Thursday, July 30, 2009


We are in the middle of a short series of Analyses on Tom Wright's book Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision. (The trajectory of the series is not quite turning out as originally planned, but never mind.)

This month we continue our examination of the Bishop's argument first by underscoring the point made by John Piper in The Future of Justification that God's righteousness is wider than covenant faithfulness. This is not only a point of sound theology, but also a point of logic.

We then see that most of the elements of the Reformed account of the atonement and its place in justification are in fact endorsed by Wright - Christ's death is the 'basis' of justification, he acts as a substitute, as a result of which God 'reckons' us to be 'in the right'.

In the next post, in September, I do not pursue the obvious next question, which is: What then is so new about the new perspective if so much of the old perspective is still in place? Rather, I shall ask- what is it that Wright objects to about the place that the Reformed account of justification finds for the imputation of Christ's righteousness? And is he consistent to object to it as he does?

The second post is a further draft extract from the forthcoming Calvin at the Centre (OUP), this time on Calvin and Stoicism.