The New Testament and the People of God: Christian Origins and the Question of God: Volume 1

It is difficult to speak of this work without over selling. Serious Bible students and theologians alike must read Wright's work. He does not simply rehash old theories; he steps out with fresh insight and boldly states his positions without apology. He masterfully builds his case. The first 144 pages are spent on the subject of epistemology. After he has thoroughly introduced you to this subject he then moves on to teach, in a very readable and interesting way, about the history of the Jews from exile to Bar Kochba. He demonstrates his understanding of primary source documents to such a degree that one wonders do they even need to read anyone else on the subject. This book is thorough, but good. Wright presents his material in such a way as to teach and convince, rather than to show off how much he knows. This is not a light read. The subject matter is heavy, but definitely worth the work with what I find to be a great teacher. Wright moves from Jewish history and thought into Church history and thought and ends with a chapter that bears the title of the book. After I got past the first 144 pages of the book this book became hard to put down. If you get this book and find the first 144 pages too laborious, skip it and then read the first part later, but make sure you do not quit on this book. The good news is that this is just volume one and afterwards comes Jesus And The Victory of God. I am just starting on it now, but can already tell that it will equal or exceed this book.

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 endear 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 mill

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.

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.

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.