paul wrote to an audience more entr...more

like · see review

Aug 09, 2009 Adam rated it 4 of 5 stars

A great deal of this book was over my head. It's way more academic (seminary) that the other two I've read (Surprised by Hope / Simply Christian). It's a great exegetical walk through Paul attempting to show how Wright's perspective is a mix of the "New" and "Old" perspective and ultimately the correct Pauline perspective. I haven't read Piper's book, which this one is a reply to, so I entered half-way into the conversation, which may explain some of why it was over my head. I really enjoyed it...more

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 41 42 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 (3)

Genres

Religion > Theology

60 users

Religion > Christianity

14 users

Christian

9 users

Religion

8 users

Non Fiction

4 users

Spirituality

3 users

Religion > Scripture

2 users

Religion > Church

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 Justification: Go...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Justification: God's P...

“True freedom is the gift of the Spirit, the result of grace: but, precisely because it is freedom FOR as well as freedom FROM, it isn't simply a matter of being forced now to be good, against our wills and without our cooperation, but a matter of being released from slavery precisely into responsibility, into being able at last to choose, to exercise moral muscle, knowing both that one is doing it oneself and that the Spirit is at work within, that God himself is doing that which I too am doing.” — 2 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision
avg rating	preview: Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision Goodreads rating: 3.95 (550 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6434820-justification?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348898446l/6434820.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6434820-justification?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision by N.T. Wright[/url]

Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website