Paul and the Faithfulness of God

One of Wright’s controlling motifs throughout chapter ten’s treatment of justification by faith is the claim that Paul understood final judgment no differently than the Judaism of his period – God judges each man according to his actions. Final judgment, Wright states, “will be on the basis of the totality of the life that has been led. God will ‘repay to each according to their works’. Paul never for a moment undermines this biblical and traditional saying, widespread across the thought of ancient Israel,” (938; cf. 936–42). But it is not entirely clear how Wright can claim Romans 2 – particularly v. 13’s οὐ γὰρ οἱ ἀκροαταὶ νόμου δίκαιοι παρὰ [τῷ] θεῷ, ἀλλʼ οἱ ποιηταὶ νόμου δικαιωθήσονται (“After all, it isn’t those who hear the law who are in the right before God. It’s those who do the law who will be declared to be in the right!”) – as paradigmatic for eschatological justification or judgment, when Paul writes, in the very next chapter (3:21), that Νυνὶ δὲ χωρὶς νόμου δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ πεφανέρωται (“But now, quite apart from the law… God’s covenant justice has been displayed.”). When it is recognized that the judgment in Romans 2’s context is specifically a just judgment in accordance with Torah (v.12, διὰ νόμου κριθήσονται), making sense of the δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ apart from Torah in 3:21 results in considerable tension for Wright’s reading; the pivot of judgment has been altered from a Torah-based judgment, to one apart from Torah. When Paul’s larger argument concerning justification in Romans is further considered in light of 3:10 (discussed above), it seems clear that Paul’s purpose throughout the text has more to do with God’s grace in justification than on any understood Israelite vocation. Paul’s concern for demonstrating God’s grace in justification would also account for the importance of Abraham – a figure Wright is certainly correct in highlighting, covenantal emphasis and all. Romans 4, citing Gen 15:6 – καὶ ἐπίστευσεν Αβραμ τῷ θεῷ, καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιοσύνην (LXX); “And he believed the LORD; and the LORD reckoned it to him as righteousness – reveals Abraham as both the father of the divinely promised worldwide family composed of Jews and gentiles and the supreme biblical example of justification by faith. And this both/and view, with appropriate emphasis on Paul’s understanding of justification as an act of divine grace, would function as a helpful corrective for Wright’s understanding of Romans, which is elsewhere excellent.While it is clear that Wright’s exegesis of Romans accounts for the “redrawing of the symbolic world to include believing Jews and Gentiles on equal terms” (932), it is not clear how it accounts for divine grace, when the context of Romans 4 explicitly discusses χάριν (“gift”) with direct relationship to Paul’s use of δικ- vocabulary, and in antithesis to ἔργων (Rom 4:4–5). Wright has elsewhere countered that: “The point is that the word ‘justification’ does not itself denote the process whereby, or the event in which, a person is brought by grace from unbelief, idolatry and sin into faith, true worship and renewal of life.” And: “The doctrine of justification by faith was born into the world as the key doctrine underlying the unity of God’s renewed people.” Wright’s covenantal emphasis is a welcome fresh reading, but a both/and would make better sense, especially in Romans 4.Wright’s reading of justification is heavily influenced by “covenantal eschatology,” such that it involves the “renewal of all things, the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth” (936). Wright frequently states that justification is God’s “single-plan-through-Israel-for-the-world” in his previous book Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision. This understanding is also revealed at the outset of his lengthy treatment of justification when he explains that the δικ- vocabulary in Paul has its “home within the redefinition of election” (925; though it must be recalled what Wright means by “election,” which includes Israel’s calling, the rectifying of all creation, and putting humanity to rights). “Justification, for Paul, is a subset of election, that is, it belongs as part of his doctrine of the people of God.” The incorporative messiahship discussed previously would account for this reading.The judicial verdict of this eschatological, final judgment of God can be known in advance. Justification has a proleptic, or “in the present time” forensic aspect (944). In the context of table fellowship between Jewish and gentile Christians in Galatians, Wright explains “… the main theme is the fact that God has one family, not two, and that this family consists of all those who believe in the gospel… Faith, not the possession and/or practice of Torah, is the badge which marks out this family, the family which is now defined as the people of the Messiah.” Clearly for Paul, justification exists now.

This masterwork by Tom Wright completes the series of four volumes which addresses the issue of "Christian Origins and the Question of God), written over the space of 20 years. The other volumes in the series includes "The New Testament and the People of God," "Jesus and the Victory of God," and "The Resurrection of the Son of God." Combined, their pages number a whopping 3,753. Bookshelves can sag under such weight. But it's worth it! Never, to my knowledge, has so much valuable interpretation been assembled in one organized collection.That said, there are similarities and differences between the volumes. All together they each provide one seamless proclamation from the beginning of the Bible to its end. Too often the Old Testament (a.k.a. Hebrew Bible) is treated by Christians as the prelude to the real revelation: the ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the early years of the building of the Christian Church. Nothing could be farther from the truth, Wright time and again reminds us in this volume, as Paul very forcefully says in chapters 9-11 of Romans. The Hebrew Bible, and Jewish faith, are the roots upon which our faith is built (11:18) -- cut that root off and we risk being cut off from YHWH (pronounced Yahweh), the creator God and the source of Jewish and Christian faith. To help us make this seamless transitions between the two testaments, Wright uses several powerful, yet subtle, symbolic words. For instance:1. He rarely uses the word "Christ" when speaking of Jesus, but instead uses the Jewish term, "the Messiah." Christ comes from the Greek, and Messiah comes from the Hebrew. Both mean the same, "the anointed."2. When quoting texts from the Hebrew Bible Wright uses the name of God, "YHWH" instead of LORD as it is most often translated. This is important because YHWH means "I am what I am" or "I will be what I will be." both meanings are correct. There is no better definition of God than that!3. When he uses the generic word "God" he capitalizes the first letter in this volume, whereas he left all in lower case in the previous volumes. He made this change because he assumes his readers understand by now that he is speaking of the one creator God of the universe, and the God of Israel. In the previous volumes he explained that people have so many variations of the god they believe in that he wouldn't be sure what god they had in mind.For me, one of its greatest values, however, is Wright's introducing us to the worldview of Paul, which consisted of the culture and worldview of Ancient Greece, Rome, and Israel. All three were instrumental in shaping Paul's theology and mission. Also his description of Paul's Pharisaic life is the best I've seen.Yes, it's long, far too long for my taste, but it is precise and detailed (sometimes to a fault). Yet I recognize that his massive work is aimed primarily not at the general reading public, but for academics to pour over its pages, and enter them into their debates among themselves. If that is your primary complaint, you haven't read many academic treatises. If you want to catch the other side of Tom Wright, read some of his books which are aimed primarily at the general public: "Paul in Fresh Perspective," "Surprised by Hope," "Simply Jesus," "How God Became King," etc. You might think they were written by some other person! Not so. Just a different style of writing, by a master scholar and storyteller. Yes, I'll skip the parts that are too wordy and look for Wright's conclusions along the way.Some reviewers believe that he does not reflect Reformed/Reformation theology. Must we be stuck with 500 year old dogma, doctrine and interpretation? The world has come a long way since then. We don't burn witches anymore either. We are in the midst of a revolution in biblical studies which may, in the end, prove more important then the Reformation.One reviewer gives the book one star because it doesn't agree with his 17 proof texts and apparently believes those trump the hundreds, nay thousands, of texts cited by Wright. It's sad.If the price of the Kindle edition is so close to the paperback edition, shell out a few bucks more for the print edition -- it'll be easier to read and highlight the great passages (which are many).