Customer Reviews

The New Testament And The People Of God: Christian Origins And The Question Of God, Volume 1

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

As I worked my way through the first third or so of the book, it seemed to me that much of the material could stand to be at least revised, if not drastically condensed. However, as I moved closer towards the final section of the book, which turns to the writings of the New Testament in such a way that can only be fully appreciated having experienced the preceding 400 pages, I experienced a change of heart. In those 400 pages, Wright develops a hypothesis for how to read the New Testament writings, and equips the reader with historical, theological, literary, and perhaps most importantly, epistemological tools necessary for the job.

Wright devotes the first part of the book to some selected, general cognitive issues: specifically, outlining, correcting, and updating the weaknesses of the epistemological tendencies of the post-enlightenment period as he perceives them. He passionately calls for a move away from the "propositionalism" that characterised the Modern period, and towards an understanding of reality as a whole that is more narrative-oriented and realistic.

In the second part of the book, Wright surveys the different beliefs, hopes, and understandings that would have characterised the Jewish worldview during the approximately 400 year period between the Maccabean revolt in the 2nd century B.C.E. and the Bar-Kochba rebellion in the 2nd century C.E. Short of another Schurer revision, there is little more that could possibly be done to make this survey more comprehensive than it stands. The underlying theme here is "worldview," and it is this theme that propels the book into the final section.

The third part, then, stands as a proposal for developing a methodology, for lack of a better term, for understanding the writings of the New Testament, or perhaps more appropriately, the worldview underpinning the same. Such a methodology would both include and require a solid understanding of the perception of reality in general, and also how the Jews of the period would have perceived their respective realities, given their history and contemporary situations. This is where the work really starts to come together: don't miss it!

A couple of concerns. As is the case with many New Testament treatises, Wright repeatedly interacts with and chides what he refers to as the "Bultmannian" school; interaction with scholarship is one thing, but the extent to and ways in which Wright does so with Bultmann, one must wonder how much of this work is simply a vendetta and reaction against the life's work of a now-dead German scholar with whom he happens to vehemently disagree. His interaction with the cerebral rationalism of modernity takes much the same tone. Another concern is the occasional biting tone of the book. It is a bit too conversational at times, and as is the case with the Bultmann tradition, unnecessary jabs are sometimes taken at a few selected straw-men antagonists. As such, the book at times takes on somewhat of an accusatory and ostentatious tone, which is of course quite out of place in a work such as this.

All things considered, this is a most excellent introduction to the writings of the New Testament. One could conceivably refer to it as a hybrid, wedding as it does the traditionally disparate historical, theological, philosophical and literary dimensions of New Testament study. If there is one thing of which Wright could emphatically not be accused as it relates to this work, it is the failure to be thorough and erudite: Wright leaves absolutely no stone unturned in this study, and interacts with literally hundreds of other scholars on the issues at hand. This is a welcome addition to the world of New Testament studies.

This book is not for those who are light in interest. If you are not committed to learning more and going into detail about the subject, don't bother.

What Wright does here is incorporate much modern scholarship in the various "quests for historical Jesus" that have happened into a volume friendly to those who are conservative about the subject. Wright is very careful and detailed in his interpretations - others may dispute his conclusions but Wright does not undermine himself with shoddy work.

Wright paints a picture of Jewish culture and history at the time of the New Testament than tries to do the same for the early church. This is supposed to be an introductory volume for the subject. Many will probably feel they've gone deep enough. Nonetheless, this is the first in what now appears to be a projected 6 volumes. To date only 3 have been published so we shall see where this ends up.

I for one intend to plow through the next 2, hopefully soon.

This book is the first volume in N.T. Wright's series of books on "The question of God," and Wright spends the first quarter of the book explaining and defining the methodology he intends to apply to the task. This makes for some tedious reading if one has never studied (or studied and found horribly boring) literary theory or historical method. But it is important to the argument he is making. I went back and read it again once I got into the "good stuff" (the historical background of Second Temple Judaism) just so I wouldn't miss any of the finer points he was making.

Wright's interpretation of Second Temple Judaism is a variation on E.P. Sanders and J.D.G. Dunn's "New Perspective", which denies that the Jews in Jesus' time believed they could earn salvation through acts of covenantal loyalty. Wright parts ways with Sanders at several imporant points, though, including the historicity of Jesus' debates with the Pharisees (which he explores more fully in "Jesus and the Victory of God") and seems to be less interested in doing apologetics for Second Temple Jews than Sanders.

But with Sanders, he argues for a pluriform Judaism. He cites scads of ancient texts which catalogue the debates between the Pharisaical schools of Shammai and Hillel, the separatist Essenes and the Sadducess. These groups all expected the "forgiveness of sin" to involve YHWH moving decisively against those who refused to acknowledge him in the way he deserved, which included not only the Gentiles, but also members of the other sects of Judaism which did not hold to their belief system, and to exalt their particular group as the true children of Israel, returned from exile at last. Most strikingly, Wright says the Pharisees were a revolutionary party, drawing largely on their roots in the Maccabean period.

Wright's historical method is as fine as any I have seen in any history book on any topic in any genre. His command of the ancient and secondary sources is quite impressive. He is a cogent thinker and his work has little touches of ironic humor that endears the reader.

But Wright's eschatology leaves something to be desired. He claims that Second Temple Jews could not have understood the "little apocalypse" in Mark 13 as referring to end of the "space-time universe" and that it refers to destruction of the Temple in AD 70 rather than a scene of judgment at the Parousia. Instead, he recommends reading all apocalyptic language as figuratively referring to actual socio-political events.

Traditional scholars have often underestimated the importance of Jesus' proclamation of judgement on the temple. But it seems that Wright's position, following Dodd and Caird before him, is a response to Bultmann's mockery of Schweitzer's picture of Jesus as a failed apocalyptic prophet. Wright's eschatology gives too much in this area.

I have not yet read the "Resurrection of the Son of God", which presumably will tie in the importance of Christ's life and death to someone who lives millenia after AD 70. The expectation of Christ's return as the eschatological judge of the world has been the signal belief of Christians since the time of the apostles; I am not wiling to give it up because of the opinion of a handful of scholars doing battle against existentialism.

On balance, the book is worth your time and money, but, as always, read critically.

The first of Wright's projected six books in the series. I do not recommend reading out of sequence as you will find yourself overwhelmed by Wright's material. He is carefully constructing an argument that is complex, but the reader will find it rewarding. NTPG is footnoted extensively in the second book of the series, Jesus And The Victory Of God, so reading this book will save the time required to cross reference.

Wright offers a one stop veiw of previous NT research, and expalnation of methodology (both his and other's), and a comprehensive analysis of first century Palenstine. The material lays the ground work for his belief that current NT scholarship is missing the forest in its focus on the trees.

Wright rebuts the current work of the Jesus Seminar, Form Criticism, and other popular researchers that seek to deconstruct the NT in an effort to make the material easier to digest rationally. Ironically, it is Wright's arguments that offer the most credible explanation for the origin of the NT material.

This book is not an easy read, and may require a refresher course in history, methodology, and some of the social sciences. I found myself dusting of books not read since college to familiarize myself with some of Wright's references. But the whole experience is well worth the effort.

This book calls into question most of the liberal scholarship and much of the "traditional orthodox" research. I believe it will change the focus of NT Studies once the series is complete.

We often believe, whether or not we would admit it, that deeply committed Christians can not be serious scholars. Wright is a deeply committed Christian and not only a serious scholar, but a premier one. I have enjoyed several of his shorter works. I hesitated to read this one only because of its depth and length. I wish I had not waited so long. While worth the wait, no one can afford to delay this treasure.

No NT theologian has dared to tackle the gargantuan goals which N.T. Wright has set before him in his series, "Christian Origins and the Question of God." Wright's first volume, NTPG, is a fast-paced intro to the whole project, offering a fine picture of both first-century christianity and second-temple judaism. Wright's explanation of the continuiing exile for Jews during the first century A.D. has enormous implications for any NT scholar. Wright weds a scholarly depth rarely seen with a literary warmth not seen since C.S. Lewis. His words hasten you forward like a John Grisham novel, all the while offering a paradigm-setting historiography sure to impact generations to come. Much thanks to Wright- I highly await the rest of the series.

This book is the first in a series by N.T. Wright. Wright sets the groundwork for volume 2 of the series. He explains his methodology and illustrates some of the basic Jewish beliefs of 1st-century Judaism. This series is a must read for those interested in the historical Jesus.

This book is one of your better examples of conversative scholarship at its best. In Wright's first volume of his *Christian Origins and the Question of God*, he divides the book into 5 parts. The first part (Introduction), deals with a general overview of what Wright is about to embark upon. In the second part (Tools for the Task), Wright lays out certain epistemic critera he's going to use as he lays out his argument, as well as an enlightening part on the immpossibility of giving an unbiased view of history. It's good to see a scholar admit that, before laying out his argument of what he considers the the evidense to mean. Of course, the problem with bias is solved when you figure out that there is nothing wrong with your particular bias. That is, there is nothing wrong with good bias. Part 3 (First-Century Judaism within the Greco-Roman World), is over exactly what it sounds like. Wright gives an awesome overview of the stories, and views of 2nd-Temple Judaism. Wight shows thier views from both popular scholarly opinions (and gives his own opinion of those), and extensively uses primary sources as well. Part 4 (The First Christian Century) is nicely done as well. Wright shows in Part 4, and then in Part 5 (Conclusion) that Jesus is best understood as a Jewish apocalyptic figure, considering the stories and view of both 1st century Judaism and 1st century Christianity. Wright's arguments are extremely convincing when dealing with the primary sources, and opinions of numerous scholars.

This, and then his second volume *Jesus and Victory of God* from this same series of books, are must reads. You will find his opinions on the subject matters thoroughly done, and will find it hard to disagree with the conclusions he drawls, as I did when I read it.

This book is Vol I in a projected 5-volume series called "Christian Origins and the Question of God", and so far it's the best. Wright believes that the way to find the historical Jesus is, so to speak, by a pincer movement: forward from the picture of first-century Judaism, and backward from the gospels. This book outlines the world-views of 2nd Temple Judaism and primitive Christianity with exhaustive detail. While it has become the force of fashion in academia to shun even speaking of a monolithic "first-century Judaism" -- for, indeed, there were many "Judaisms" in the first century -- Wright nonetheless teases out common denominators in the religion. Ditto with Christianity. Though there were various different Christian groups in the first century, they shared in common basic and fundamental beliefs about the messiah Jesus (anti-Judaic "Christianities", such as Gnosticism, were exceptional abberations). Wright demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that eschatology -- the hope for Yahweh's Kingdom to come, "on earth as it is in heaven" -- was the bedrock of both Judaism and early Christianity.

This book also deals with crucial issues of epistemology. Wright heavily criticizes the pretentious methodology of doing "pure history" divorced from theology; this is just as wrong as attempting the Bultmannian stunt of doing theology without solid controls from history. As difficult as it makes the great religious task, history and theology must complement and check each other. He is as critical of the modernist's claim to pure objectivity as he is of the postmodernist's dominating self-indulgent subjectivity. The result is a methodology which uses the best, and discards the worst, from all three domains: orthodox dogma, objective criticism, and subjective interpretation. Read this excellent tome, and then read the sequel, Vol II, "Jesus and the Victory of God".

Any attempt to characterize this book is like trying to bottle a whirlwind--it is a massive, heavily documented, and well argued case for a historical understanding of the origin of Christianity. Basically, Wright argues for: 1) a proper historical methodology, 2) a 2nd-temple Jewish background for Jesus & the N.T., and 3) a Jewish Messianic understanding of earliest Christian community.

According to Wright, there is no such thing as a totally "objective" neutral view of reality; and while the N.T. offers an "interpretation" of Jesus, it is precisely the historical Jesus who is presented to us--rather than distorting Jesus, or creating a figure, to express their own private perspective, their witness brings out the "real" significance of the historical Jesus. Thus Wright argues for a "critical realism" methodology. Next Wright argues for a common worldview of 2nd temple Judaism, via an examination of its typical praxis, symbols, and beliefs. Then he argues that we can best understand Jesus, the N.T., and the earliest Christian community against this background. In all of these arguments, Wright draws upon numerous extant Jewish sources and references to other scholarly works.

Wright's treatment is comprehensive, massive, detailed, compelling, and original. His treatment of Jesus, the N.T., and the early Christian community against the Jewish background brings them to life, is believable and convincing; and throughout his book he critiques other scholarly positions and demonstrates how his offers a more probable accurate historical point of view. In the process, he destroys numerous traditional critical theories and sets the direction for all future discussion.