Ask Doug - "Does the New Perspective on Paul trouble you or excite you?"

[thesuikerlounge]

THANK YOU!!! i is good to see that there are actually american scholars that agree that the "new" perspective has two sides: on the one hand is a mere historically biased misreading of paul and on the other hand is right - however, everything else than new.

[ElasticGiraffe]

Translation: Wright is correct only insofar as he agrees with Calvinism's 16th century Reformational theology. Since his views on Jesus are roughly the same as mine, he's alright there. Since his interpretation of Paul, however, is not as thoroughly "Reformed" or anti-Catholic as mine, he's dangerous on soteriology.

Seriously, why do we even continue to ask pretentious Calvinist pastors and systematic theologians their opinions on the NPP and biblical theology? Their answers are so predictable.

[gastrongman]

i believe NT Wright has hit the nail on the head. I dont believe he is wrong at all. I have a better understanding about things.

[foucachon]

@CloudsofBliss

So does Doug. In fact, in a recent sermon he said something along the lines of "We believe in the old perspective on Paul".

When it comes to Justification, he sharply disagrees with NT Wright. When it comes to other work, like on Jesus, then he appreciates him, as he said in the video.

[ferrisscott]

he didn't say anything

[foucachon]

@ferrisscott

Huh? Did you actually listen to it? He says that the NPP make him nervous...and that things NT Wright says are flat wrong (such as NPP), but NT Wright still has some good things to say... so...not sure what you mean. Pretty clear..

[ferrisscott]

@foucachon do you know what about the new perspective on paul troubles him, and what part excites him?

[foucachon]

@ferrisscott The part about the "New Perspective" that troubles him is that "NEW" part. He's an "old perspective" as he once said in a sermon in reference to the New Perspective on Paul debate.

But he still appreciates some of NT Wrights work.