It’s no doubt that N. T. Wright is a brilliant, yet spiritually humble man. There is also no doubt that being Anglican and wearing a collar he will be stereotyped and caricatured… regardless of what he actually says and believes. Furthermore, some will undoubtedly take his Anglo way of looking at things, run it through and American-Evangelical-Modernist point of view and judge it lacking. That said, when the issue of “What does N. T. Wright believe…” regarding what it takes for someone to be part of the covenant community, to be a Christian, the need to be “born-again” – I figure it best to by-pass those who talk about Wright and let him speak for himself.
Here then are some excerpts from a paper presumably written by Wright under the original title Simply Christian, the whole of which may be found here. It is a very good essay and I am impressed by his use of imagery. This is not to say that I agree with everything that Wright writes, this post is simply offered as clarity against the accusation that N. T. Wright is some/any kind of universalist, or that he has a low view of becoming and being a Christian. In regards to Wright’s comment on how one becomes a Christian, emphasis will be laid on the section Waking Up to the Good News.
Wright uses the metaphor of awaking from sleep to illustrate the manner in which people are awakened to Christ.
There are classic alarm-clock stories. Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus, blinded by a sudden light, stunned and speechless, discovered that the God he had worshipped had revealed himself in the crucified and risen Jesus of Nazareth. John Wesley found his heart becoming strangely warm, and he never looked back. They and a few others are the famous ones, but there are millions more.
And there are many stories, though they don’t hit the headlines in the same way, of the half-awake and half-asleep variety. Some people take months, years, maybe even decades, during which they aren’t sure whether they’re on the outside of Christian faith looking in, or on the inside looking around to see if it’s real.
Here Wright clearly shows his belief in, but not the requirement of a “Damascus Road experience.” Some would require a person to be able to identify their moment of conversion as proof that it happened, Wright would not (nor I for what that’s worth).
That Wright believes in the necessity of salvation, for being born-again, for “waking up” is obvious in such statements as:
As with ordinary waking up, there are many people who are somewhere in between. But the point is that there’s such a thing as being asleep, and there’s such a thing as being awake. And it’s important to tell the difference, and to be sure you’re awake by the time you have to be up and ready for action, whatever that action may be….
So what is involved in hearing and responding to the Christian gospel? What does it mean to wake up to God’s new world? What does it mean, in other words, to become a member of God’s people, of Jesus’s people—of the church?
The gospel—the “good news” of what the creator God has done in Jesus—is first and foremost news about something that has happened. And the first and most appropriate response to that news is to believe it.
Wright basis this need on two theologically conservative requrement – the need for forgiveness and the need to repent. Regarding the latter he writes:
When we see ourselves in the light of Jesus’s type of kingdom, and realize the extent to which we have been living by a different code altogether, we realize, perhaps for the first time, how far we have fallen short of what we were made to be. This realization is what we call “repentance,” a serious turning away from patterns of life which deface and distort our genuine humanness. It isn’t just a matter of feeling sorry for particular failings, though that will often be true as well. It is the recognition that the living God has made us humans to reflect his image into his world, and that we haven’t done so. (The technical term for that is “sin,” whose primary meaning is not “breaking the rules” but “missing the mark,” failing to hit the target of complete, genuine, glorious humanness.) Once again, the gospel itself, the very message which announces that Jesus is Lord and calls us to obedience, contains the remedy: forgiveness, unearned and freely given, because of his cross. All we can say is, “Thank you.”
There will be those who object to his references to being genuinely human, but that’s their problem and is mostly a tangential rabbit trail. What is clear is Wright’s thoroughly biblical belief in the necessity of one to be spiritually awakened.
And if all that were not clear enough he concluded the section with:
…Whether you come to this faith in a blinding flash or by a long, slow, winding route, once you get to this point you are (whether you realize it or not) wearing the badge which marks you out as part of the church, on an equal footing with every other Christian who ever lived. You are discovering what it means to wake up and find yourself in God’s new world.
What’s more, you are giving clear evidence that a new life has begun. Somewhere in the depths of your being something has stirred into life that was previously not there. It is because of this that many early Christians reached for the language of birth. Jesus himself, in a famous discussion with a Jewish teacher, spoke of being born “from above”: a new event similar to, though distinguished from, ordinary human birth (John 3). Many early Christians picked up and developed this idea. As a newborn baby breathes and cries, so the signs of life in a newborn Christian are faith and repentance, inhaling the love of God and exhaling an initial cry of distress. And at that point what God provides, exactly as for a newborn infant, is the comfort, protection, and nurturing promise of a mother.
I anticipate some may object that he did not speak of what happens to those who are not awakened. To which I respond, so what? It’s not the topic at hand and any omission can easily be resolved by saying that is a question this essay did not set out to answer.
Some may also object to Wright’s metaphors and/or his hopeful attitude… so be it, but nothing herein is unbiblical, in fact it is thoroughly biblical and amazing evangelical coming from an Anglican.
And therein lies, I believe, the biggest issue for many…
![Image of The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31Jl6fhDLxL._SL75_.jpg "The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith")
22 Comments(+Add)
Just to clarify….I am a baptized Anglican, it is the church in which I was raised.
Nope. Fail. We are human, and, by nature, at emnity with God. We are born with a nature to sin ( Just go to Churcky Cheese or WalMart on a Saturday morning to observe this…sorry Tony Jones) There is none who seeks after God. We were made in this way, it is something we all must be redeemed from.
Nope. Fail. Repentance is a turning away, but it is a turning to as well. We must have a change of mind to align with the mind of God. It is not our humaness that is distorted, it is our view of how sin offends a Holy God. Our humaness is intact; we need to put that humaness to death and beg Christ for His life!
Nope- partial fail. God has made Christians- not humans- to reflect His image to the world. This gives a hint of universalism here; the belief that all humans somehow reflect the image of God. Perhaps in a distorted way because of sin. But until we are in Christ, Born again, we cannot truly reflect His image.
Nope, Fail. Failing to hit the mark of God’s standard, which is sinless perfection- holiness. Righteousness.
Partial fail: The Gospel announces that Jesus is Lord; and therefore we must repent and believe the Gospel. Folks, if you do not agree that you are a sinner in the site of God, there is no need for a Savior, no need for forgiveness.
I have no problem with kingdom metaphors and earthly awakenings at all. But I always remain undecided until I hear a clear, albeit a small, reference to eternity. You may not like the term heaven but that is fine, you may not like the term hell and that it fine, but although I realize eternity begins now, but many references and parables are directed to the “afterlife” situation.
That is what always seems so hazy and unclear, and I have concluded that some do it intentionally. It would be so simple to say “I believe those who embrace Christ and those who reject Him will not spend eternity in the same place”.
Easy and simple, so what I am to conclude about the beliefs of those who refuse to even mouth those generously non-descript words?
PB, if all humans are born totally depraved sinners, does that mean that aborted fetuses automatically go to hell?
Exactly… truth of which you, I and N. T. Wright agree.
#4
Well, according to your people, they are not actually human…so…
I don’t know, Phil, when depravity meets the human. I hope (only hope) in the grace of God that He will save those who never had a chance to repent, or even understand the need for repentance. I do not know about an ‘age of accountability’ in scripture. So, I will say honestly that I do not know, but I hope.
Again, a statement inwhich you, I and N. T. Wright are in complete agreement.
I do not think being human is the problem… it was not for Adam. The problem is sin which effect our humanness – and Wright is obvious about sin.
Well, golly gee, that sounds like universalist-type thinking to me!
I believe ALL humans are created in the image of God and there created purpose is to reflect that image. There is NO universalims here. Just that some (those in Christ) can reflect much better/fuller than those not in Christ.
I agree that we cannot fully reflect God’s image outside of Christ, but this does not negate elements of it in those who are not in Christ. And it has nothing to do with universalism, or even a hint of it.
If you believe this, you are not reading Scripture. Genesis begins with the creation of humanity, not with the creation of Christianity.
God’s standard for what it means to be created as humans – so essentially, we all agree again.
You guys argue over literary nuances and shadows. Will everyone spend eternity in the same place? If not, why?
All the rest can be filled in.
Apparently you missed his references to sin and repentance…
Rick, you are right.
You are correct. See, it is possible to disagree with a guy like Wright and not build a false caricuture.
I do not like Wright’s take on Hell… when he talks about people becoming less and less human… but even when he does that he admits it is speculation and he is not teaching it as Scripture.
What is clear, what Pastorboy refuses to acknowledge, is that Wright has a clear sense of those in Christ spending eternity in a different place from those who reject.
This explains a lot. I mean that sincerely, not as some swipe.
I will make this observation: My ears have much more patience with a humble approach than the shrill “truth warrior” communication. I may not agree with everything but I will listen to a man like Wright.
Someone screaming with hubris and demeaning language loses me immediately. I can remember seeing some of the ODMs use the temple cleansing as a template for Christian discernment, but I read a little further and found Jesus doing this right after overturning the moneychangers:
Matt.21:14-16 – And the blind and the lame came to Him in the temple and He healed them. And when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that He did, and the children crying in the temple and saying, “Hosanna to the son of David”, they were sore displeased.
And they said unto Him,”Don’t you hear what they are saying?” And Jesus said unto them, “Yes, have you ever read “Out of the mouth of babes and infants Thou has perfected praise?”
My point being that right after Jesus cleansed the temple He resumed His natural character with humility and in the midst of children, healing many who were in need.
In an interview with the Wittenburg Door Wright said:
Here he is emphasizing the current role of believers – and this is based on two clear assumptions 1) our future beyond death is enormously important, and 2) he makes a distinction between those who are Jesus’ followers and those who are not
Better but still nebulous.
Understood- but the question was not about the distinction, the question was about what believers should be about now… I was pointing out that the fact that his answer only makes sense if he assumes there is a distinction.
Once again we agree. Pastorboy is not nearly as shrill and demeaning as most ADM’s, but he leans that way, and thinks in those terms.
That can be illustrated by comment #2 in which he lists a bunch of failures on the part of Wright, when, in actuality, Wright and Pastorboy agree on more than they disagree (in that list) it’s just that Wright does not use the language that Pastorboy does…
More clarity for those who have a hard time distinguising between the “Social Gospel” and the social effects of the Gospel…
Full interview