This Russell Moore interview of NT Wright is based on the 2023 NT Wright book, “Into the Heart of Romans: A Deep Dive Into Paul’s Greatest Letter.” The book is about one chapter: Romans 8. The verse under consideration is Romans 8:28. A traditional translation of Rom 8:28: “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose” (ESV). Or in the KJV: “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.” NT Wright argues that in the original Greek, in Rom 8:28, “God is the subject of the main verb.” The subject is not “all things.” So he prefers the RSV translation: “We know that in everything God works for good with those who love him, who are called according to his purpose” (see p. 158). What's the significance? It is in the word, WITH. "God works all things together for good WITH those who love him.” Not “for those” or “to them.” And this is why this video title has the phrase “the most misunderstood verse in the Bible.” One of the main results of this view is that salvation is less about “being saved FROM the world” and more about “being saved FOR the world.” This represents a paradigm shift concerning our vocation as the people of God. There are massive implications for our theology and practice. In his book, Wright spells all this out in a verse-by-verse exegesis of the Greek. The Russell Moore interview with Wright offers tip-of-the iceberg highlights. (Written by Werner Mischke, VP, Mission ONE)
@@thederwentexperience4894 This chaneel has nothing to do with Yahweh and Yeshua! These a pagans who practice paganism. They quote from the popular cristianity and popular cristianity is pagan. I pray you wake up from these false prophets, these a re false prophets and you do not need any commentaries of men to explain the Bible to you. The Bible is very clear, Yeshua the word made it very clear! Yahweh warned us about adding or taking away from the Bible and these people added volumes of mens thoughts. The Bible is very clear. I pray you wake up. May Yahweh bless you and keep you through Yeshua, Amen!
NT Wright is correct, it took me until my later years to discover that God the Father truly loves me because I equated God the Father to my own abusive father. Also as a small child I remembered the blood & thunder sermons of the 1950s which first put the fear of God into me. It wasn't really until 7 years ago when I first read the Old Testament for the first time that I finally came to understand that God so loved the world.... Finally I was able to embrace God the Father as my LOVING, HEAVENLY FATHER!!
Thank you, I was just curious to know what it was without listening to the whole thing, as I'm not a great fan of NT Wright, I recently heard John Piper say they disagree on justification. But I can guess what he's saying, it's true that verse is bandied about far too much "according to His purpose" being conveniently forgotten or downplayed ;)
Nowhere in Romans 8:28 does it say that God works for those that love Him. It says And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
You know I'm so blessed by NTS depth and love of the Lord Jesus Christ and of the scriptures I was hearing that Russell Brand a fellow Brit who is a large cultural force in his own right and has embraced Buddhism in the past but is now exploring Christianity and was reading CS Lewis's the problem of pain and I was wondering if Professor Wright reads this, if he would be able to reach out to Russell Brand to perhaps discuss these matters, noting that to me NT wright is probably the inheritor of the legacy of CS Lewis and therefore able to answer Brands questions about the Faith, in depth .
The fear of God's wrath as an unbeliever and the love of God with full assurance as a believer are flip sides of the same coin. Wright and Moore are kneejerking against the first side of the coin. It's a legitimate pastoral matter for individuals, but balance is needed.
I saw "N.T. Wright" in the title of this video and had to watch! The beginning of the pandemic in 2020 coincided with Lent, and I decided to get off social media for 40 days and nights EXCEPT for videos by Bible scholars and teachers. I discovered N.T. Wright and watched just about every lecture and sermon of his that I could find on TH-cam. His book "Surprised By Hope" is not a surprise given what I heard in those lectures...so hopeful! I was an Episcopalian at the time, and have now become a Catholic...but I still love to listen to him speak. Through him I have learned what the Christian hope *is*, and what Christians are called to *be*. I've sometimes mused that perhaps Tom Wright is an apostle of hope.
Good stuff @darla! And good for you not taking the bait (of the typical anti-Catholic leading questions...the kind of questions which, sadly, let you know the questioner isn't seeking answers, just reinforcement of their existing prejudice and ignorance). On a much happier note: I too am a huge fan of NT Wright as a Christian of the Catholic denomination. There are many thousands of us, going by his book sales and lecture attendance.
@@jaggedstarrPI the questioner is perhaps trying to help you realize that some aspects of your faith are "practice and ritual" and have nothing to do with the following of Jesus Christ and everything to do with religion.
Thanks SheepDog :-) I appreciate your generosity of spirit. You're probably right; nevertheless, in addition to being a silly, self appointed defender of the Church, lol, I am also on a Quixotic crusade to rescue the word religion itself...big dreams, I know. It's been useful to point out the danger in religious forms but I say we're well past that and have thrown out the baby with the bath water. Religion means to bind together. As long as it has Christ as its objective it is both good and necessary. I completely reject the false dichotomy of faith vs. religion. But I digress. Thanks again for your great feedback. Peace
P s By the way Sheep Dog, I find it much better to focus on the log in the eye of my own denomination than trying to convince other Christians that the speck in their tradition needs to be the priority. What does your church get wrong? In your opinion of course. In my opinion, my church gets it wrong when they deny communion to folks who are divorced and remarried. Maybe you can pray for us.
My uncle Livingston Blauvelt did a wonderful new translation and commentary on Romans, calling it, rightly so, Pauls Magnum Opus. I will have to find this new NT Wright book at a local library.
In many many places in the old testament and it's also stated in at least one place in the new testament." The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom ". Now yes without a doubt God loves us and even came down from heaven and suffered a horrible death to reestablish our relationship with him. Modern people continually want to only emphasize The God of mercy and love ....and want to ignore the dignity and power and majesty...the one whom we owe our reverential love, obedience and worship. God isn't to be reduced to our slave by his love for us! We are to be conformed to him ....not him accepting our sin and him being forced by his love for us to ignore our stubborn obstinate life of sin!
Kind of like, "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free!" Gee, I have this suspicion that this is not what Jesus said. What was it that He actually said because the part that is missing there is key! What is that pesky part of that sentence that is missing?
Thank you for this interview. It’s a very long time since I was a student at Wycliffe Hall and N T Wright was Chaplain of Worcester College and a visiting lecturer on NT studies at Wycliffe! I’ve had an on/off relationship with his works over the years, partly because some people whose theology I didn’t get on with thought he was the bee’s leg-joints, so as I didn’t trust them theologically, I didn’t trust him. This interview reminded me of what I liked about him when I did hear him speaking, and that his theology is a generous orthodoxy with room for people to disagree without having to be disagreeable about it. His emphasis on covenant is refreshing in contrast to the mediaeval Latin-legalism that often marks discussion of atonement on the Calvinist side of the aisle, without giving way to those who dismiss penal, substitutionary atonement as barbaric and sub-Christian, throwing out the atoning baby with the theological bathwater. I loved his way of saying that we and some of those with whom we disagree may be either side of a dividing line between two ways of thinking, but yet be closer together than we are to the extremes on our side of the dividing line. The Bible does not place us with Cicero in the Roman Forum, nor with Greta Thunberg on the climate protest, but with Jesus by the sea, in the temple and on the cross. The mediaeval church and Christians in that day were in their own time, we are in ours, and we need to pass on the message of God’s love in Christ and how it works out, in the context in which we now are, linking the world of the Bible with the world of today.
There are so many points of contention in what has been said I don’t know where to start. Sinners prayer never got anyone saved -it’s just words read out - it’s the conviction that one is a sinner, confession of that to God and then repentance - turning from sinful life. Leadership is male - women are helpmates to men. Isaiah 3:12 sums things up - women ruling over men is a judgement - desires of heart and leanness in soul. None can snatch us from Gods hand but we can take our hand from his.
I've read several of NT Wright's books, notably 'The Resurrection of Jesus Christ' and 'Book of Revelation'. It was a delight to hear him in person. He sounds as reasonable as he writes. We don't agree on everything, but I love his heart for God.
People can’t live by parts of Scripture, those that fit in to today’s societal expectations or ones own desires, , rather, one needs to prescribe and live by the WHOLE Word of God, no matter how much it might hurt for some. Paul made this topic of women speaking out in churches and ministering very, VERY clear; and not just in some small, single verse but, rather, multiple passages and Books within Scripture. Blessings 🙏🏼❤ OnlyJesuSaves ✝👑📖👍🏼🙏🏼❤
Thank you Dr. Moore for having the wisdom to talk to and respect those who may not agree with you on every point. I always learn something from you and your guests. And it's always a joy to hear Dr. Wright expound on scripture. I would like to make a comment about egalitarianism and the differences between men and women (by the way, I'm a female teacher and preacher and relatively conservative in my Christian beliefs). I don't believe that philosophically, egalitarianism implies that men and women are identical and interchangeable. It implies that first, men and woman are of equal value in the sight of God and should be so in human eyes as well. Both deserve the equal right to pursue their callings and their interests without being forced to conform to other people's interpretations of God's will for their lives, and finally, both partners need to be willing and able to fulfill the responsibilities and duties of being a partner and a parent. And yes, it's obvious that there are biological differences between the sexes. However, whatever our perceived differences between the sexes may be, it's impossible to predict how our maleness or femaleness will affect our personalities. Case in point: "women are more emotional then men," "men are the natural leaders," "women like to feel protected," "men are better decision-makers." All of those may be true in many cases, but they're not true in all cases, and better not to jump to hasty conclusions about people, especially since women seem to bear the brunt and suffer the limitations when aspiration conflicts with stereotype.
So, 20:58 NT Wright's spiritual advice to someone on his deathbed worried about looming judgement is not to talk about confession of sin and repentance and faith in the cross of Christ, but to reassure the person of God's love. That's all I needed to hear to know the man is not biblical. He's a well-spoken wolf. Compare his message to what the apostles preached !
When you practice the teaching of Yeshua for long enough it becomes second nature. But when the Law of God is written upon your heart it becomes a natural part of your character. It becomes first nature. And you cannot break it.
@@robertbrown7470 Of course all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. There is no one deserving of Gods love by their works. But the real message is being born again you are set back into a new creation which is loved because you have believed in the one God sent. And it was he who said all the laws were rolled into one. Do unto others as you would have done unto you. The simplicity of the gospel.
@@robertbrown7470 matthew 7:12 But remember Jesus was speaking to the pharisees who thought they were righteous because they followed the laws. There were over 900 at that time. Gal 2:16
This is one of the reasons I advocate for Christians to spend some time learning to read Biblical Greek. The more comfortable we become with reading the original biblical text, the better able we are to cut through the nonsense and read the text as it truly is.
The simplest thing is the hardest thing... Love God. Love people. Christ embodied that. He died for that. He rose again for that. Now we GET to do the same thing as a collective Body with different expressions of parts working throughout time as a mysterious unity aimed at restoring all things back to the Good from which it was made. This is Good News indeed! Thank you for this remarkable discussion which offers confirmation of our blessed vocation as followers of Christ.
Two of my favourite thinkers on the same show. If the rest of the church could emulate the theological hospitality shown by these two, we’d be in a much better place.
it is a double edged sword.....do all those books validate this teaching....and why not a more basic summary, for those, of us.....challenged in that dept....
I so very much love N.T. Wright's wisdom and historical insights. Yet, I do struggle with his answers about the larger framing on "how to be saved" as a solution to passages like Romans 8 on glorification and its place in salvation. It just seems that the "this worldly" correction of the resurrection as the true ultimate destiny of those that are saved (as opposed to the "going to heaven" shorthand), does not alter or set aside the very important question of how one is saved. Or that glorification is about being conformed to the person of Christ which is the end goal of salvation (both of unmerited justification and the outworking of a living faith in sanctification). I would summarize my confusion as "that is an odd disjunction," or "the original love of God is a good wider framing, but how does that change the substance of the traditional answer"? There was a point where God being "disappointed" in us as sinners was put on the table or framed as a potentially bad thing by Moore. Or as a kind of "moralism" by Wright (4:50). But how is that a bad thing? Of course, God is disappointed in our disobedience. How is that a problem? The problem is not the "moral standard," but the trivialization of sin as misdemeanor rule breaking rather than a decisive wholistic turning against God from the heart. One need not even hold the view that Adam was trying to positively merit eternal life in the garden for God to be disappointed. One need only believe that Adam was supposed to maintain his original innocence by not turning against God's moral authority. For us to do this was a disappointment, and it wounded God. It was our unjust betrayal of God, who was innocent of any wrong toward us. God has every reason to have been disappointed in us. The amazing thing about mercy is that he was willing to put his just demands aside and to take our offense and the justice due him and cancel them by his own loving death and obedience on our behalf (Col. 2:14). Why must we downplay God's disappointment at our sin, and the drama of his overcoming this disappointment for the sake of his great love--the journey of God into the far country on our behalf? By eliminating the disappointment, we eliminate the great drama of his merciful lovingkindness! This is a strange way to approach the sinful person who might be offended by God's "moral" disappointment. Are we so fragile that we can't understand that God's disappointment is justified? Is not this possible offense an essential element of the gospel? When Wright presents the love of God and his presence pursuant to Romans 8, to the one who is saying "I'm fearful of judgment" or "what must I do to be saved" (21:00), it just seems he is insisting upon God's love already being with the person. But that seems to miss the question. True, the love of God can't be separated from those that are in Christ (Rom. 8). But that presumes that one is IN CHRIST! And that is the very heart of the uncertainty behind the question. So the answer to the question of the person who is looking for assurance about their future resurrected life with God (to rightly incorporate the larger framework, as Wright would say), is not just that "God is love and is FOR you," but "turn from trusting in yourself and cast yourself upon him," and believe that God suffered for your sin in Jesus Christ, and has cancelled your debt of obligation to his justice (Col. 2:14). If you turn to Christ and believe this, you shall know the Son, and the Son shall know you, and those who are united to the Son are known of God. Sure, we can address questions about the unevangelized and all that, but this is not a classroom, but a death bed question. Why should it be watered down to less than this? Absolutely, simply saying "God loves you, and love God back," should be enough, because perfect love casts out fear, but this person is fearful because they suspect that they did not love God as they should have, so this "love" is clearly not enough. The mercy in God's love, and trust in it, if at all possible, should be spelled out.
@@ericstone413, I appreciate that insight, and I agree with Wright that it’s about trusting that God is for us and it’s something about what Jesus has done. And it’s very true that one does not have to have a great deal of knowledge to be able to decide for God, one’s life experience will provide a sufficient background. It would be better, however, if we could specify for this person who is dying, and ourselves, what this vague “trust” is in. The “something about” Jesus that we would want to focus on in light of the teaching of Jesus would be, “have mercy upon me, a sinner” (Lk. 18:13-14), such is the trust we can have in Christ. This is the good-news, that the mercy in Christ is not “maybe, if you were good enough,” etc., but yes and amen. The fear and displeasure of God is not dealt with by denying its existence toward us, but in the confidence that God has overcome it for us in Jesus Christ. This is not a lot of difficult theory, though it is but the tip of an iceberg. My word of encouragement is, let’s not make the goodnews obscure out of a fear that it will raise the specter of God’s judgment, the word certainly is, “though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death you are with me,” but the reason is not because there is no wrath and glory that shines against sin, but because we are held in the cleft of the rock that is Jesus, upon whom God said well done. This is the trust we should highlight. Not trust in the love of God for someone like me who loves him as I should, or a “something about Jesus” but as one who trusts in the Father’s mercy because of his revelation that mercy triumphed over judgment in Jesus-that we can face him, because he has turned his face toward us.
@@jrhemmerich I agree with much of what you say. I wondered how you viewed the judgement seat of Christ which ALL will stand before. That causes fear in me. In listening to NT Wright you would think for Christians there is no judgement, but that is not what Paul says. I suppose many would argue such a judgement will not merit 'casting out' but rather a withholding of 'rewards' whatever they may be, but Im not convinced by that.
@@PC-vg8vn Greetings my friend! I would like to present my own take on this via a few questions and statements. It may be that I am not really grasping what you are saying so please forgive me if I am misunderstanding your point. If your life is hidden with Christ in God how can you be judged for sin? We are in Him and He is in us, is Christ to be made sin once more? The healthy outlook is to assume Jesus is with us, the Holy Spirit is mentoring us and God is pleased that we have begun to walk the path. Yes we have a hard road ahead yet our mind should be on doing what is right and not lingering and worrying about our failures along the way. Confess and turn away from what is wrong is the provided way. We are enabled to maintain our fellowship with God in this manner. True we should never be of the mind that we have already attained the goal while we are still on this mortal plane and fearing God is the beginning of wisdom, yet to consider ourselves as being lost and separated from God while we are walking in the way is also entirely wrong. Yes a judgement awaits the faithful, but it is as to what reward will be granted according to the level and quality of service provided to the Master. The judgement of the faithful will not be concerning sin. So, be up and doing! Feel free to respond or not, however you feel to do. Shalom!
"I never knew you. Depart from Me, you evil doers (Matt 7:23)." These words were spoken by Our Lord to those pastors in protestant churches, who teach partial Truth, by saying 'Lord, Lord', quoting Bible, mixed with heresies and lies to deceive unsuspecting souls and lead them to eternal perdition. Our Lord said, "I know My sheep and they know Me (John 10:14). They hear My voice and follow Me and I give them the eternal life (John 10:27-28)." The sheep in His Fold are the members of His Church, His Body and Bride whom He saves (Eph 5:23), which He founded on the 12 Apostles (Rev 21:14) with St. Peter as His Vicar (Pope) on earth, vesting him with His Authority by giving him the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 16:18-19), and sent to teach all nations to OBSERVE ALL HE Commanded and baptize them (Matt 28:20, Mark 16:16) for salvation of souls until the end of the world.
And Our Lord said, "Whoever listens to you listens to Me. Whoever rejects you rejects Me and rejects the One who sent Me (Luke 10:16, John 13:20, Matt 10:40)." To justify their existence, protestant churches attack, accuse, slander, and reject the Catholic Church, therefore reject Our Lord, the Head of the Church (Col 1:18). Our Lord said, "Whoever rejects Me and does not accept My Words has something to judge him; the word that I spoke, it will condemn him on the last day (John 12:48). You do not believe because you are not among My sheep (John 10:26). Whoever is not with Me, is against Me (Matt 12:30)." So, Matt 7;23 was spoken to warn protestant pastors and those who follow them, so that they may repent and come to Our Lord's Only Sheepfold (John 10:16) and be saved.
Tbe "Former guy" #45 told Evangelistic pastors that the "Eye for an Eye..." Exodus verse was about revenge and was from "John" but without elaborating. Leviticus has similar guidance as does ancient Babylonian Law regarding loss having equivalent punishment.
Hearing this dialogue the first verse that came to mind was this "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36
"I never knew you. Depart from Me, you evil doers (Matt 7:23)." These words were spoken by Our Lord to those pastors in protestant churches, who teach partial Truth, by saying 'Lord, Lord', quoting Bible, mixed with heresies and lies to deceive unsuspecting souls and lead them to eternal perdition. Our Lord said, "I know My sheep and they know Me (John 10:14). They hear My voice and follow Me and I give them the eternal life (John 10:27-28)." The sheep in His Fold are the members of His Church, His Body and Bride whom He saves (Eph 5:23), which He founded on the 12 Apostles (Rev 21:14) with St. Peter as His Vicar (Pope) on earth, vesting him with His Authority by giving him the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 16:18-19), and sent to teach all nations to OBSERVE ALL HE Commanded and baptize them (Matt 28:20, Mark 16:16) for salvation of souls until the end of the world.
And Our Lord said, "Whoever listens to you listens to Me. Whoever rejects you rejects Me and rejects the One who sent Me (Luke 10:16, John 13:20, Matt 10:40)." To justify their existence, protestant churches attack, accuse, slander, and reject the Catholic Church, therefore reject Our Lord, the Head of the Church (Col 1:18). Our Lord said, "Whoever rejects Me and does not accept My Words has something to judge him; the word that I spoke, it will condemn him on the last day (John 12:48). You do not believe because you are not among My sheep (John 10:26). Whoever is not with Me, is against Me (Matt 12:30)." So, Matt 7;23 was spoken to warn protestant pastors and those who follow them, so that they may repent and come to Our Lord's Only Sheepfold (John 10:16) and be saved.
I am curious what you think of the new popes stance on Homosexuality? Also what do you think of the popes in the past that have had mistresses? @@hyeminkwun9523
@@regpharvey Wrong? Why? Do you not understand that Our Lord wills that all who believe in Him through the teachings of the Apostles, namely His Church, be One (John 17:20-21)? Whoever causes a division is an instrument of the enemy of Our Lord, that is Satan who wants to drag souls to his Hell.
With all due respect, Christianity can make sense of a number of things, but not everything that can clearly be understood in its own right fits within a solidly Christian worldview, and sometimes there are things that are Christian that, although very appealing to believe, seem unlikely to be true. I am not here to argue it, and people are certainly free to disagree. At the same time, if anyone else is starting to think the way I do, please know that you are not alone. Maybe I am wrong, but for those who wish to correct me, please take comfort in knowing this: I may know less than you, but we are all at different places in our understanding. Maybe someday I will see things the same way as you. I wish everyone here the best.
Charles Spurgeon said discernment isn’t about discerning right from wrong but right from almost right. Wright is almost right and as a result he is also dangerous. His misunderstanding of the gospel borders on the heretical.
how are these confusing times? these are the most obvious times we have ever had; clear lines are drawn; satan is loved on one side and rejected on the other; what could be confusing about that?
I find the differences in libraries noteworthy. I wonder how long it would take for the libraries to be transformed if these two guys switched. Order vs Chaos.
I must say, as someone who believes in PSA, I didn't recognise a lot of the "very medieval angry" version of it, perhaps because God in love is taking it to himself. Its like putting up a version to shoot down. Also I would have thought the book of Hebrews would have to be reckoned in.
David Moffitt's "Rethinking the Atonement" wrestles with Hebrews in a way that NT Wright appreciates, if you want to see a similar perspective but on Hebrews. Very interesting work.
@@derekcaldwell4334 Thanks for the tip. I love listening to NT Wright, but I often do seriously ponder if he's gone to the corporate view end of the scale in deference to the individual (who is at enmity with God/under wrath). He also has clearly widely read the secular literature, but I wonder if he trusts it more in deference to the Gospels' record. E.g. Some of the secular have sources many, many decades after the first century, whereas e.g. Luke 18 v 9 clearly records a temple Pharisee who was self righteous, self confident, self reliant. They were not Pelagian ( red herring), but Semi Pelagian, turning Grace into works or prideful accomplishment (which does reflect the 16th century situation in ways) . Also other passages, Jesus condemns them as "swiping a gnat, swallowing a camel", "hypocrites", etc. Then Paul himself Romans 10,v 1-4, Phil 3v9. Then the gospel defined as 1Cor 15 v 1-4. I also see NT going for "boundary conditions" like circumcision and ponder that "the circumcision" is those who "live it" or "hanker after the old ways", which would include the moral law that can never be met, etc. I believe, essential to salvation, is "I can never meet the righteous standard required", and need a Righteousness not my own, namely need the alien Righteousness of Jesus Christ (akin to the garment of salvation). Paul get very exercised about the Judiasers, and Hebrews shows going back is an inferior option and an eternal mistake. Must go look for that book. Thanks.
@@Bibliotechno To be fair, Wright has noted that there are necessarily both corporate and individual elements, as there undoubtedly are. And most of the time the larger issue is missing the corporate view because we've been raised to see everything through an individualistic lens. And I think he and others are just trying to understand it through ancient eyes, which is difficult, takes a lot of rethinking and reimagining, which is so difficult. He would also say that, while he may not totally be on board with PSA, there are still elements penal and substitutionary at play, it is just that those have been connected incorrectly in some areas. I hope people keep giving him and others a listen. It is complicated for sure, but there is no easy way to explain something when it potentially paradigm-shifting. Even though you disagree with Wright on this matter, kudos to you for still engaging with it thoughtfully! I am not in 100% agreement either, but it keeps me thinking critically about what has been handed down and my own inherited biases when reading the Bible.
@@Bibliotechno Right. People don't need a re-interpretation of Scripture to say what they would like it to say. Like believing, if you are alive at the time, you will not go through Tribulation, you are going to be beamed out (raptured out). An unbelievalbe number of people in the West believe that - Hook, Line and Sinker! Who is the fisherman in that case?
Excellent discussion! I am writing my first Biblical commentary, The Emerald Hexameron, about Gn 1-2 (I guess the title gives that away). Who knew N. T. Wright, of all people, would use Ps 8 to create a fascinating bridge between Rom 8:18-28 and Gn 1-2 by defining glorification as that which obtains by fulfillment of our standing as the Imago Dei. It's not heavenly pie in the sky, it's about regaining that which we lost through stupidity, going our own way, forgetting the imperatives of Gn 1:28-30 and 2:5-15. I don't know that I will even comment (in my book) on the misinterpretation of Genesis by New Testament scholars and preachers across the ideological spectrum, but Prof. Wright gives me a good starting place for any such exegesis. I conducted a cursory search of commentaries on my shelf and found no mention of Ps 8 in relation to Rom 8:18-28. N. T. Wright's connection of the two seems audacious, but his is an audacity I trust, and I trust particularly the way he defends his contention in the interview with you. He attacks the Enlightenment, as I will do in my commentary, since I believe (apparently with Prof. Wright!) that the Enlightenment caused a severe misunderstanding of Genesis to permeate theological thought over the last 300 years, and again across the entire ideological spectrum. He used one of my trigger words, 'Wisdom', but on second listening I found he implied wisdom was something obtained collaboratively, so I won't accuse him of lapsing into Siecle de lumiere reasoning. I have contended for some time that our true identity is not Homo sapiens (wise man) but rather Fabricator universalis, because Genesis does not speak of wisdom or rational thinking or logical syllogism or any other such nonsense. Genesis is about Creation, about the initial (transformative--per Prof. John Walton) acts of Creator God, and therefore, if we are to image God, we do so, in the lexicon of Genesis, as reflections of the Creator/Architect, and thus we image God as Builders, since builders reflect or carry out the instructions of the architect. Carl Linnaeus, that misguided child of the Enlightenment, performed one of the great disservices of science when he named us Homo sapiens, in effect distinguishing us, separating us from the Cosmos, placing us above Creation, and everyone--even those of us who profess faith--bought into his self-serving nonsense. Perhaps we (believers) don't consider ourselves owners of Creation, but we call ourselves 'stewards' and in a too patronizing, too paternalistic way. We put on our tweed jackets and break out our pipes to cogitate over the matter when instead we should don bib overalls and work gloves because there's work to do. Great interview! Pearson Moore 2023
Genesis is about sin and the Fall, and this affects everyone since Adam. All the stuff you talk about might be very clever, but if it misses that point it is worthless. We are personally sinners, and we need a personal salvation to escape its consequences, which is separation from God for ever! N.T Wright has got himself so confused with his own cleverness that he has wandered off the true and narrow way, and sadly is leading others that way too.
Hi @@petercollins7848 Thank you for your kind response. I hope my commentary will not be clever, but that it will find a way to shed light on ideas forsaken and abandoned over the last 300 years. As for Prof. Wright, I find nothing confusing in his writings or here in his interview with Christianity Today. I find nothing clever or misleading or self-serving in any of his works. Peace be with you.
@@AncientNovelist Sadly, if you don’t see anything wrong with N.T Wright it means that you have wandered down the same wrong road that he has. Wright has befuddled himself with his academic cleverness, and seeks to lead others astray. There are no ideas ‘forsaken and abandoned for over 300 years’, it is a delusion based on a sense of academic superiority and pride. None of us like to think of ourselves as desperate sinners, but that is what we are and our only hope is Jesus. The hymn-writer was absolutely correct when he penned ‘ Nothing in my hand I bring, simply to Thy cross I cling; Naked come to Thee for dress; Helpless, look to Thee for grace; Foul, I to the fountain fly; Wash me, Saviour, or I die’. (Rock of Ages). There are no ‘good people, in spite of our self delusion and the false gospel and deception propagated by most religious ministers, telling people that after death they will ‘go to heaven’, when in fact those who are not united to Christ by faith will go to a lost eternity! Academic prowess and knowledge is a valuable thing, but unless united to a living and saving faith, it is worthless.
Hi @@petercollins7848 Peace and all things good. Thank you for your kind and thoughtful response. I hope you might forgive my ignorance, but I am not acquainted with your position regarding the writings/teachings of Dr. Wright. I don't know what the 'wrong road' is. All I can tell from your posts is that you disagree with Dr. Wright, but I don't know what the nexus of disagreement is. I don't find anywhere in Wright a rejection of the Christ, nor do I find anywhere in his writings a rejection of the truth that all persons have sinned against each other, against God's Creation, against God. I suppose at some point we all disagree with each other. I don't agree with Wright, or anyone else for that matter, on every single issue of theology or faith or practical living. Perhaps rather than enjoying the broad common ground I share with theologians of varied and even extreme assertion, I ought instead insist on my own interpretation of particulars and noisily reject anyone who does not share my viewpoint. Perhaps along this road is progress made in our understanding of Scripture. I tend to doubt this. I tend to believe we are better served by friendly collaboration, by common worship, by warm fellowship. We don't tear down, we build up. When I cite papers and publications in my own work, I do so with the acknowledgment of the the papers' positive impact on my thought. I am no New Testament expert. If your beef with Dr. Wright concerns esoterica around fine points of Gospel or Pauline themes, I'm not your best debate partner. My expertise is purification process design for isolation of API secondary metabolites from plant matter and chromatographic analysis of API and impurity behavior--that is to say, I am an R&D chemist with a quite narrow expertise. I dabble in exegesis. I take the time to write The Emerald Hexameron because I find no published work supporting my understanding of what I have long considered true, that to call ourselves Homo sapiens and to insist that therefore wisdom and rational thought are the capabilities and potentials most closely aligned with the Divine nature and can be understood as the predominant characteristic of our identity as the Imago Dei cannot be correct. To my mind, this is nothing more than Enlightenment-era drivel. The Imago Dei reflects the Creator, and must therefore be a builder. We build up each other. We build up God's world. That is our purpose. Genesis details the way in which we can become faithful servant-builders. Peace be with you.
@@petercollins7848We love the reformers because they questioned the status quo of their day by going back to the Bible and reading it afresh... Though we love them for it, we have little patience for those who do the same today.
@@TheRomans9Guy Did you know that saying “omg” is replacing the Holy name of God as a filth word, like Human Excrement, it was punishable by death in the Old Testament. I’m assuming you never knew this or you certainly wouldn’t use it as a true born again Christian.
Indeed, nothing can separate us from the love of God (see Romans 8:35-39); for "God is love" (1 John 4:8b). However, our behavior can remove us from the life of God in us (see Romans 8:12-14).
I'd love to hear NT Wrights comment on Romans 13:4 (Dutch Statenbible) about State Authority being God's servant working for our good. In Dutch history this verse has been used by theologians to condemn every action against government authority, even under nazi-occupation...How does this verse relate to the idea of 'good people disobey bad laws', because the whole Reformation would not have happened if Luther had just sat there and obeyed government authority of that day, quoting Romans 13:4...
The arguments I hear against most 'environmentalism' is that the solutions are vague, expensive, unlikely to make a meaningful impact, and will only hurt poorer countries by taking away their most efficient means of producing energy. Jordan Peterson does a great job of summing up these arguments.
Don't give in to your enemies Bibi, they are consumed by envy and hatred. You are the strongest leader in the world and truly the most admired. If you compromise or bend to the ICC you will have handed victory to those who want Israel destroyed. May the Lord bless you and keep you safe.
Man always makes God in their image, therefore, He is angry and judgmental. But Isa. 55 points out His ways are higher then ours, in that He freely forgives by His Grace. Hence we are called to come eat and drink without any ability to pay for it. The spirit of deceit specializes in a religious, old covenant perspective, that we have to do to earn!!!!
Jesus was quoting the first few words like a reference to the whole psalm. Ki d of like a rabbinic shortcut so people there hear it and think about the whole passage as the context for what they were actually witnessing. All of the Jewish people watching would be so used to this idea and method it would be intuitive.
So important to know the whole Bible and the context of the Biblical story leading up to Jesus. My understanding of the cross and the gospel of Jesus was made so much more rich when I read through the Torah and especially when I came to the book of Leviticus.
The most misunderstood verse in all of scripture has to be Matt.24:30.!!!! 2nd coming? Not on your life.!!!!!!! Judgement against the Matt.23 apostates, absolutely. !!!!!!
You will never know or understand the "why" of things on this Earth. Relax and realize that you are not God or a god. If you read the New Testament and don't get it, for some reason you are not listening. At the least you should get the jist of what God is telling you. But, if you do not want to understand and get it, you will not. It's your decision.
@@chernowitz Seek and you will find. Does it all have to make sense to you or anyone else? No. To accept the truth of what the Bible says, the New Testament especially says is sufficient.
Yeah I know. Great discussion, but I hate click bait titles. The verse appears to be Rom 8:28, "All things work together for good." But it does not come up until about 32 minutes in.
The very statement that is “the most misunderstood bible verse” is the sign that people shall not rely on the bible alone to understand the bible. What if you come upon one verse that your finite mind cannot understand? What do you do? Do you ask NT Wright? But😮 NT Wright himself says, this is the most misunderstood verse. Would you trust him of his understanding? Why does he understands and you don’t?
Daniel's prayer in chapter 9. Daniels coming before the Lord idenifying with his people and their sins and then asked the Lord to have mercy for His Name save His people f ok r His Name sake . Daniel orsyed to the Kord what the people should have but because the y didnt Daniel prayed FOR them and AS them
Concur. Perhaps the title was not chosen by the interviewer, but that's no excuse for the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. Also, whenever you see such a superlative in a title, there is probably no consensus on whether it is generally true. In this case, I believe there are many candidates for most misunderstood verse in Scripture. Whatever one person thinks is the most misunderstood verse, another can make an argument for some other verse.
I love watching Russell Moore deconstruct before our eyes (and yet, I’m not sure he realizes he is deconstructing). It is high time the destructive mistranslations, misreadings, & faulty interpretations of Reformed theology to be put to bed.
Deconstruction isn't a bad word automatically. See McDowell on deconstruction, either in one of his podcast episodes or better yet, his cowritten book Set Adrift: Deconstructing What You Believe Without Sinking Your Faith. Just because someone takes the evangelical package, picks the pieces apart, and wrestles with which pieces are actually congruent with scripture doesn't mean they're losing their faith. E.g., many of us would be naturalistic atheists if we felt that we *had* to keep drinking the milk of the young-earth creationism we were raised on--vs. deconstructing, finding the YEC position untenable, but finding that God is still faithful and his word is so much deeper than what YEC apologists invest in convincing us Genesis 1 is all about. Sorry, that was a little Christian rant.
@@ericstone413 I will say we have a new vocabulary since 2016... until now.. Deconstruct means to break apart and analysis it.. Some of us have some deep inbedded believes that may not even be in the Bible... Everything I learn more and more about Jesus and His love at 56 is amazing..
When you pray a prayer that is in 100% agreement with God and His Word especially His proceeding Word, that prayer authorizes the Holy Spirit to do what HE wills, and of course that doesnt mean that we move God.
To me the best place to begin when speaking of the gospel is a scripture in the book of Jeremiah. It describes the corruptible condition of every man's heart: "The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it?" Then follow it with the promise of God found in 1Timothy 2:3-4 : "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
That is not the place to start (and this is the point of N.T. Wright), that the start of the Bible (and the entire Biblical Story), is that God’s creation is good, and that the pinnacle of His creation, human beings, is very good. Yes, in short order, human beings failed, but even that ushered in what would be something even greater, the restoration of God’s creation, a New Creation, in and through His Son!
@@johnmilius3365 God's creation is good. Man is not. Jesus tells you that human beings are not good let alone "very good." That contradicts Jesus - 100%. Even Jesus, when someone refers to him as good, says there is none good but God. But not you......
Anyone still monitoring questions on this video page? Does N.T. Wright have any home or work on returning to God's plans and explicit set times/Feast Days for clarifying view across all Scripture? While God never ordained Easter, He clearly established Pesach/Passover. (This is one clearly visible part of the immense iceberg of distortions of Scripture, doctrine and practice that remains the Roman Catholic church. - How do Catholics "calculate" the day to celebrate Jesus' resurrection? How is designated, clearly, in Scripture?) This only one key example of this continuing problem in Evangelism and doctrine and assumptions and ignorance of Christianity. The historic, continuing failure of both Protestantism (and the latest count of some 20,000 denominations) and Catholicism (with its 1 or 2 major branches) all have failed to coherently, respectfully return to the invaluable Hebrew roots, of language, culture and Scriptural interpretation, and to accept and teach the Jewisvhness eternally, of the Messiah Yeshua/Jesus.
You Must have missed St Paul’s memo To The Galatians…? Or The Gospel according to Prophet Jeremiah 600BC 31 v 31-34 New covenant promised 32 NOT LIKE SINAI 🪦🪦 33 Indwelling ~ Acts 2… 34 No Sin‼️ ✝️🩸🕊️ John 3v3 ~ 6 v 29. 70AD temple destroyed. Rev 21 v 22… John 2 v 19.. hallelujah
But you would never understand the incredible love HE has for us if you didnt realize that it was YOUR/OUR sins... not HIS sins that HE bore on the cross if you arent made aware of the penalty of sin being death of the soul.
As finite beings trying to comprehend an infinite God, I wonder if we're always simply going to be unbalanced in our perspective. I see where I comes from, but I also think you are spot on with your critique.
Ecclesiastes 12:7🎉 "Then shall the Dust return to the earth as it was: and the Spirit return unto God who gave it"..... We were God's, are God's and will Remain God's 🎉
If that's the case why didn't Christ select a woman as one of his 12 disciple if NT wright wants to use Mary in Matthew 20, as an example to ordain a woman. How can anyone knowledgeable as NT Wright use that as an example. Please think people...
The first thing that came to me on the sin Jesus took on for all of us.of all time...🎶 He became sin that knew no sin, that we might become His righteousness.. music 🎵
@@robertbrown7470 Thats true. lol. I believe Paul called them twice plucked up. That is if they ever really understood the gospel to begin with. Some just go to church to have the label and their parents did too.
@@robertbrown7470 "Might" is actually the word they used to express the subjunctive tense in the past. It did not mean "possibility" (in that context). The subjunctive (which I have studied in other languages) is used when we're not talking facts. An example is: "I wish you were taller". You're not taller. That's why I can use "were" rather than "was" (one of the few subjunctive tenses remaining in English). Another example is "he died so that we may/might live". Nowadays, we wouldn't use "may/might" anymore in that sentence (probably to avoid ambiguity). We would say "he died so that we live".
@@leenieledejo6849 You can manipulate the texts any way you want. You are free to do so. Doesn't make it right. Oh, wait, right doesn't mean right it means something else.... lol
@@robertbrown7470 That's not manipulation. That's the English language and if you had an ounce of humility, you would research the subjunctive tense yourself, realize that the KJV especially uses it a LOT (because it used to be used more in English) and learn how "might" is used to translate the subjunctive in foreign languages. But then you also have the choice to remain in ignorance and learn nothing...
Ray Comfort does a good job of street evangulism by using the approach analogy of a doctor first telling a patient how they are terribly sick and showing them that they are deathly ill and need a cure. He also uses the 10 Commandments as a tets for the person to confess they are a sinner. But it is important to understand the Story of God wanting to dwell with humans and the struggle with man kind to restore things back God Dwelling with man.
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA W2D5 | Summer | วันอาทิตย์ จะขิตหรือจะรอด!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-4JLNwQRK-Y/mqdefault.jpg)
![ตั๋วเมีย (ຕົວະເມຍ) - SOMBATH.97 Ft. YOUD SALAVAN [ Official music video ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GV6qHagpp50/mqdefault.jpg)
This Russell Moore interview of NT Wright is based on the 2023 NT Wright book, “Into the Heart of Romans: A Deep Dive Into Paul’s Greatest Letter.” The book is about one chapter: Romans 8. The verse under consideration is Romans 8:28.
A traditional translation of Rom 8:28: “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose” (ESV). Or in the KJV: “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.”
NT Wright argues that in the original Greek, in Rom 8:28, “God is the subject of the main verb.” The subject is not “all things.” So he prefers the RSV translation: “We know that in everything God works for good with those who love him, who are called according to his purpose” (see p. 158).
What's the significance? It is in the word, WITH. "God works all things together for good WITH those who love him.” Not “for those” or “to them.” And this is why this video title has the phrase “the most misunderstood verse in the Bible.”
One of the main results of this view is that salvation is less about “being saved FROM the world” and more about “being saved FOR the world.” This represents a paradigm shift concerning our vocation as the people of God. There are massive implications for our theology and practice.
In his book, Wright spells all this out in a verse-by-verse exegesis of the Greek. The Russell Moore interview with Wright offers tip-of-the iceberg highlights.
(Written by Werner Mischke, VP, Mission ONE)
Thank you 👍
@@thederwentexperience4894 This chaneel has nothing to do with Yahweh and Yeshua! These a pagans who practice paganism. They quote from the popular cristianity and popular cristianity is pagan. I pray you wake up from these false prophets, these a re false prophets and you do not need any commentaries of men to explain the Bible to you. The Bible is very clear, Yeshua the word made it very clear! Yahweh warned us about adding or taking away from the Bible and these people added volumes of mens thoughts. The Bible is very clear. I pray you wake up. May Yahweh bless you and keep you through Yeshua, Amen!
@@trumpetblast2326 Well said
Thank you for this succinct summation.
Thank you 🫡
NT Wright is correct, it took me until my later years to discover that God the Father truly loves me because I equated God the Father to my own abusive father. Also as a small child I remembered the blood & thunder sermons of the 1950s which first put the fear of God into me. It wasn't really until 7 years ago when I first read the Old Testament for the first time that I finally came to understand that God so loved the world.... Finally I was able to embrace God the Father as my LOVING, HEAVENLY FATHER!!
ROMANS 8:28 IS THE VERSE THEY ARE DISCUSSING.
I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT I HAD TO SEARCH THROUGH
25 COMMENTS TO FIND IT.
Thank you! Was scanning comments to find this bit of info! LOL 😂
Well, at least now you won't forget which verse this is :)
Thank you, I was just curious to know what it was without listening to the whole thing, as I'm not a great fan of NT Wright, I recently heard John Piper say they disagree on justification. But I can guess what he's saying, it's true that verse is bandied about far too much "according to His purpose" being conveniently forgotten or downplayed ;)
@@PennySmart you should listen to the whole thing, it's pretty good
Thank you I was searching for which verse was the one in question.
Come let us reason together! Love the way Professor Wright "reasons". What a tremendous blessing.
Nowhere in Romans 8:28 does it say that God works for those that love Him. It says And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
Thank You for hosting this great conversation…and giving us opportunity to see and hear the amazing voice, insight and experience of NT Wright!
Thank you for this interview, both to Prof Wright for his knowledge, and to Russell Moore for his insightful questions.
I stumbled on this vide today. Truly blessed by it . Thank you Russell and thank you Mr NT wright
An outstanding interview! Thank you very much.
You know I'm so blessed by NTS depth and love of the Lord Jesus Christ and of the scriptures
I was hearing that Russell Brand a fellow Brit who is a large cultural force in his own right and has embraced Buddhism in the past but is now exploring Christianity and was reading CS Lewis's the problem of pain and I was wondering if Professor Wright reads this, if he would be able to reach out to Russell Brand to perhaps discuss these matters, noting that to me NT wright is probably the inheritor of the legacy of CS Lewis and therefore able to answer Brands questions about the Faith, in depth .
Thank you. Will listen to it again
Thank you. This is a wonderful conversation.
So interesting and so much to absorb. Thank you gentlemen, I'll be listening again and probably again!.
The fear of God's wrath as an unbeliever and the love of God with full assurance as a believer are flip sides of the same coin. Wright and Moore are kneejerking against the first side of the coin.
It's a legitimate pastoral matter for individuals, but balance is needed.
I saw "N.T. Wright" in the title of this video and had to watch! The beginning of the pandemic in 2020 coincided with Lent, and I decided to get off social media for 40 days and nights EXCEPT for videos by Bible scholars and teachers. I discovered N.T. Wright and watched just about every lecture and sermon of his that I could find on TH-cam. His book "Surprised By Hope" is not a surprise given what I heard in those lectures...so hopeful! I was an Episcopalian at the time, and have now become a Catholic...but I still love to listen to him speak. Through him I have learned what the Christian hope *is*, and what Christians are called to *be*. I've sometimes mused that perhaps Tom Wright is an apostle of hope.
Do you venerate Mary? Or pray to saints? Do you confess sins in a confessional to a priest?
Good stuff @darla! And good for you not taking the bait (of the typical anti-Catholic leading questions...the kind of questions which, sadly, let you know the questioner isn't seeking answers, just reinforcement of their existing prejudice and ignorance).
On a much happier note: I too am a huge fan of NT Wright as a Christian of the Catholic denomination. There are many thousands of us, going by his book sales and lecture attendance.
@@jaggedstarrPI the questioner is perhaps trying to help you realize that some aspects of your faith are "practice and ritual" and have nothing to do with the following of Jesus Christ and everything to do with religion.
Thanks SheepDog :-)
I appreciate your generosity of spirit. You're probably right; nevertheless, in addition to being a silly, self appointed defender of the Church, lol, I am also on a Quixotic crusade to rescue the word religion itself...big dreams, I know.
It's been useful to point out the danger in religious forms but I say we're well past that and have thrown out the baby with the bath water. Religion means to bind together. As long as it has Christ as its objective it is both good and necessary. I completely reject the false dichotomy of faith vs. religion.
But I digress.
Thanks again for your great feedback. Peace
P s By the way Sheep Dog, I find it much better to focus on the log in the eye of my own denomination than trying to convince other Christians that the speck in their tradition needs to be the priority.
What does your church get wrong? In your opinion of course.
In my opinion, my church gets it wrong when they deny communion to folks who are divorced and remarried. Maybe you can pray for us.
Amen. Thank you for this!
My uncle Livingston Blauvelt did a wonderful new translation and commentary on Romans, calling it, rightly so, Pauls Magnum Opus. I will have to find this new NT Wright book at a local library.
In many many places in the old testament and it's also stated in at least one place in the new testament." The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom ". Now yes without a doubt God loves us and even came down from heaven and suffered a horrible death to reestablish our relationship with him. Modern people continually want to only emphasize The God of mercy and love ....and want to ignore the dignity and power and majesty...the one whom we owe our reverential love, obedience and worship. God isn't to be reduced to our slave by his love for us! We are to be conformed to him ....not him accepting our sin and him being forced by his love for us to ignore our stubborn obstinate life of sin!
Truth.
Just finished listening again, “for by its’ light, I can see all things,” Thank you, Tom, for that gem of thought. Amen
Kind of like, "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free!" Gee, I have this suspicion that this is not what Jesus said. What was it that He actually said because the part that is missing there is key! What is that pesky part of that sentence that is missing?
NT Wright dropping the mic on our fits in the West!
Thank you for this interview. It’s a very long time since I was a student at Wycliffe Hall and N T Wright was Chaplain of Worcester College and a visiting lecturer on NT studies at Wycliffe! I’ve had an on/off relationship with his works over the years, partly because some people whose theology I didn’t get on with thought he was the bee’s leg-joints, so as I didn’t trust them theologically, I didn’t trust him. This interview reminded me of what I liked about him when I did hear him speaking, and that his theology is a generous orthodoxy with room for people to disagree without having to be disagreeable about it. His emphasis on covenant is refreshing in contrast to the mediaeval Latin-legalism that often marks discussion of atonement on the Calvinist side of the aisle, without giving way to those who dismiss penal, substitutionary atonement as barbaric and sub-Christian, throwing out the atoning baby with the theological bathwater. I loved his way of saying that we and some of those with whom we disagree may be either side of a dividing line between two ways of thinking, but yet be closer together than we are to the extremes on our side of the dividing line. The Bible does not place us with Cicero in the Roman Forum, nor with Greta Thunberg on the climate protest, but with Jesus by the sea, in the temple and on the cross. The mediaeval church and Christians in that day were in their own time, we are in ours, and we need to pass on the message of God’s love in Christ and how it works out, in the context in which we now are, linking the world of the Bible with the world of today.
Love the energy of Wright and his theological acumen
I love N.T. Wright ❤❤❤ he so knowledgeable and I love his way of teaching Thanks for sharing. ❤
The comment N T made about The Lord's Prayer around minute 44 got to the heart of everything he tried to and did say here. (for me)
There are so many points of contention in what has been said I don’t know where to start. Sinners prayer never got anyone saved -it’s just words read out - it’s the conviction that one is a sinner, confession of that to God and then repentance - turning from sinful life.
Leadership is male - women are helpmates to men.
Isaiah 3:12 sums things up - women ruling over men is a judgement - desires of heart and leanness in soul.
None can snatch us from Gods hand but we can take our hand from his.
I absolutely love this man!
Great discussion.
Well! If this guy had been teaching in the 70's, I could have stayed. (But I'm not coming back; Zen is awesome.) Glad I listened.
Russell, a marvellous job as interviewer!
I met “NT” when he was Tom and spoke in Thunder Bay ON 🇨🇦
I've read several of NT Wright's books, notably 'The Resurrection of Jesus Christ' and 'Book of Revelation'. It was a delight to hear him in person. He sounds as reasonable as he writes.
We don't agree on everything, but I love his heart for God.
A conversation between two brilliant Christians. Wonderful.
People can’t live by parts of Scripture, those that fit in to today’s societal expectations or ones own desires, , rather, one needs to prescribe and live by the WHOLE Word of God, no matter how much it might hurt for some.
Paul made this topic of women speaking out in churches and ministering very, VERY clear; and not just in some small, single verse but, rather, multiple passages and Books within Scripture.
Blessings 🙏🏼❤
OnlyJesuSaves ✝👑📖👍🏼🙏🏼❤
truth.
Thank you Dr. Moore for having the wisdom to talk to and respect those who may not agree with you on every point. I always learn something from you and your guests. And it's always a joy to hear Dr. Wright expound on scripture. I would like to make a comment about egalitarianism and the differences between men and women (by the way, I'm a female teacher and preacher and relatively conservative in my Christian beliefs). I don't believe that philosophically, egalitarianism implies that men and women are identical and interchangeable. It implies that first, men and woman are of equal value in the sight of God and should be so in human eyes as well. Both deserve the equal right to pursue their callings and their interests without being forced to conform to other people's interpretations of God's will for their lives, and finally, both partners need to be willing and able to fulfill the responsibilities and duties of being a partner and a parent. And yes, it's obvious that there are biological differences between the sexes. However, whatever our perceived differences between the sexes may be, it's impossible to predict how our maleness or femaleness will affect our personalities. Case in point: "women are more emotional then men," "men are the natural leaders," "women like to feel protected," "men are better decision-makers." All of those may be true in many cases, but they're not true in all cases, and better not to jump to hasty conclusions about people, especially since women seem to bear the brunt and suffer the limitations when aspiration conflicts with stereotype.
Genesis 3:15-19
So, 20:58 NT Wright's spiritual advice to someone on his deathbed worried about looming judgement is not to talk about confession of sin and repentance and faith in the cross of Christ, but to reassure the person of God's love.
That's all I needed to hear to know the man is not biblical. He's a well-spoken wolf.
Compare his message to what the apostles preached !
Marvelous insights
When you practice the teaching of Yeshua for long enough it becomes second nature. But when the Law of God is written upon your heart it becomes a natural part of your character. It becomes first nature. And you cannot break it.
So what you are saying is that "Not all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God!"
Michael, this was incredibly well-put! I'm going to recall this idea and use it. Thank you.
@@robertbrown7470 Of course all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. There is no one deserving of Gods love by their works.
But the real message is being born again you are set back into a new creation which is loved because you have believed in the one God sent. And it was he who said all the laws were rolled into one. Do unto others as you would have done unto you.
The simplicity of the gospel.
@@dw3403 OK, I don't understand what you mean by all the laws were rolled into one?
@@robertbrown7470
matthew 7:12
But remember Jesus was speaking to the pharisees who thought they were righteous because they followed the laws. There were over 900 at that time.
Gal 2:16
Russell, you need some crooked lamp shades in your background to really get your scholar vibe going!
Great interview. However, NT Wright is incorrect about Roman's 8:28: the King James Version has the verse expressed correctly.
Thank you!
This is one of the reasons I advocate for Christians to spend some time learning to read Biblical Greek. The more comfortable we become with reading the original biblical text, the better able we are to cut through the nonsense and read the text as it truly is.
The simplest thing is the hardest thing... Love God. Love people. Christ embodied that. He died for that. He rose again for that. Now we GET to do the same thing as a collective Body with different expressions of parts working throughout time as a mysterious unity aimed at restoring all things back to the Good from which it was made. This is Good News indeed! Thank you for this remarkable discussion which offers confirmation of our blessed vocation as followers of Christ.
Two of my favourite thinkers on the same show. If the rest of the church could emulate the theological hospitality shown by these two, we’d be in a much better place.
"Theological hospitality." Wonderful term!
@@Ellie49 The problem in Christianity is LACK of SOTERIOLOGICAL hospitality..
"Two of my favorite thinkers..."
That's a sad statement.
Is anyone else impressed by all the books in the background? Id love to look through that treasure trove!
I have book envy as well
as the host/guest prove, a pile of "good books" makes NO guarantee, of godly wisdom....
It’s easy to get a list of them, just search “books by NT Wright”
joking
@@jamesparker1063 EXACTLY 🎯
It's nothing but pitiful vanity.
it is a double edged sword.....do all those books validate this teaching....and why not a more basic summary, for those, of us.....challenged in that dept....
I so very much love N.T. Wright's wisdom and historical insights. Yet, I do struggle with his answers about the larger framing on "how to be saved" as a solution to passages like Romans 8 on glorification and its place in salvation. It just seems that the "this worldly" correction of the resurrection as the true ultimate destiny of those that are saved (as opposed to the "going to heaven" shorthand), does not alter or set aside the very important question of how one is saved. Or that glorification is about being conformed to the person of Christ which is the end goal of salvation (both of unmerited justification and the outworking of a living faith in sanctification).
I would summarize my confusion as "that is an odd disjunction," or "the original love of God is a good wider framing, but how does that change the substance of the traditional answer"? There was a point where God being "disappointed" in us as sinners was put on the table or framed as a potentially bad thing by Moore. Or as a kind of "moralism" by Wright (4:50). But how is that a bad thing? Of course, God is disappointed in our disobedience. How is that a problem? The problem is not the "moral standard," but the trivialization of sin as misdemeanor rule breaking rather than a decisive wholistic turning against God from the heart.
One need not even hold the view that Adam was trying to positively merit eternal life in the garden for God to be disappointed. One need only believe that Adam was supposed to maintain his original innocence by not turning against God's moral authority. For us to do this was a disappointment, and it wounded God. It was our unjust betrayal of God, who was innocent of any wrong toward us. God has every reason to have been disappointed in us. The amazing thing about mercy is that he was willing to put his just demands aside and to take our offense and the justice due him and cancel them by his own loving death and obedience on our behalf (Col. 2:14).
Why must we downplay God's disappointment at our sin, and the drama of his overcoming this disappointment for the sake of his great love--the journey of God into the far country on our behalf? By eliminating the disappointment, we eliminate the great drama of his merciful lovingkindness! This is a strange way to approach the sinful person who might be offended by God's "moral" disappointment. Are we so fragile that we can't understand that God's disappointment is justified? Is not this possible offense an essential element of the gospel?
When Wright presents the love of God and his presence pursuant to Romans 8, to the one who is saying "I'm fearful of judgment" or "what must I do to be saved" (21:00), it just seems he is insisting upon God's love already being with the person. But that seems to miss the question. True, the love of God can't be separated from those that are in Christ (Rom. 8). But that presumes that one is IN CHRIST! And that is the very heart of the uncertainty behind the question. So the answer to the question of the person who is looking for assurance about their future resurrected life with God (to rightly incorporate the larger framework, as Wright would say), is not just that "God is love and is FOR you," but "turn from trusting in yourself and cast yourself upon him," and believe that God suffered for your sin in Jesus Christ, and has cancelled your debt of obligation to his justice (Col. 2:14). If you turn to Christ and believe this, you shall know the Son, and the Son shall know you, and those who are united to the Son are known of God.
Sure, we can address questions about the unevangelized and all that, but this is not a classroom, but a death bed question. Why should it be watered down to less than this? Absolutely, simply saying "God loves you, and love God back," should be enough, because perfect love casts out fear, but this person is fearful because they suspect that they did not love God as they should have, so this "love" is clearly not enough. The mercy in God's love, and trust in it, if at all possible, should be spelled out.
But don't ignore what he says in 22:22-22:40. He doesn't leave out the atonement there.
@@ericstone413, I appreciate that insight, and I agree with Wright that it’s about trusting that God is for us and it’s something about what Jesus has done.
And it’s very true that one does not have to have a great deal of knowledge to be able to decide for God, one’s life experience will provide a sufficient background.
It would be better, however, if we could specify for this person who is dying, and ourselves, what this vague “trust” is in. The “something about” Jesus that we would want to focus on in light of the teaching of Jesus would be, “have mercy upon me, a sinner” (Lk. 18:13-14), such is the trust we can have in Christ. This is the good-news, that the mercy in Christ is not “maybe, if you were good enough,” etc., but yes and amen.
The fear and displeasure of God is not dealt with by denying its existence toward us, but in the confidence that God has overcome it for us in Jesus Christ.
This is not a lot of difficult theory, though it is but the tip of an iceberg. My word of encouragement is, let’s not make the goodnews obscure out of a fear that it will raise the specter of God’s judgment, the word certainly is, “though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death you are with me,” but the reason is not because there is no wrath and glory that shines against sin, but because we are held in the cleft of the rock that is Jesus, upon whom God said well done.
This is the trust we should highlight. Not trust in the love of God for someone like me who loves him as I should, or a “something about Jesus” but as one who trusts in the Father’s mercy because of his revelation that mercy triumphed over judgment in Jesus-that we can face him, because he has turned his face toward us.
@@jrhemmerich I agree with much of what you say. I wondered how you viewed the judgement seat of Christ which ALL will stand before. That causes fear in me. In listening to NT Wright you would think for Christians there is no judgement, but that is not what Paul says. I suppose many would argue such a judgement will not merit 'casting out' but rather a withholding of 'rewards' whatever they may be, but Im not convinced by that.
@@PC-vg8vn
Greetings my friend!
I would like to present my own take on this via a few questions and statements. It may be that I am not really grasping what you are saying so please forgive me if I am misunderstanding your point.
If your life is hidden with Christ in God how can you be judged for sin?
We are in Him and He is in us, is Christ to be made sin once more?
The healthy outlook is to assume Jesus is with us, the Holy Spirit is mentoring us and God is pleased that we have begun to walk the path. Yes we have a hard road ahead yet our mind should be on doing what is right and not lingering and worrying about our failures along the way. Confess and turn away from what is wrong is the provided way. We are enabled to maintain our fellowship with God in this manner.
True we should never be of the mind that we have already attained the goal while we are still on this mortal plane and fearing God is the beginning of wisdom, yet to consider ourselves as being lost and separated from God while we are walking in the way is also entirely wrong.
Yes a judgement awaits the faithful, but it is as to what reward will be granted according to the level and quality of service provided to the Master. The judgement of the faithful will not be concerning sin.
So, be up and doing!
Feel free to respond or not, however you feel to do.
Shalom!
"I never knew you. Depart from Me, you evil doers (Matt 7:23)." These words were spoken by Our Lord to those pastors in protestant churches, who teach partial Truth, by saying 'Lord, Lord', quoting Bible, mixed with heresies and lies to deceive unsuspecting souls and lead them to eternal perdition. Our Lord said, "I know My sheep and they know Me (John 10:14). They hear My voice and follow Me and I give them the eternal life (John 10:27-28)." The sheep in His Fold are the members of His Church, His Body and Bride whom He saves (Eph 5:23), which He founded on the 12 Apostles (Rev 21:14) with St. Peter as His Vicar (Pope) on earth, vesting him with His Authority by giving him the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 16:18-19), and sent to teach all nations to OBSERVE ALL HE Commanded and baptize them (Matt 28:20, Mark 16:16) for salvation of souls until the end of the world.
And Our Lord said, "Whoever listens to you listens to Me. Whoever rejects you rejects Me and rejects the One who sent Me (Luke 10:16, John 13:20, Matt 10:40)." To justify their existence, protestant churches attack, accuse, slander, and reject the Catholic Church, therefore reject Our Lord, the Head of the Church (Col 1:18). Our Lord said, "Whoever rejects Me and does not accept My Words has something to judge him; the word that I spoke, it will condemn him on the last day (John 12:48). You do not believe because you are not among My sheep (John 10:26). Whoever is not with Me, is against Me (Matt 12:30)." So, Matt 7;23 was spoken to warn protestant pastors and those who follow them, so that they may repent and come to Our Lord's Only Sheepfold (John 10:16) and be saved.
Lovely chat! Thanks for sharing🧡
Tbe "Former guy" #45 told Evangelistic pastors that the "Eye for an Eye..." Exodus verse was about revenge and was from "John" but without elaborating.
Leviticus has similar guidance as does ancient Babylonian Law regarding loss having equivalent
punishment.
Wonderful interview… so glad CT has you, Russel Moore, to help bring a fresh look to Christianity.
A wonderful dialogue, as one would expect.
Thank God for N.T. Wright!
I'm so glad you invited him!!
Hearing this dialogue the first verse that came to mind was this "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36
"I never knew you. Depart from Me, you evil doers (Matt 7:23)." These words were spoken by Our Lord to those pastors in protestant churches, who teach partial Truth, by saying 'Lord, Lord', quoting Bible, mixed with heresies and lies to deceive unsuspecting souls and lead them to eternal perdition. Our Lord said, "I know My sheep and they know Me (John 10:14). They hear My voice and follow Me and I give them the eternal life (John 10:27-28)." The sheep in His Fold are the members of His Church, His Body and Bride whom He saves (Eph 5:23), which He founded on the 12 Apostles (Rev 21:14) with St. Peter as His Vicar (Pope) on earth, vesting him with His Authority by giving him the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 16:18-19), and sent to teach all nations to OBSERVE ALL HE Commanded and baptize them (Matt 28:20, Mark 16:16) for salvation of souls until the end of the world.
And Our Lord said, "Whoever listens to you listens to Me. Whoever rejects you rejects Me and rejects the One who sent Me (Luke 10:16, John 13:20, Matt 10:40)." To justify their existence, protestant churches attack, accuse, slander, and reject the Catholic Church, therefore reject Our Lord, the Head of the Church (Col 1:18). Our Lord said, "Whoever rejects Me and does not accept My Words has something to judge him; the word that I spoke, it will condemn him on the last day (John 12:48). You do not believe because you are not among My sheep (John 10:26). Whoever is not with Me, is against Me (Matt 12:30)." So, Matt 7;23 was spoken to warn protestant pastors and those who follow them, so that they may repent and come to Our Lord's Only Sheepfold (John 10:16) and be saved.
I am curious what you think of the new popes stance on Homosexuality? Also what do you think of the popes in the past that have had mistresses? @@hyeminkwun9523
@@hyeminkwun9523 Wrong.
@@regpharvey Wrong? Why? Do you not understand that Our Lord wills that all who believe in Him through the teachings of the Apostles, namely His Church, be One (John 17:20-21)? Whoever causes a division is an instrument of the enemy of Our Lord, that is Satan who wants to drag souls to his Hell.
@@hyeminkwun9523Good explanation.
With all due respect, Christianity can make sense of a number of things, but not everything that can clearly be understood in its own right fits within a solidly Christian worldview, and sometimes there are things that are Christian that, although very appealing to believe, seem unlikely to be true. I am not here to argue it, and people are certainly free to disagree. At the same time, if anyone else is starting to think the way I do, please know that you are not alone. Maybe I am wrong, but for those who wish to correct me, please take comfort in knowing this: I may know less than you, but we are all at different places in our understanding. Maybe someday I will see things the same way as you. I wish everyone here the best.
Charles Spurgeon said discernment isn’t about discerning right from wrong but right from almost right. Wright is almost right and as a result he is also dangerous. His misunderstanding of the gospel borders on the heretical.
Tom being wonderful as usual, The Fox thing is common to me as a fellow chap from Northern England and I laughed out loud...
how are these confusing times? these are the most obvious times we have ever had; clear lines are drawn; satan is loved on one side and rejected on the other; what could be confusing about that?
Great Conversation! So many pearls of wisdom to guide us deeper into life and godliness in Christ
Love how all these people just have to film themselves in front of their bookshelves - to show everyone how 'educated' they are.
Their studies are probably the most convenient places to film. I very much doubt if NT Wright feels any need at all to show off about his learning.
I find the differences in libraries noteworthy. I wonder how long it would take for the libraries to be transformed if these two guys switched. Order vs Chaos.
I must say, as someone who believes in PSA, I didn't recognise a lot of the "very medieval angry" version of it, perhaps because God in love is taking it to himself. Its like putting up a version to shoot down. Also I would have thought the book of Hebrews would have to be reckoned in.
David Moffitt's "Rethinking the Atonement" wrestles with Hebrews in a way that NT Wright appreciates, if you want to see a similar perspective but on Hebrews. Very interesting work.
@@derekcaldwell4334 Thanks for the tip. I love listening to NT Wright, but I often do seriously ponder if he's gone to the corporate view end of the scale in deference to the individual (who is at enmity with God/under wrath). He also has clearly widely read the secular literature, but I wonder if he trusts it more in deference to the Gospels' record. E.g. Some of the secular have sources many, many decades after the first century, whereas e.g. Luke 18 v 9 clearly records a temple Pharisee who was self righteous, self confident, self reliant. They were not Pelagian ( red herring), but Semi Pelagian, turning Grace into works or prideful accomplishment (which does reflect the 16th century situation in ways) . Also other passages, Jesus condemns them as "swiping a gnat, swallowing a camel", "hypocrites", etc. Then Paul himself Romans 10,v 1-4, Phil 3v9. Then the gospel defined as 1Cor 15 v 1-4. I also see NT going for "boundary conditions" like circumcision and ponder that "the circumcision" is those who "live it" or "hanker after the old ways", which would include the moral law that can never be met, etc. I believe, essential to salvation, is "I can never meet the righteous standard required", and need a Righteousness not my own, namely need the alien Righteousness of Jesus Christ (akin to the garment of salvation). Paul get very exercised about the Judiasers, and Hebrews shows going back is an inferior option and an eternal mistake. Must go look for that book. Thanks.
@@Bibliotechno To be fair, Wright has noted that there are necessarily both corporate and individual elements, as there undoubtedly are. And most of the time the larger issue is missing the corporate view because we've been raised to see everything through an individualistic lens. And I think he and others are just trying to understand it through ancient eyes, which is difficult, takes a lot of rethinking and reimagining, which is so difficult. He would also say that, while he may not totally be on board with PSA, there are still elements penal and substitutionary at play, it is just that those have been connected incorrectly in some areas. I hope people keep giving him and others a listen. It is complicated for sure, but there is no easy way to explain something when it potentially paradigm-shifting. Even though you disagree with Wright on this matter, kudos to you for still engaging with it thoughtfully! I am not in 100% agreement either, but it keeps me thinking critically about what has been handed down and my own inherited biases when reading the Bible.
@@Bibliotechno Right. People don't need a re-interpretation of Scripture to say what they would like it to say. Like believing, if you are alive at the time, you will not go through Tribulation, you are going to be beamed out (raptured out). An unbelievalbe number of people in the West believe that - Hook, Line and Sinker! Who is the fisherman in that case?
Excellent discussion! I am writing my first Biblical commentary, The Emerald Hexameron, about Gn 1-2 (I guess the title gives that away). Who knew N. T. Wright, of all people, would use Ps 8 to create a fascinating bridge between Rom 8:18-28 and Gn 1-2 by defining glorification as that which obtains by fulfillment of our standing as the Imago Dei. It's not heavenly pie in the sky, it's about regaining that which we lost through stupidity, going our own way, forgetting the imperatives of Gn 1:28-30 and 2:5-15. I don't know that I will even comment (in my book) on the misinterpretation of Genesis by New Testament scholars and preachers across the ideological spectrum, but Prof. Wright gives me a good starting place for any such exegesis. I conducted a cursory search of commentaries on my shelf and found no mention of Ps 8 in relation to Rom 8:18-28. N. T. Wright's connection of the two seems audacious, but his is an audacity I trust, and I trust particularly the way he defends his contention in the interview with you. He attacks the Enlightenment, as I will do in my commentary, since I believe (apparently with Prof. Wright!) that the Enlightenment caused a severe misunderstanding of Genesis to permeate theological thought over the last 300 years, and again across the entire ideological spectrum. He used one of my trigger words, 'Wisdom', but on second listening I found he implied wisdom was something obtained collaboratively, so I won't accuse him of lapsing into Siecle de lumiere reasoning. I have contended for some time that our true identity is not Homo sapiens (wise man) but rather Fabricator universalis, because Genesis does not speak of wisdom or rational thinking or logical syllogism or any other such nonsense. Genesis is about Creation, about the initial (transformative--per Prof. John Walton) acts of Creator God, and therefore, if we are to image God, we do so, in the lexicon of Genesis, as reflections of the Creator/Architect, and thus we image God as Builders, since builders reflect or carry out the instructions of the architect. Carl Linnaeus, that misguided child of the Enlightenment, performed one of the great disservices of science when he named us Homo sapiens, in effect distinguishing us, separating us from the Cosmos, placing us above Creation, and everyone--even those of us who profess faith--bought into his self-serving nonsense. Perhaps we (believers) don't consider ourselves owners of Creation, but we call ourselves 'stewards' and in a too patronizing, too paternalistic way. We put on our tweed jackets and break out our pipes to cogitate over the matter when instead we should don bib overalls and work gloves because there's work to do. Great interview! Pearson Moore 2023
Genesis is about sin and the Fall, and this affects everyone since Adam. All the stuff you talk about might be very clever, but if it misses that point it is worthless. We are personally sinners, and we need a personal salvation to escape its consequences, which is separation from God for ever! N.T Wright has got himself so confused with his own cleverness that he has wandered off the true and narrow way, and sadly is leading others that way too.
Hi @@petercollins7848 Thank you for your kind response. I hope my commentary will not be clever, but that it will find a way to shed light on ideas forsaken and abandoned over the last 300 years. As for Prof. Wright, I find nothing confusing in his writings or here in his interview with Christianity Today. I find nothing clever or misleading or self-serving in any of his works. Peace be with you.
@@AncientNovelist
Sadly, if you don’t see anything wrong with N.T Wright it means that you have wandered down the same wrong road that he has. Wright has befuddled himself with his academic cleverness, and seeks to lead others astray.
There are no ideas ‘forsaken and abandoned for over 300 years’, it is a delusion based on a sense of academic superiority and pride.
None of us like to think of ourselves as desperate sinners, but that is what we are and our only hope is Jesus. The hymn-writer was absolutely correct when he penned ‘ Nothing in my hand I bring, simply to Thy cross I cling; Naked come to Thee for dress; Helpless, look to Thee for grace; Foul, I to the fountain fly; Wash me, Saviour, or I die’. (Rock of Ages).
There are no ‘good people, in spite of our self delusion and the false gospel and deception propagated by most religious ministers, telling people that after death they will ‘go to heaven’, when in fact those who are not united to Christ by faith will go to a lost eternity!
Academic prowess and knowledge is a valuable thing, but unless united to a living and saving faith, it is worthless.
Hi @@petercollins7848 Peace and all things good. Thank you for your kind and thoughtful response. I hope you might forgive my ignorance, but I am not acquainted with your position regarding the writings/teachings of Dr. Wright. I don't know what the 'wrong road' is. All I can tell from your posts is that you disagree with Dr. Wright, but I don't know what the nexus of disagreement is. I don't find anywhere in Wright a rejection of the Christ, nor do I find anywhere in his writings a rejection of the truth that all persons have sinned against each other, against God's Creation, against God. I suppose at some point we all disagree with each other. I don't agree with Wright, or anyone else for that matter, on every single issue of theology or faith or practical living. Perhaps rather than enjoying the broad common ground I share with theologians of varied and even extreme assertion, I ought instead insist on my own interpretation of particulars and noisily reject anyone who does not share my viewpoint. Perhaps along this road is progress made in our understanding of Scripture. I tend to doubt this. I tend to believe we are better served by friendly collaboration, by common worship, by warm fellowship. We don't tear down, we build up. When I cite papers and publications in my own work, I do so with the acknowledgment of the the papers' positive impact on my thought. I am no New Testament expert. If your beef with Dr. Wright concerns esoterica around fine points of Gospel or Pauline themes, I'm not your best debate partner. My expertise is purification process design for isolation of API secondary metabolites from plant matter and chromatographic analysis of API and impurity behavior--that is to say, I am an R&D chemist with a quite narrow expertise. I dabble in exegesis. I take the time to write The Emerald Hexameron because I find no published work supporting my understanding of what I have long considered true, that to call ourselves Homo sapiens and to insist that therefore wisdom and rational thought are the capabilities and potentials most closely aligned with the Divine nature and can be understood as the predominant characteristic of our identity as the Imago Dei cannot be correct. To my mind, this is nothing more than Enlightenment-era drivel. The Imago Dei reflects the Creator, and must therefore be a builder. We build up each other. We build up God's world. That is our purpose. Genesis details the way in which we can become faithful servant-builders. Peace be with you.
@@petercollins7848We love the reformers because they questioned the status quo of their day by going back to the Bible and reading it afresh... Though we love them for it, we have little patience for those who do the same today.
Psalms are good to read to practice prayer.
so good.
I don’t think this is the most misunderstood verse in the Bible.
Professor Wright is a tremendously brilliant and helpful man who needs to straighten those lampshades.......
Lol. Perhaps brilliance requires them skewed...
OMG! Now I can’t unsee them!
@@TheRomans9Guy
Did you know that saying “omg” is replacing the Holy name of God as a filth word, like Human Excrement, it was punishable by death in the Old Testament.
I’m assuming you never knew this or you certainly wouldn’t use it as a true born again Christian.
yes, God needs help. Without Wright we are all lost. lol
I ❤ this view..
Indeed, nothing can separate us from the love of God (see Romans 8:35-39); for "God is love" (1 John 4:8b). However, our behavior can remove us from the life of God in us (see Romans 8:12-14).
I'd love to hear NT Wrights comment on Romans 13:4 (Dutch Statenbible) about State Authority being God's servant working for our good. In Dutch history this verse has been used by theologians to condemn every action against government authority, even under nazi-occupation...How does this verse relate to the idea of 'good people disobey bad laws', because the whole Reformation would not have happened if Luther had just sat there and obeyed government authority of that day, quoting Romans 13:4...
A major flaw in Wright's theology is not understanding that all was made right with Christ's return in AD 70. He's got it all in the future.
The arguments I hear against most 'environmentalism' is that the solutions are vague, expensive, unlikely to make a meaningful impact, and will only hurt poorer countries by taking away their most efficient means of producing energy. Jordan Peterson does a great job of summing up these arguments.
This is the BEST!❤💯🙏
Don't give in to your enemies Bibi, they are consumed by envy and hatred. You are the strongest leader in the world and truly the most admired. If you compromise or bend to the ICC you will have handed victory to those who want Israel destroyed. May the Lord bless you and keep you safe.
Man always makes God in their image, therefore, He is angry and judgmental. But Isa. 55 points out His ways are higher then ours, in that He freely forgives by His Grace. Hence we are called to come eat and drink without any ability to pay for it. The spirit of deceit specializes in a religious, old covenant perspective, that we have to do to earn!!!!
When we consider that God sent Himself to be made man and to die for our sins, what does the verse "my God my God why have You foresaken me?" mean?
Jesus was quoting the first few words like a reference to the whole psalm. Ki d of like a rabbinic shortcut so people there hear it and think about the whole passage as the context for what they were actually witnessing.
All of the Jewish people watching would be so used to this idea and method it would be intuitive.
Hansel and Gretel is a story, Charles Dickens wrote stories. The Holy Scriptures are "TESTIMONIES" of what the Lord has planned.
Direct from the source with commentary from "The Lord's Son---Christ"
So important to know the whole Bible and the context of the Biblical story leading up to Jesus. My understanding of the cross and the gospel of Jesus was made so much more rich when I read through the Torah and especially when I came to the book of Leviticus.
Luckily I gave up long ago trying to make sense of the Bible so there is no longer any misunderstanding of verses.
The most misunderstood verse in all of scripture has to be Matt.24:30.!!!! 2nd coming? Not on your life.!!!!!!! Judgement against the Matt.23 apostates, absolutely. !!!!!!
Your honesty is to be commended. To understand the Bible we need illumination from God. That’s at least what the Bible claims
If you insist on embracing the heresy, the slander of "Eternal Torment", your ability to convince anyone that God is a God of Love is sabotaged.
You will never know or understand the "why" of things on this Earth. Relax and realize that you are not God or a god. If you read the New Testament and don't get it, for some reason you are not listening. At the least you should get the jist of what God is telling you. But, if you do not want to understand and get it, you will not. It's your decision.
@@chernowitz Seek and you will find. Does it all have to make sense to you or anyone else? No. To accept the truth of what the Bible says, the New Testament especially says is sufficient.
God coming forth in all His glory is the Father's greeting the Prodigal: us; coming back to the Life mankind left in Eden, to pursue good among evil.
15 mins in, what verse are they talking about?
Yeah I know. Great discussion, but I hate click bait titles. The verse appears to be Rom 8:28, "All things work together for good." But it does not come up until about 32 minutes in.
@@willyarnold3UNBELIEVABLE!
Thanks for letting us know.
NEXT!
@@willyarnold3 It is simply a statement of fact.
I’ve heard great things about N.T. Wright.
The very statement that is “the most misunderstood bible verse” is the sign that people shall not rely on the bible alone to understand the bible. What if you come upon one verse that your finite mind cannot understand? What do you do? Do you ask NT Wright? But😮 NT Wright himself says, this is the most misunderstood verse. Would you trust him of his understanding? Why does he understands and you don’t?
What is the prayer of lament that N.T. Wright refers to?
Daniel's prayer in chapter 9. Daniels coming before the Lord idenifying with his people and their sins and then asked the Lord to have mercy for His Name save His people f ok r His Name sake . Daniel orsyed to the Kord what the people should have but because the y didnt Daniel prayed FOR them and AS them
How does a show have a clickbait title like that and then not even reveal what the verse in question is in the notes?
Concur. Perhaps the title was not chosen by the interviewer, but that's no excuse for the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.
Also, whenever you see such a superlative in a title, there is probably no consensus on whether it is generally true. In this case, I believe there are many candidates for most misunderstood verse in Scripture. Whatever one person thinks is the most misunderstood verse, another can make an argument for some other verse.
Thanks for your comment, I’ve just stopped the video and will move on. We must start with honesty.
Romans 8
It's probably Romans 8:28
Watch the video and you’ll see the answer.
I love watching Russell Moore deconstruct before our eyes (and yet, I’m not sure he realizes he is deconstructing).
It is high time the destructive mistranslations, misreadings, & faulty interpretations of Reformed theology to be put to bed.
Deconstruction isn't a bad word automatically. See McDowell on deconstruction, either in one of his podcast episodes or better yet, his cowritten book Set Adrift: Deconstructing What You Believe Without Sinking Your Faith. Just because someone takes the evangelical package, picks the pieces apart, and wrestles with which pieces are actually congruent with scripture doesn't mean they're losing their faith. E.g., many of us would be naturalistic atheists if we felt that we *had* to keep drinking the milk of the young-earth creationism we were raised on--vs. deconstructing, finding the YEC position untenable, but finding that God is still faithful and his word is so much deeper than what YEC apologists invest in convincing us Genesis 1 is all about.
Sorry, that was a little Christian rant.
@@ericstone413, amen.
@@ericstone413 I will say we have a new vocabulary since 2016... until now.. Deconstruct means to break apart and analysis it.. Some of us have some deep inbedded believes that may not even be in the Bible... Everything I learn more and more about Jesus and His love at 56 is amazing..
Amen! One of the few comments that are totally correct!
When you pray a prayer that is in 100% agreement with God and His Word especially His proceeding Word, that prayer authorizes the Holy Spirit to do what HE wills, and of course that doesnt mean that we move God.
To me the best place to begin when speaking of the gospel is a scripture in the book of Jeremiah. It describes the corruptible condition of every man's heart: "The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it?" Then follow it with the promise of God found in 1Timothy 2:3-4 : "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
That is not the place to start (and this is the point of N.T. Wright), that the start of the Bible (and the entire Biblical Story), is that God’s creation is good, and that the pinnacle of His creation, human beings, is very good. Yes, in short order, human beings failed, but even that ushered in what would be something even greater, the restoration of God’s creation, a New Creation, in and through His Son!
@@johnmilius3365 God's creation is good. Man is not. Jesus tells you that human beings are not good let alone "very good." That contradicts Jesus - 100%. Even Jesus, when someone refers to him as good, says there is none good but God. But not you......
@robertbrown7470 You seem very aggressive in your tone. Could you not be emphatic in a nicer way please!?
@@le2584 There you go.
What's up with the lamps? Just curious. They seem to have been on purpose made to be crooked.
Haha, I was wondering that too!
Anyone still monitoring questions on this video page?
Does N.T. Wright have any home or work on returning to God's plans and explicit set times/Feast Days for clarifying view across all Scripture?
While God never ordained Easter, He clearly established Pesach/Passover. (This is one clearly visible part of the immense iceberg of distortions of Scripture, doctrine and practice that remains the Roman Catholic church. - How do Catholics "calculate" the day to celebrate Jesus' resurrection? How is designated, clearly, in Scripture?) This only one key example of this continuing problem in Evangelism and doctrine and assumptions and ignorance of Christianity.
The historic, continuing failure of both Protestantism (and the latest count of some 20,000 denominations) and Catholicism (with its 1 or 2 major branches) all have failed to coherently, respectfully return to the invaluable Hebrew roots, of language, culture and Scriptural interpretation, and to accept and teach the Jewisvhness eternally, of the Messiah Yeshua/Jesus.
Hebrew roots is for larpers
You Must have missed St Paul’s memo To The Galatians…?
Or
The Gospel according to Prophet Jeremiah 600BC
31 v 31-34
New covenant promised
32 NOT LIKE SINAI 🪦🪦
33 Indwelling ~ Acts 2…
34 No Sin‼️ ✝️🩸🕊️
John 3v3 ~ 6 v 29.
70AD temple destroyed.
Rev 21 v 22…
John 2 v 19..
hallelujah
But you would never understand the incredible love HE has for us if you didnt realize that it was YOUR/OUR sins... not HIS sins that HE bore on the cross if you arent made aware of the penalty of sin being death of the soul.
One of the few comments here I tend to agree with, more in line with the Bible.
As finite beings trying to comprehend an infinite God, I wonder if we're always simply going to be unbalanced in our perspective. I see where I comes from, but I also think you are spot on with your critique.
If salvation is the bigger picture and vocation the lesser, why doesn't NT Wright focus on the bigger picture?
Love the wonky lampshades and stacks of books everywhere😂
How do I know it is true? Because he lives in my heart! I think this is what Dr. Wright is saying in elaborate words.
Before I watch the video…is it the “render unto Caesar” verse?!
16:13 beautiful picture of PSA
ok, I give up.....I dont have a clue as to the message here....
Ecclesiastes 12:7🎉 "Then shall the Dust return to the earth as it was: and the Spirit return unto God who gave it"..... We were God's, are God's and will Remain God's 🎉
I am done with fear mongering Christianity, the beauty of the gospel is what I'm drawn to
If that's the case why didn't Christ select a woman as one of his 12 disciple if NT wright wants to use Mary in Matthew 20, as an example to ordain a woman. How can anyone knowledgeable as NT Wright use that as an example. Please think people...
The first thing that came to me on the sin Jesus took on for all of us.of all time...🎶 He became sin that knew no sin, that we might become His righteousness.. music 🎵
And "might" is the key word. Not a free pass for sin as countless many Protestants believe.
@@robertbrown7470 Thats true. lol.
I believe Paul called them twice plucked up. That is if they ever really understood the gospel to begin with. Some just go to church to have the label and their parents did too.
@@robertbrown7470 "Might" is actually the word they used to express the subjunctive tense in the past.
It did not mean "possibility" (in that context).
The subjunctive (which I have studied in other languages) is used when we're not talking facts.
An example is: "I wish you were taller".
You're not taller. That's why I can use "were" rather than "was" (one of the few subjunctive tenses remaining in English).
Another example is "he died so that we may/might live".
Nowadays, we wouldn't use "may/might" anymore in that sentence (probably to avoid ambiguity).
We would say "he died so that we live".
@@leenieledejo6849 You can manipulate the texts any way you want. You are free to do so. Doesn't make it right. Oh, wait, right doesn't mean right it means something else.... lol
@@robertbrown7470 That's not manipulation. That's the English language and if you had an ounce of humility, you would research the subjunctive tense yourself, realize that the KJV especially uses it a LOT (because it used to be used more in English) and learn how "might" is used to translate the subjunctive in foreign languages.
But then you also have the choice to remain in ignorance and learn nothing...
Ray Comfort does a good job of street evangulism by using the approach analogy of a doctor first telling a patient how they are terribly sick and showing them that they are deathly ill and need a cure. He also uses the 10 Commandments as a tets for the person to confess they are a sinner. But it is important to understand the Story of God wanting to dwell with humans and the struggle with man kind to restore things back God Dwelling with man.
Then if this is so commendable, why does Jesus never do this in evangelism.
Why don't I hear any person linking no condmnation with Rom 7