Michael Brown on Tyra Banks

I don't watch the Tyra Banks show since I'm usually at work during her show.  Even on the occasional weekday when I'm off (like today) I don't watch it.  But I was alerted to this from Michael Brown's ministry.  Apparently, Brown was asked to be on the Tyra Banks show to discuss the issue of transgendered children.  If you watch the segment from the show you'll see Brown doesn't have much of an opportunity to speak since he is often interrupted.  He did, however, provide a short response later which you'll find below.  I found it interesting that at about 4:50 he mentions a study of London taxi drivers which showed that the spatial reasoning part of their brain was larger than the average person.  This was particularly interesting because N. T. Wright mentions this same study in his new book After You Believe. (38 See here for the link Wright provides.)  Wright isn't talking about transgendered children but both men cite the study as evidence that our brains are changed or re-wired based on our behavior. This reminded me of another book just out called Wired for Intimacy: How Pornography Hijacks the Male Brain which, though I've not read it, I think probably argues along similar lines concerning the effect of pornography on the brain.  I find the whole subject fascinating.  The incident with Brown on the Tyra show only shows once again how even when the media finds an intelligent person of faith to speak they really don't give him any time.

N. T. Wright, John Walton and Genesis

My friend Paul sent me this video of N. T. Wright commenting on Adam and Eve.  In passing Wright says he's "with" John Walton in his understanding of Genesis 1.  I'll come back to that in a minute. 

I find it interesting that Wright says Americans need to realize the "rest of the world" does not bundle issues together the way we do so we need to "lighten up" and "uncouple" those issues.  I think he's thinking of things like if we deny Adam and Eve were real then we have to deny original sin. I realize it's more than that but that's one example.  First, I'm not sure that just knowing others (For Wright to go from the way Britains do it to the "rest of the world" is quite a leap in itself.) don't make the connections we do in itself justifies that we stop making them.  It makes us sound like we are slaves to some "American mental illness" that arbitrarily makes connections with no sound reason for doing so. Secondly, on the other hand, I do believe we have unnecessarily coupled some things together on pretty tenuous grounds but the uncoupling must be proven not simply dismissed because "the rest of the world" doesn't see connections the way we do.

His discussion of myth vs. history is very good and is a common misunderstanding in popular circles.  The last part of the discussion he shows his dependence on Walton's understanding of Genesis.  I've provided Wright's video here and another brief video of Walton on Genesis.  Those who want to know more should read Walton's book The Lost World of Genesis One.  You can see my review of Walton's book here.  You can find these and other helpful videos and articles at The BioLogos Foundation. 


 

N. T. Wright and Catholicism

Every now and then someone makes the charge that N. T. Wright's views on justification are very similar to those of Catholicism. In a recent panel discussion on Wright the issue was raised again. The panel members included Tom Schreiner, Mark Seifrid, Denny Burk and Brian Vickers and was moderated by Al Mohler. You can find the discussion here. I found it interesting but not much that was new.

But several people responded to the charge that Wright's views were the same or nearly the same as the Catholic view of justification. One of the comments referred to post by Taylor Marshall called "Does N. T. Wright's Theology Lead to Catholicism?" Marshall says "I started reading N.T. Wright at Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia) and along the way through my hiatus as an Anglican priest. I believe that he provided the necessary paradigm shift for me to appreciate the nuances of the Council of Trent regarding justification." He says that Wright is a "Protestant writing like a Catholic." Imagine my surprise then at finding a comment from Chris Castaldo whose book Holy Ground I just recently reviewed. Castaldo agreed with Marshall saying he was "right to suggest that NT Wright’s emphasis on covenantal nomism raises new questions about the merits of the Catholic position on justification." Marshall was so taken with Castaldo's comment that he offered him an opportunity to do a guest post on the subject of “The Four Aspects of Wright’s Pauline Theology." Castaldo agreed and wrote a post called "An Evangelical Perspective on N. T. Wright and Catholicism". Castaldo concludes however, that while he understands why some would take a second look at Catholicism because of Wright, "because the believer’s identity is founded in the risen Christ, God the Father views us as possessing the merits of Jesus’ victory and on that basis declares us 'not guilty.' For this reason, it seems to me, Wright stands closer to Calvin than anyone on the Catholic side of Wittenberg’s door."

Marshall has written a book, The Catholic Perspective on Paul, which is due out Summer 2010.

Michael Horton on N. T. Wright's Justification

The White Horse Inn Blog will start a series over the next several weeks called "Wright Wednesdays." It will be Michael Horton's review/critique of N. T. Wright's book Justification. I know some of you may be thinking "enough already!" Well, welcome to the world of academic debate. It's not going away. My experience has been that the longer a response takes to come out the more thoughtful it is. This isn't always true of course but those who have taken their time with an issue and have given themselves the time to formulate their critique have been more helpful to me in the long run. We will see what comes from Horton's pen (or should I say keyboard?).

Gerald Bray Turns Up the Heat on N. T. Wright

Theologian Gerald Bray has written a review of N. T. Wright's book Justification. This review is very different from the others I've read because this is the first review where part of the review suggests that Bishop Wright resign as Bishop or give up scholarship. Bray charges, "There is no shame in giving up scholarship, or in resigning a bishopric, when the pressures become too great, but doing a half-baked job in one is bound to lead to the suspicion that one is doing an equally half-baked job in the other, and that the longsuffering recipients of such treatment are ending up with the worst of both worlds." (104) These are strong words and I'm not sure they quite belong in a book review. Besides, Bishop Wright has managed to do quite well juggling the responsibilities of Bishop and a scholar given his past literary credits. I will admit complete ignorance on his abilities as a Bishop but I've not read of any complaints.

Bray's opinion is more than clear when he asserts "Bishop Wright has let us down badly." Bray is forceful in his expression and unbending in his certainty the Wright is wrong. I'm afraid that whatever points Bray has that may be valid will be ignored by readers who are turned off by his tone especially of the final two paragraphs.

Gerald Bray is Research Professor of Samford University and a Church of England minister. He also teaches specialized short courses for Beeson Divinity School.

More Reviews of N. T. Wright's "Justification"

My friend Paul has sent me another review of N. T. Wright's book Justification. You can find the review here. Also Kevin DeYoung has posted some of his thoughts on the book. You can find the last of the three posts here. Rick Phillips has a critique entitled "Five Arguments Against Future Justification by Works. Part one is here and part two is here. Paul has a running list of reviews on his blog. If you are at all interested in Wright's book Paul has saved you a considerable amount of time by assembling some of the best reviews (both pro and con) that are available on line.

Since I've not finished the book myself I'm trying to avoid reading too many reviews. But I have read some. My thanks to Paul for being so diligent in keeping his list up to date. If you know of one he has missed please pass it along to him. I know he would appreciate it.

Paul Helm starts series on N.T. Wright's Justification

Philosopher Paul Helm will be starting a series of posts on N. T. Wright's book Justification. Helm is Professor of Theology at Highland Theological College and a premier philosopher from a Calvinistic perspective. The series will be most interesting. Also, my friend Paul Adams is continuing his list of other online resources that interact or review Wright's book. Paul has assembled a good list to start the curious reader who wants to know what the fuss is all about. Also see the handy primer compiled by Trevin Wax on the differences between Wright and John Piper. A brave endeavor indeed to try to summarize the two of them on one sheet!

N. T. Wright and Justification

No better summary than that offered by the author himself. Wright summarizes a couple of the major points of importance in his latest book.