Rating: 
Summary: deep waters
Review: Part of me wants to give N.T. Wright's "The New Testament and the People of God" five stars. Another part is leaning towards three. I'm gonna split the difference and give this monolith of a book four stars.Wright is one of my favorite authors. This does not mean I agree with him all of the time. His critiques of those he disagrees with theologically are masterful. He lays careful foundations for his own work. His methods are generally quite solid. A lot of his conclusions are insightful. However, there are some things about Wright's work that leave me puzzled. For instance, I cannot understand his insistence that Jesus didn't really "know" know that he was the Son of God. This notwithstanding, "The New Testament and the People of God" is an excellent first volume in what will no doubt be Wright's magnum opus: "Christian Origins and the Question of God ." This first volume sees Wright laying out the principles he uses while doing his work, discussing the history of much of the work that was done preceding him, and examining the world Jesus was born into. The length of five hundred pages is deceptive. "The New Testament and the People of God"is a very dense read. It is heavily (though not too heavily) footnoted. Its ideas take adequate time for reflection to digest. I would even go so far as to suggest that reader either unfamiliar with Wright's work or not used to reading theology or books about the historical Jesus start with one of Wright's more popular books in preparation for reading this series. I would recommend starting with a book such as "The Way of the Lord," "The Challenge of Jesus," or "The Crown and the Fire" instead of starting cold on a massive undertaking like "The New Testament and the People of God." Wright is a great writer. You don't want to turn yourself off to him by jumping into the deep waters before you're ready. I recommend this book highly.
Rating: 
Summary: Making a Revolution
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Making a Revolution
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent conversative scholarship
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Good for skeptic and Christian alike
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Good for skeptic and Christian alike
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Wright's method and historical interpretation
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Wright's method and historical interpretation
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: First-rate study of the New Testament
Review: 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".
Rating:
Summary: First-rate study of the New Testament
Review: 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".
| 
