Thank you for a marvellously clear and helpful summary of both men’s views.

Nevertheless at the end I find myself wondering ‘much ado about nothing’?

Yet McGrath and others see Wright as demolishing Protestantism – not just imputed righteousness but solafideism too.

Do the elements where Wright is correct (eg the 1st century Jew as a nomist not pelagian) actually change much for the man in the pew, and the pastor preaching to him? It appears not.

Richard

ps – I personally think a refined (harmonised?) view on justification should actually bring about a substantial rethinking on sanctification, when people are ready to look at that. I have always found the protestant view(s) of sanctification to be much more inconsistent (and pelagian)

For Piper, you might try “Counted Righteous in Christ” and his harder-to-find book “The Justification of God.”

For intro-level books to these men, read Piper’s “Desiring God.” If you’ve read “Desiring God,” you’ve pretty much read everything Piper. The rest of his corpus serves as “spin-off” to his main book. (You might also like Piper’s “God is the Gospel.”)

For Wright, I would suggest “Simply Christian,” “The Challenge of Jesus,” and “Following Jesus.”

If you have the time and attention to devote to Wright’s 800-page book on the Resurrection (“The Resurrection of the Son of God”), it’s well worth it. Trust me.

About discernment, I suggest you keep your Bible in hand. Look up references. Look at the context. Keep in mind the Bible’s big picture. Read both these men with a critical eye and your Bible open. I think you’ll find that both are right in some areas and both are wrong in some areas (like us all!).

Any tips for reading these men? I love them both. I am currently working through Wright’s Romans for Everyone. In one post you mentioned how the differences between Wright and Piper in regards to imputation can at times be confusing and whether or not they are saying the same thing with different language. I only a second year undergraduate student with minimal knowledge in technicalities. So how people like me be discerning while reading both Piper and Wright? Do you have any advice at all?

My understanding from study of the magisterial reformers is that they saw themselves not as “discovering” something that no one had seen for 1500 years, but rather reviving and returning to ancient Christianity. Calvin in particular believed that he was merely bringing back some important aspects of Augustine that some late Medieval theology had obscured or forgotten.

I am sorry that I mispelled your name a couple of times. It is actually “Trevin” not “Trevor”:) At any rate, I appreciate your analysis on these important issues. Sometimes, Piper and Wright seem to complement each other. Sometimes, they mean the same thing (s) in different ways. Yes indeed, Christ is our Righteousness, our justification and our peace.

Blessings in Christ,

Lou

God does speak through people today, not in the same way he spoke through the biblical authors. But surely a Christian should heed good counsel from trustworthy Christians to see if God may be speaking through them. Of course, a pastor is God’s mouthpiece only insomuch as he correctly presents the biblical text.

I think the probelm here is what the Bible says and not what either of these men say, God speaks through the Bible, I’m not saying we shouldn’t study what other men have to say about the Bible but we shouldn’t be trying to discern what “God is saying through men” rather what is God saying through the Bible.

Ken