It feels strange that Thomas Schreiner should say that N.T. Wright was harsh in his language when describing John Piper's work in his new book on justification which is a direct response to Piper's earlier writing. Reading the first 20 pages, one could not help but to feel that Piper is already positioning Wright in the readers' mental perception that Wright is offering 'another' non-biblical gospel much like the challenge encountered by Paul in his letter to the Galatians. In other words, Wright is to be considered dangerous even though Piper overtly says that he is not equating Wright as a heretic. However, as a reader, you just feel that Piper is saying exactly what he intends to say, that Wright is dangerously wrong and Christians should turn away from his teachings and writings.
Compared this to how Wright positions Piper in an analogy as a person who insists that the sun revolves around the earth, it comes no where close to the kind of accusations that Piper is making of Wright in the first 20 pages of his book.
This entry sets the stage for, I hope, a series of short comments on the two books written by Wright and Piper in their polemic on justification.
Compared this to how Wright positions Piper in an analogy as a person who insists that the sun revolves around the earth, it comes no where close to the kind of accusations that Piper is making of Wright in the first 20 pages of his book.
This entry sets the stage for, I hope, a series of short comments on the two books written by Wright and Piper in their polemic on justification.
Comments
Blessings,
Jon