>>> Learn the Absolute Basics of the Christian faith with this book + illustrated video study! store.seedbed.com/products/the-absolute-basics-of-the-christian-faith

@RonKelmell

Жыл бұрын

Rather read C.S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity", than try to follow Wright's clap trap.

Even though Iam Eastern Orthodox , I have a deep respect for N T Wright . Thanks for the upload .

Excelent! N T Wright is so clear, it is sad that so many people misunderstand him!

@emmanuel8310

Жыл бұрын

Well, not so clear on some things...but, yes, he's "villainised".

I also am Eastern Orthodox (and I also love Benedict XVI). AND I also have a deep respect for N.T. Wright. Do I agree with Wright on all issues (women's ordination, for example)? NO. But I think that Wright is providentially center-stage in a Catholic/Protestant Western context for a reason.

Very clear presentation. I have read many of your books. But first time listening your careful explanation of this important topic. Thanks

If this isnt splitting hairs and then splitting the split hairs again, I dont know what is. It's like saying "you're hired" doesnt mean you have the job, it means you can come work at our office. What in the world is he talking about?

Title wrong.....Not one word on the word Sanctification! All talk on justification.

I’ve never come away from an NT Wright discussion without feeling, “Wha? What the frig is he talking about?”

Paul on Justification: "And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith." [Phil. 3:9] Why is that so hard to understand Rev. Wright?

I have no idea what N T Wright is talking about when he says the Reformer or all of us (protestants) misinterpreted Paul. I know there are a lot of people on each side of the debate as if N T Wright has departed from Luther and Calvin on justification, I wish N T Wright would make it clear for all of us what conclusions about justification did Luther and Calvin missed.

@henriquelucastristan

3 жыл бұрын

Go to his books.

Wright seems to be including and highlighting, at least, a component of the context which he thinks many evangelicals have left out, the inclusion into the people of God featuring very loudly in the texts that speak of justification (Eph 2; Gal 2). He's linking inclusion with justification as the meaning Paul ascribed to the word: you have now been added to the 'Israel of God'. Is that a fair assessment and is the exegesis right?

What does this even mean? How is is view of Justification distinct from John Piper's or anyone else's? I'm confused

Romans 8:30- And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

@markuswmenezes

5 жыл бұрын

Corporate.

@erichort4898

Жыл бұрын

No one can be justified without being sanctified also If we confess our sins THEN Jesus can cleanse us from ALL our unrighteousness. Justification and sanctification always work together to be glorified when Jesus comes and look on Him and not perish with His brightness.

@globalrevival

Жыл бұрын

Romans 8:29 (NKJV): 29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. 2 Corinthians 3:18 (NKJV): 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord. Romans 12:1-2 (NKJV): 12 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. Living a holy life, sanctification, is throughout the New Testament scriptures. The “predestined” part is about being conformed into the image of Christ, not a ticket to heaven. Justification is the initiation into salvation and glorification presumes one has become a saint, not a sinner, but a renewed, born-again, born-from-above, saint. The new spiritual man must still put on Christ and be filled with the Holy Spirit and obey the Spirit to walk out their salvation (their sanctification) after they are justified.

Justification = declared to be in the right before God. But is declared righteous and made righteous (although different) two sides of the same coin? Does one follow the other?

im so confused on what he believes.. does he believe initial justification still comes by faith in christ?

“We” have mistranslated Paul because instead of study the text to find meaning and truth we regurgitate doctrines our predecessors cooked up and then served it up to us as truth. Then we continue and propagate these lies with absolute confidence that we are correct when in reality we are absolutely WRONG! The reformation did good but it was not even close to the reformation that needed to take place! We need to be SEPERATE and be HOLY! The Protestant church as a whole is the daughter of Contantinian Catholicism!

I believe Catholics need to listen to Wright's explanation, as well. Protestants and Catholics both want to say to be justified is to be "made just," rather than to be "declared just." For Luther, it was a paradox that we are righteous in spite of ourselves. When we observe our moral frailty we are judging ourselves by the Law, but God says we are righteous and we must believe him (the Gospel), not rely on our own self-understanding. This is a somewhat distorted view, but Catholics too ought to

@b-manz

6 жыл бұрын

ElasticGiraffe Catholics believe such nonsense like praying to Mary we would all appreciate it if you didn't comment because your beliefs are not relevant

Worthless religion vs Intimate relationship ?? Are you a servant or a son? Are you fighting for victory or fighting from victory?

Wright tells us that imputation was a "later comer to the Reformation." Yet is it put forward in detail by both Luther and Calvin.

It's very simple, sooooo Justification is not how somebody becomes saved but rather the reason why they are saved or included in God's family. See why the reformed and Calvinist hate this so much.

1:28 Justification

Digging up complications no one asked for. Highlighting nuances that only muddy the theological water.

@JonathanGrandt

5 жыл бұрын

Jesse Gandy stupid quarrels that upset the faith of some?

What do scholars think they are achieving by complicating these matters?

@frisb.7948

4 жыл бұрын

It's their job, unfortunately.

@chaseellefson4726

3 жыл бұрын

It's not complicating. It's trying to actually understand the Christ Mystery. It's extremely important.

@PatrickMoto97

3 жыл бұрын

@@chaseellefson4726 what is the “christ mystery”?

@chaseellefson4726

3 жыл бұрын

@@PatrickMoto97 The mystery of Christ. The mystery of God (Christ) as man (Jesus) and what he did. Theories of atonement matter because it changes how we perceive Christ and what He did on earth.

@chaseellefson4726

3 жыл бұрын

@@PatrickMoto97 Check out Richard Rohr. He's great on this stuff.

Justification is that declaration that one is in the right before God. This occurs because one has been united to Christ. All that belongs to Christ now belongs to the Christian. As for imputation, the Christian has Christ's righteousness because he is "in Christ".

@nesvadi

7 жыл бұрын

yes,... right

@simonskinner1450

7 жыл бұрын

Do you believe that you remain justified if we don't obey the commandments of Jesus, that is willfully sin, or don't show we are being faithful through what you do.? For instance in Romans 13:8-9 helps us gauge our behaviour.

@bobpolo2964

6 жыл бұрын

simon skinner - A person was never justified if they return to bondage without repentance

@simonskinner1450

6 жыл бұрын

I have developed my position on justification that God justifies by faith through Jesus Christ, that is a guarantee from God on the condition of our faith in Christ, making God's justification a ceremonial act for us which is ours if we keep to the conditions. The condition is faith through Christ our Lord and judge, see John 5:22, and it is his justification by his grace and mercy we also need for salvation, see Titus 3:7 and Jude 21. And justification from Christ is through sanctification of the Holy Ghost, see Titus 3:5 and Romans 15:16. Martin Luther was wrong, we cannot be justified by God alone.

@bobpolo2964

6 жыл бұрын

simon skinner - "we cannot be justified by God alone." Is there someone outside of God that grounds our justification?

When you believe in Jesus Christ you are justificated , it is simple in Rom 3:22. In the moment when you was restored through faith by Jesus, in that moment you are justified before God, and it remains till the end, and you are imputed to one church witch consistends from jews and gentiles.

@simonskinner1450

6 жыл бұрын

Pavol that much is true, you are justified by God, but you also need to be justified by Christ as he alone is our judge, see John 5:22. God's grace is given freely when we put our faith in his son Jesus Christ. But we also need Christ's grace and mercy, and that is judged by our good works. God's grace for our faith, and Christ's grace for our works.

Yes, he should, and maybe he will. But i think his loyalty towards the reformation stops him from doing it. But let's pay for him!

According to Paul, both justification and sanctification are connected, inextricable, and concurrent. The second doesn't follow the first, though in practice I don't deny that what we think to be holiness is an ongoing fight. Paul seems to argue that both are done deal. We are legally declared right with God and sacerdotally (if you will) set apart for his use. The flesh is said to be co-crucified and dead, and now we live IN him by the power of the indwelling Spirit. The vessel, our body, remains earthly--"a treasure in an earthen vessel" awaiting the "redemption" of the physical self. This seems to be what Paul is saying.

Now I am a little confused. Here is my understanding. Salvation is given by grace to all humans. One needs to receive it by faith. The moment a person receives it by faith, that person is saved. Simply put, his place in heaven is guaranteed. I always thought, that that very same moment, Justification kicks in (for Gentiles). Justification means you are justified as a member of God's family, which makes gentiles become ingrafted children (branches) of God. Salvation and Justification are two different words, but are essentially the same thing. Hence, Salvation = Justification. Am I correct ? NT is also saying the same thing. How is he wrong ?

@anthonywong1781

Жыл бұрын

This is exactly where Western Christian mindset has found itself at odds with the traditional Hebrew gospel of the kingdom of God. The apostles weren't as concern about whether you will go to heaven if you die tomorrow as what you will need to live properly in this flesh from this day on if you still have a life to live before you die and go to heaven. Paul hardly ever got hung up on what would happen after death when he teaches about justification. The Jews in Jesus time thought they were already justified as God's people by obeying the Mosaic Law and therefore ready to welcome the Messiah to establish a Kingdom of God on Earth where they, the so-called justified ones, will rule over the Gentiles, the so-called unjustified ones. It hardly ever occurred to the Jews then that neither Jews nor Gentiles were actually justified before God regardless of what they do, which is why Jesus came among the Jews to radically reshape the whole nation in preparation for the inclusion of both Jews and Gentiles into this redefined truly justified people of God who will welcome the Messiah at his second coming to establish the kingdom where those who receive Jesus, the truly justified, will rule over those who deny Jesus, the truly unjustified. But the Pharisees were so unwillinging to consider the possibility that they weren't actually justified and would need to be justified through some other means than the Mosaic Law which they had pulled everything they got obeying, so they hated Jesus so much so that they eventually nailed him on a cross. Paul used to be one of such Pharisees and were zealously persecuting Christians, but after he saw Jesus on the road to Damascus he realized everything he had ever known about his justification as a practicing Jews was rubbish. No longer was it a matter of trying to obey the Law so you can feel justified for as long as it takes the Messiah to come and establish the kingdom for the justified, but rather a matter of you receiving the Holy Spirit as soon as possible so you can start getting on the way of true justification while already justified through the Holy Spirit testifying with you for as long as you are alive. Without the Holy Spirit to fill that void in the flesh, you will keep feeling the need to obey some laws to make yourself feel justified instead of actually training in true righteousness knowing that you are justified, and by constantly living under such a condition you will eventually be assigned with the unjustified when the Messiah comes to establish the kingdom, which is why Paul always finishes up his teaching on justification with the reception of the Holy Spirit. Ever since Augustine, the Catholic Church shifted her focus to saving souls to heaven and justification pretty much means going to heaven after death, which has little to do with what Paul had in mind. After the reformation, we started thinking about salvation as taking place instantly at the moment of belief, which is more so a reaction against the Medieval Catholic Church than a genuine return to what Paul had in mind about justification. We put too much focus on what would happen after death instead of what we would need to live before death. We want to feel safe about our destiny after death as if we are buying an afterlife insurance plan. And this great confusion, in my opinion, all began with the Catholic Church adopting Augustinianism in favor of a going-to-heaven-centered salvation.

Not nearly declared righteous… But are made righteous in that moment.

@jenex5608

Жыл бұрын

Nah Just declared righteous Cause the Work of The cross is applied to them.

You're right, I was confused by the theological use of the word 'justification'. So a Christian can have justification, while at the same time being unjustified in such justification?

of course witherington loves n.t. "the wonder of the voice who says nothing" wright

The title should be Justification and Salvation. Wright never mentions Sanctification in this short clip.

@andrewjarrett7329

5 жыл бұрын

Kelly Carter. Actually he does. The faithful remenent of Israel are the Saints. What NT is saying is that once a gentile is justified they can sit down with Jewish Christians for a meal. That is they have now entered into God’s family of the Saints, therefore Sanctified. In the OT Saints are faithful Jews or those that believe in Gods promises. In the NT Saints refers in most cases to Jewish Christians. Now we understand it to mean all Christians.

@kellycarter9813

5 жыл бұрын

@@andrewjarrett7329 Hi, Andrew. First, there is no mention of sanctification in the video, specific or otherwise. The word is never used or alluded to. Secondly, I think we may disagree on the immediate cause of and maybe even the definition of sanctification. I would not conclude that sanctification is the result of entering into God's family of the Saints, and NT Wright says nothing of the sort in this video, even if it was the case. He does make specific reference to the difference between being saved, or salvation, and justification, and this is actually the whole point of the video: justification is not salvation. So, even if you are correct that sanctification comes as a result of entering into God's family of the Saints, NT Wright does not say so in this video, nor does he allude to this, but he instead uses the video to show the difference between justification and salvation-the theme of the video. At what chronological point in the video does Wright refer to sanctification, allude to sanctification, or imply that when he talks about entering into God's family of the Saints that he is actually talking about sanctification, as opposed to justification?

Yes, that's true. Also, he likes novel private interpretation of scriptures, and would not agree with the limitations of the Tradition for it. And from this, i think, flows his support for female clergy by example.

Never forget we are saved from sin which is transgression of God's moral law. Justification puts us back on the path of righteousness after we have wandered off it. This is only half the gospel Rom 12,1,2 says we also must be transformed or renewed by the power of the cross. Jesus trod the path of righteousness from the cradle to the cross. We in turn must walk the same path of righteousness from the cross to the kingdom by obeying the ten commads especially the one God has told us to remember and keep the Sabbath day the seventh day of the week holy. All commands are important not just nine. James 2,10

Did this guy say sacrificing the Son of God on a cross is paganism

Justification is a work of God the Father and the Holy Spirit in us and without us. Justification and faith do not have a sequence in time but in order Faith- Justification but are simultaneously in time. Sanctification is a work of The Holy Spirit in us but not without us. Justification and SANCTIFICATION cannot be separated. There is no sanctification without justification or justification without sanctification, this even when sanctification is just a begin of regeneration through all our life. Faith is by Grace and the free gift of God. The Bible teaches us the Justification of the UNGODLY. [Made/ declared Righteous] Not a believer is justified. James 2: 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works [read FRUITS] is dead? Faith First then Fruits of Faith

@jtlearn1

Жыл бұрын

Justification is not a work of God but an act of God. Sanctification is a work of God which begins with justification which begins with faith which is given by grace . 😊

I don't hear anything about sanctification

Hmm, he gets it backwards again when discussing Eph. 2. We discover we're part of God's family when we're justified. Let's turn NT Wright and the NPP on their heads: Faith community membership is the badge of our having been justified by faith. Hmm... tastes good. I like it.

2:01 Is the camera on me? Okay, good.

N.T. Wright has basically confirmed to me that the Catholics had justification RIGHT before Wright did! (Taylor Marshall has written a blog about this, which was highlighed in a Christianity Today article titled "Not All Evangelicals and Catholics Together")

realize that justification is not the process of becoming more just in our attitudes and behavior. I believe that's best described as theosis. Protestants tend to focus on a past act, Catholics on a future state, but justification is the dimension of our salvation in which we are declared just due to our sacramental union with Christ, BUT only to be confirmed in the end if we persevere in faith. Initially it is God's acknowledgement of our pledge to conform to the the image of his Son. :)

@Throwbacc7

7 жыл бұрын

This comment is the most beautifully stated conception of justification I have found on the internet. Thank you.

@Phill0old

6 жыл бұрын

Justification is not God acknowledging anything we have done, it is God declaring something to be true which He has accomplished. He saves us and then declares us justified because of the faith the he gave us and the believing which naturally flows from that faith. God is saying that the seed which He planted in, good ground, is alive and growing and is therefore a good thing as opposed to being a tare. It is totally a past act once you are saved because it is part of the package. At the end of time God will be glorified and shown to be Just when we are shown to be what we truly are. It is confirmed now, Paul teaches that we are justified and that we were justified.

Justification in the sense of being "saved" from some kind of "original sin" is unsupported by any kind of evidence. The story of Adam and Eve and a talking snake is a mythological story not supported by any evidence (there is actually scientific evidence against such an idea). If that's a myth, why the need for a 'savior' in the first place?

The Old Testament makes it legal to hoard wealth, use force and to kill in war. Three things that the New Testament declares to be a dead creed most sinful. And so, if we want heaven, we must desire to do what is done in heaven.

@robertjones4060

5 жыл бұрын

And that is righteousness

@johnellis7614

5 жыл бұрын

And that is another word for harmless, a freewill with a desire to do only good and beneficial things.

@robertjones4060

5 жыл бұрын

@@johnellis7614 harmless?

@johnellis7614

5 жыл бұрын

1. Gaining righteousness requires that we create the one thing that God cannot create, a grateful, humble and contrite heart. 2. Having righteousness is to have the indwelling God the Holy Spirit. 3. Being righteous is the work of the indwelling Spirit, namely a desire to do only good and beneficial things. Not that the righteous are never tricked by those more intelligent into doing sinful things, just that they never deliberately harm anyone, even under pain of death.

@robertjones4060

5 жыл бұрын

@@johnellis7614 What is a holyspirt?

Is Ben wearing a Russian Orthodox cross? Fancy!

Never lost is never saved. Jesus came to seek and save that which was lost. Regeneration by Calvin is the work or fruits of the Spirit throughout our life. How can faith be the consequence of the New Birth If God justifies THE UNGODLY? Are the ungodly borne again? Romans 3:28 Therefore WE CONCLUDE THAT A MAN IS JUSTIFIED BY FAITH. The order of salvation is: Ungodly, Faith and by faith we are justified. Faith cannot come after the new birth. Romans 4:5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works: Institutes of Calvin: CHAPTER 3. REGENERATION BY FAITH. OF REPENTANCE. That repentance not only always follows faith, but is produced by it, ought to be without controversy (see Calvin in Joann. 1:13). For since pardon and forgiveness are offered by the preaching of the Gospel, in order that the sinner, delivered from the tyranny of Satan, THE YOKE OF SIN, AND THE MISERABLE BONDAGE of iniquity, may pass into the kingdom of God, it is certain that no man can embrace the grace of the Gospel without retaking himself from the errors of his former life into the right path, and making it his whole study to practice repentance. Those who think that repentance precedes faith instead of flowing from, or being produced by it, as the fruit by the tree, HAVE NEVER UNDERSTOOD ITS NATURE, AND ARE MOVED TO ADOPT THAT VIEW ON VERY INSUFFICIENT GROUNDS.

This is so simple. It is the blood of Jesus Christ which makes a person right before God aka it is faith in the blood Jesus shed on the cross which makes us right before God. Justification is God declaring us right because we have been made right through Christ. Even though there might not be a chronological sequence to these things there is a logical sequence to these things.

@bonnie43uk

9 жыл бұрын

Hi Lloyd, it doesn't make sense to me that God would have his son crucified, we are told by Christians this was an amazing sacrifice, yet a sacrifice is something you give away not to be returned, yet we're told Jesus is in eternal heaven, so what exactly was it that he sacrificed?. Now if you said to me Jesus sacrificed himself *for us* and was now in eternal Hell. it would make more sense, but it would seem insane that anyone would do that. And yet, if I reject Christ's blood sacrifice on the cross in that he died for my sins, which I absolutely *do* reject, it's *me* who gets that eternal suffering for the crime of being honest with myself by using my own logic and reason, it's certainly not out of any hatred or disliking of God, I simply see no credible evidence. So according to your doctrine, am i damned? ( I'm not asking *you* per say to judge me, but what does your doctrine say about those who reject Christ)?

@Kinlow54

9 жыл бұрын

bonnie43uk Good to see you at still at it bonnie43uk. I have been out of action for about a month due to the flu, and a very busy time at work. As to your question, the New Testament teaches Christ's death on the cross was a substitutionary atonement. In this act Christ took our sins upon Himself and suffered on the cross in our behalf, or He took the punishment we deserve for our sins on the cross. In short, Jesus did suffer all that is in hell in our behalf on the cross. This is the New Testament teaching on this subject in an extremely abbreviated form. One can either accept or reject it. This teaching is either true or false. If it is false and you reject it, it makes no difference. If it is false and you accept it, it makes no difference. If it is true and you reject it then one is in trouble. If it is true and you accept it then the eternal consequences are good.

@Kinlow54

9 жыл бұрын

bonnie43uk I think I have asked you this question before but I do not remember if you answered it. That is, what do you consider credible evidence? Also, what is the credible evidence that your personal position of reason and logic correct? What is the credible objective evidence that skepticism is correct?

@bonnie43uk

9 жыл бұрын

Hi Lloyd, yes, always good to chat with you. Just a couple of quick points on what you've written, do we know how long Jesus spent in hell when he took our punishment (that I didn't ask him to take on my behalf), a day,? a year?.. It seems from according to what you've said, for my honesty in rejecting Christ's offer (because I see no credible evidence) my "punishment" is eternal damnation. Surely if Jesus wanted me to know him, he would make his presence known. If the tables were turned and I possessed the powers available to God \ Jesus, I would do all within my power to contact every single human. I've said before that it's my view that no sentient being deserves to suffer after death. Maybe my morals are better than Jesus's.

@bonnie43uk

9 жыл бұрын

LLoyd David Hi Lloyd ,yes, i think we have discussed what i would refer to as "credible evidence" before. With the story of Jesus, it seems almost implausible to me that not a single word was ever written about Jesus during the time he was alive ( if you know of anything, let me know), the Gospels of Mark Matthew Luke and John were all written by goodness knows who, we don't know who wrote them, those 4 names were added much later. The non biblical sources for Jesus is very poor, the best on offer would seem to be Josephus, but even that tiny mention by him is generally seen as an interpolation to make it look as though Josephus knew of him. He had the opportunity to spend time with notable writers and historians of the day, yet he chose not to. A few years ago I would have thought it silly to even think Jesus didn't even exist, but the more i seem to delve into it, the evidence appears to get thinner and thinner. When Jesus had his encounter with satan who then tempted him, who witnessed it to write it down? The Gospels seem to be written like an adventure story rather than a historical record. Hence all the miraculous claims, it's written I think to stir the imagination, i can well imagine people being enthralled and taken in by it, it's a good story, but I'm sorry to say I don't believe a word of it.

Last time I checked , he is Anglican .

Many, many Anglicans refer to ourselves as Anglo-Catholic, as opposed to the Romish variety. Catholicism doesn't just belong to the church of Rome, in other words. It's possibly an aesthetic as well as a theological distinction, and in the end, probably matters not one whit, or course, but it makes for interesting conversation.

This man is as slippery as an eel.

Wright does have a bit of an Eastern bent, but his support for female clergy and other things would stop him from entering the Orthodox Church.

Pedantic

where does forgiveness of sins come in to the conversion story for N.T wright?

NT Wright should leave the Anglican Church and join Orthodoxy!

He's smuggling works in with his faulty definition of justification. Romans 5:1 says "having been justified, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." Justification clearly is a defining moment, *not* an after-the-fact declaration that one is a member of the faith community.

@crem004

6 жыл бұрын

John Warren “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.” - James 2:24 Yet Reformers and Protestants will skate around it.

@johnkw47

6 жыл бұрын

crem004 that's silly. We don't skate around it. We reconcile Paul and James. Paul says we're not justified by works. So what's an exegete to do? Recognize that Paul is talking about justification before God, like he said, and that James is talking about justification before men, which is what the context of James 2 is all about.

@crem004

6 жыл бұрын

John Warren that doesn’t make sense. The context is clear: 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness"-and he was called a friend of God. 24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. - James 2:22-24

@admiralmurat2777

6 жыл бұрын

John Warren we aren't justified by works of the Torah lol.

@admiralmurat2777

6 жыл бұрын

John Warren Paul is talking about keeping stupid laws in Torah. Look at my penis it's circumcised and so I'm justified.

1. I will repeat myself: Would a Hindu's personal experiences count as evidence that Krishna is real? 2. Do you know what population genetics is? Do you know how impossible it was that all humans descended form 2 humans? And how long ago do you think 'Adam and Eve' lived? And no evolutionary biologist or geneticist has ever said that the variety of species we see today in the world, including humans, are the product of "just chance". That comment shows your ignorance on the subject.

Wow his understanding of what Paul is referring to in Galatians 2 is WAAAAAY of. This guy is wrong on so much that I'm not sure he believes anything. Paul is using the term justification the here the same way as in Romans 5.

N.T. Wright is great! He's the new John Henry Newman. I'm going to drink champagne when he becomes a Catholic!

Do you think subjective experiences count as objective evidence? Would a Hindu's personal experiences count as objective evidence that Krishna is real? I think not. There is absolutely zero evidence that "original sin" is a real thing. That's a myth story people made up. Humans are not fallen creatures, we are emerging creatures who are still trying to figure out how to live together on this planet. 2. Basically all of population genetics, most specifically Mitochondrial DNA.

It is not clear at all. These academics make the Gospel complicated..

N.T. Wright seems to have this compulsion to criticize general understanding of certain doctrines of orthodox Christianity as if they are too simplistic, but then offers up an incredibly vague 'correction' that affirms the very same understanding that he's criticising. It's like he saying 'Your dumb for using generally understood phrases and terms of orthodox Christian understanding, but I'm smarter than you so I must use more nuanced terms and phrases to talk about the very same thing.' It's the ego at work. It's pride.

@WaynePhilmore

7 жыл бұрын

You have to admit, he does have a way with words

@AbhijitDaimari

5 жыл бұрын

It's like he deliberately tries to confuse his viewers/listeners every time he speaks. Never heard him give a straight answer!

@billk8874

5 жыл бұрын

Agree, I have no clue what N. T. Wright is talking about. Are we justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone and totally apart from any works ? If the answer is yes, then why is N T Wright saying that the Reformers misread Paul, very confusing and clear as mud.

@frisb.7948

4 жыл бұрын

@@billk8874 Best solution: Stop listening to Wright. Read the bible instead.

It is not that the reformed theologians are subtle, but Wright is subtle to fool people.

Lol

N. T. Wright IS Catholic. Anglo-Catholic. Just not the Romish variety.

@toahordika6

7 жыл бұрын

He does deny the communion of his saints. This is his big issue. If he changed his view of this, his theology would be solid. (He has some other small issues, but this is his big one)

This whole dumb debate seems to be another attempt to undermine Augustinian Catholic theology. The cant disprove what is true. Faith without works is dead. To say otherwise would mean to believe in all this "once saved always saved" BS. Which is theologically absurd and rationally ludicrous.

@Duane422

8 жыл бұрын

+Nate Nobile Problem with making faith contingent upon works, is that salvation by faith then is also contingent upon works, in which case we are all screwed because how could one actually think one has worked enough?

@Duane422

7 жыл бұрын

Luther didn't remove any books from the Hebrew bible or the New Testament.

@grunt12394

7 жыл бұрын

I mean this whole argument is getting away from the real issue anyway Ecclesiology, which people like NT Wright don't believe in. Outside The Church Theres No Salvation. As long as you accept the creeds of the Catholic church an try to live by them you'll be fine I'm sorry for my polemical tone, but these things need to be understood by modern Christians. I would suggest reading the Cappadocian Fathers (especially my favorite St Gregory Nazianzus's Theological Orations)

@Duane422

7 жыл бұрын

I am Catholic. I'm familiar w the fathers. But you do realize that extra ecclesiam nulla salus does not mean that (it's been reinterpreted in Vatican 2-- see lumen gentium para 14-16). Also see Augustine and aquinas on grace (summa especially)

@Duane422

7 жыл бұрын

Personal insults have no place in an intellectual debate. But again I'm Catholic.

Careful! That accent can lead you to think he’s smarter than he really is!

"We in the Reformation tradition." Sorry, not Catholic. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Justification means being made right with God. N.T. Wright is wrong once again. (Pun intended)

@nesvadi

7 жыл бұрын

yes it is exactly what you write, . justification means that.

@b-manz

6 жыл бұрын

Surfxeo better explain yourself

@simonskinner1450

6 жыл бұрын

Surfxeo justificief with God, is being made right with God. But justified by God is not Salvation, it is an initiation into Christianity. Justified is a decision, where justification is the process to salvation by Jesus Christ. All judgement is by the Son not the Father, as John 5: 22.

@simonskinner1450

6 жыл бұрын

Dog House justification is the action of making righteous, justified is the decision of righteousness, and interestingly Jesus Christ was raised for our justification, that is for our action of making us righteous. We will be saved by the grace of Christ if we act righteous.

@wlcsp

6 жыл бұрын

Now I am a little confused. Here is my understanding. Salvation is given by grace to all humans. One needs to receive it by faith. The moment a person receives it by faith, that person is saved. Simply put, his place in heaven is guaranteed. I always thought, that that very same moment, Justification kicks in (for Gentiles). Justification means you are justified as a member of God's family, which makes gentiles become ingrafted children (branches) of God. Salvation and Justification are two different words, but are essentially the same thing. Hence, Salvation = Justification. Am I correct ? NT is also saying the same thing. How is he wrong ?

This joker sounds like one of my old neo-orthodox seminary professors, 'The more that he explains something the more unclear the subject becomes. Wright either doesn't know what he is talking about or doesn't want the listener to know what he truly believes.

five minutes of absolutely nothing

This man may be brilliant, but that collar and that huge Idol around his neck needs to go

I believe Wright is insinuating - almost like a RC view - there is an initial justification in which we are saved from wrath - God himself and we enter into the family of God - we are now a part of His family and He is our God. But - he is inferring here and elsewhere that salvation has been (at least in western circles) dwindled down to a moment in it’s entirety. Like Lutherans salvation is the entirety of life and for them and others you participate by responding to the Lordship of Christ in your obedience and life lived with the addition that one can lose their salvation and that ‘final’ review is all of Gods work/ all of Gods hand in your life but that a reckoning of what is done whether evil or good is administered to the believer and how he views the efficacy of obedience I’m unsure but I think stitching together his videos this is what I gather. So obviously he’s not a Calvinist and he would and has offered critiques on systematic theology serving as almost a scientific method of our Ortis salutis