"The New Perspective"

[ThrdJohn13]

In the past 50 years modern scholarship Near Eastern and Biblical scholarship has been carefully re-investigating the content of the New Testament in light of what can be ascertained about 1st century Palestinian Judaism and the socio-political climate of the day. This enterprise -- leading to new understandings of the person of Jesus and who his disciples perceived him to be, as well as his relationship to Yahweh's promises in history (as portrayed in the OT), as well as new understandings and formulations of Christian doctrine -- has been dubbed by scholars "The New Perspective". Scholars including Jeremias and Hengel of the past half-century as well as more modern scholars such as E.P. Sanders, Charlesworth, N.T. Wright, and Richard Hays have all made contributions to the New Perspective that have left some scholars feeling very uncomfortable, while leaving others feeling as if their eyes had just been opened. Incidentally, much of this scholarship -- which many of us Christians consider extremely valuable -- has not penetrated the Church, but instead, the Church has (generally speaking) been to a great degree off-standish about. Some say the Church has good reason for this response, while others lament the reaction.

That being said. Are you familiar with the New Perspective? If so, jot down some thoughts, and let's generate some discussion.

-JD  

 

[filosofer]

Right now, I am reading NT Wright's book, Christ and the Climax of the Covenant. I have read portions of Dunn's Romans commentary. Mike Mittendorf, professor at Concordia Irvine, wrote a response to that recently, I believ ein the Concordia Journal in which he deals with the problems of the New Perspective. I would like to read and interact with others as well, but I won't be able to do much with this until this weekend, so maybe others can go with it.

 

[ThrdJohn13]

I've worked through that Wright book....I tell people it's like trying to digest a phonebook. I can't read more than 20 pages at a time without stopping. I have a few spots in the book where I think I might disagree -- and if not disagree, think some modifications are in order (for example, his take on Deut 28 and how it appears in Galatians 3), but overall what a fantastic book. I've been wanting to go through the first 2 books in his Christian Origins... series, but have decided to read others instead.

Oh by the way, speaking of Wright, some of his old buddies at Oxford (like Allister McGrath) got together to write a hefty respons to his "Jesus and the Victory of God" recently. I'm intersted in reading what they have to say.

 

[Patmosman_sga]

I'm reading Wright's The New Testament and the People of God, which is the first volume of "Christian Origins and the Question of God." I also have the second volume, Jesus and the Victory of God, which I plan to read after finishing the first. I've also read The Millennium Myth in which he goes into greater detail about the eschatological hope and the final consummation of God's new creation (something he was accused of "denying" after Jesus and the Victory of God).

He also explains his views very coherently in The Meaning of Jesus, a debate with Marcus Borg. I have no use for Borg, but Wright's chapters in this volume are well worth the price of the whole book.

I hope McGrath, et al. took all of Wright's work into consideration when they wrote their response to JVG. Several "conservatives" have gone off half-cocked in responding to the position Wright advocates in that book.