Resurrection of Christ Denied by Evangelical Scholar?

Tomb

Mark Driscoll has a post about author and evangelical scholar N.T. Wright’s words on the resurrection of Jesus.  There are some links that are worthy reads.  Is the emerging church in danger of becoming universalists in the effort to reach and connect to the culture?

HT:  Mark Driscoll’s great blog The Resurgence, N. T. Wright Denies Primacy of Jesus’ Resurrection?

Share:
Rich Kirkpatrick

Rich Kirkpatrick

Writer, Speaker, and Musician. Rich Kirkpatrick was recently rated #13 of the “Top 75 Religion Bloggers” by Newsmax.com, having also received recognition by Worship Leader Magazine as “Editor’s Choice” for the “Best of the Best” of blogs in 2011, 2014, 2015 and 2016.

36 comments

  1. “Is the emerging church in danger of becoming universalists in the effort to reach and connect to the culture?”
    I would say most definitely yes. This is not, however, saying that they have reached that point yet. Nor should we view the emerging Church as a monolithic insititution or system of thought. The diversity found within the protestant branch of the faith (and even in individual denominations) as well as the Roman Catholic Church (I am less familiar with the Orthodox) which are much more organized than the emerging church, should warn us of that course.

    In reading only unrelated works of N.T. Wright, and the aforementioned article, I would say that Wright seems only to be following the words of Jesus, “Judge not!”

    Who are we to say where Mr. Borg’s eternal destiny lies (or Mormon’s, JW’s, etc. for that matter)? I would stand publicly and call his beliefs illogical and untrue, as Wright has done, but to speak for God and condemn him to the outer darkness… shouldn’t we be warned by the many exhortations of scripture to simply steer clear of this sort of judgement?

  2. “Is the emerging church in danger of becoming universalists in the effort to reach and connect to the culture?”
    I would say most definitely yes. This is not, however, saying that they have reached that point yet. Nor should we view the emerging Church as a monolithic insititution or system of thought. The diversity found within the protestant branch of the faith (and even in individual denominations) as well as the Roman Catholic Church (I am less familiar with the Orthodox) which are much more organized than the emerging church, should warn us of that course.

    In reading only unrelated works of N.T. Wright, and the aforementioned article, I would say that Wright seems only to be following the words of Jesus, “Judge not!”

    Who are we to say where Mr. Borg’s eternal destiny lies (or Mormon’s, JW’s, etc. for that matter)? I would stand publicly and call his beliefs illogical and untrue, as Wright has done, but to speak for God and condemn him to the outer darkness… shouldn’t we be warned by the many exhortations of scripture to simply steer clear of this sort of judgement?

  3. “Is the emerging church in danger of becoming universalists in the effort to reach and connect to the culture?”
    I would say most definitely yes. This is not, however, saying that they have reached that point yet. Nor should we view the emerging Church as a monolithic insititution or system of thought. The diversity found within the protestant branch of the faith (and even in individual denominations) as well as the Roman Catholic Church (I am less familiar with the Orthodox) which are much more organized than the emerging church, should warn us of that course.

    In reading only unrelated works of N.T. Wright, and the aforementioned article, I would say that Wright seems only to be following the words of Jesus, “Judge not!”

    Who are we to say where Mr. Borg’s eternal destiny lies (or Mormon’s, JW’s, etc. for that matter)? I would stand publicly and call his beliefs illogical and untrue, as Wright has done, but to speak for God and condemn him to the outer darkness… shouldn’t we be warned by the many exhortations of scripture to simply steer clear of this sort of judgement?

  4. “Is the emerging church in danger of becoming universalists in the effort to reach and connect to the culture?”
    I would say most definitely yes. This is not, however, saying that they have reached that point yet. Nor should we view the emerging Church as a monolithic insititution or system of thought. The diversity found within the protestant branch of the faith (and even in individual denominations) as well as the Roman Catholic Church (I am less familiar with the Orthodox) which are much more organized than the emerging church, should warn us of that course.

    In reading only unrelated works of N.T. Wright, and the aforementioned article, I would say that Wright seems only to be following the words of Jesus, “Judge not!”

    Who are we to say where Mr. Borg’s eternal destiny lies (or Mormon’s, JW’s, etc. for that matter)? I would stand publicly and call his beliefs illogical and untrue, as Wright has done, but to speak for God and condemn him to the outer darkness… shouldn’t we be warned by the many exhortations of scripture to simply steer clear of this sort of judgement?

  5. Judge? Is this not what N.T. Wright is doing when he calls his unbelieving friend a brother in Christ even though he denies the resurrection of Jesus? He is making a judgement. Plain and simple. He cannot have it both ways. Either Wright should not assume, or if he does (like in his words), he should allow others to have their conviction as well and respect them, too. Who is doing the judging here?

  6. Judge? Is this not what N.T. Wright is doing when he calls his unbelieving friend a brother in Christ even though he denies the resurrection of Jesus? He is making a judgement. Plain and simple. He cannot have it both ways. Either Wright should not assume, or if he does (like in his words), he should allow others to have their conviction as well and respect them, too. Who is doing the judging here?

  7. Judge? Is this not what N.T. Wright is doing when he calls his unbelieving friend a brother in Christ even though he denies the resurrection of Jesus? He is making a judgement. Plain and simple. He cannot have it both ways. Either Wright should not assume, or if he does (like in his words), he should allow others to have their conviction as well and respect them, too. Who is doing the judging here?

  8. Judge? Is this not what N.T. Wright is doing when he calls his unbelieving friend a brother in Christ even though he denies the resurrection of Jesus? He is making a judgement. Plain and simple. He cannot have it both ways. Either Wright should not assume, or if he does (like in his words), he should allow others to have their conviction as well and respect them, too. Who is doing the judging here?

  9. I must admit, I don’t speak any languages but english (and enough spanish to tell street kids that I am too tired to play anymore!!), and I haven’t done the study to back up what these words mean in the original languages; but in light of Jesus words to refrain from judging and condemning, and other admonitions to speak truthfully to each other, even to correct each other; I have always understood Jesus to be forbidding us from ever speaking to the condition of anothers standing with God, to refrain from making statements about who is or isn’t “saved.”
    How do you juxtapose Jesus comments forbidding “judging and condemning” with making statements regarding another’s eternal destiny?

  10. I must admit, I don’t speak any languages but english (and enough spanish to tell street kids that I am too tired to play anymore!!), and I haven’t done the study to back up what these words mean in the original languages; but in light of Jesus words to refrain from judging and condemning, and other admonitions to speak truthfully to each other, even to correct each other; I have always understood Jesus to be forbidding us from ever speaking to the condition of anothers standing with God, to refrain from making statements about who is or isn’t “saved.”
    How do you juxtapose Jesus comments forbidding “judging and condemning” with making statements regarding another’s eternal destiny?

  11. I must admit, I don’t speak any languages but english (and enough spanish to tell street kids that I am too tired to play anymore!!), and I haven’t done the study to back up what these words mean in the original languages; but in light of Jesus words to refrain from judging and condemning, and other admonitions to speak truthfully to each other, even to correct each other; I have always understood Jesus to be forbidding us from ever speaking to the condition of anothers standing with God, to refrain from making statements about who is or isn’t “saved.”
    How do you juxtapose Jesus comments forbidding “judging and condemning” with making statements regarding another’s eternal destiny?

  12. I must admit, I don’t speak any languages but english (and enough spanish to tell street kids that I am too tired to play anymore!!), and I haven’t done the study to back up what these words mean in the original languages; but in light of Jesus words to refrain from judging and condemning, and other admonitions to speak truthfully to each other, even to correct each other; I have always understood Jesus to be forbidding us from ever speaking to the condition of anothers standing with God, to refrain from making statements about who is or isn’t “saved.”
    How do you juxtapose Jesus comments forbidding “judging and condemning” with making statements regarding another’s eternal destiny?

  13. Here’s the paradox: Can anybody who denies the resurrection of Christ actually be called the Church? I would think not. Anybody can call themselves the “Church”, but Christ said we would know them by their fruits.
    The entire Protestant/Catholic faith hinges on the single event of Christ raising from the dead. Anything less is heresy.

  14. Here’s the paradox: Can anybody who denies the resurrection of Christ actually be called the Church? I would think not. Anybody can call themselves the “Church”, but Christ said we would know them by their fruits.
    The entire Protestant/Catholic faith hinges on the single event of Christ raising from the dead. Anything less is heresy.

  15. Here’s the paradox: Can anybody who denies the resurrection of Christ actually be called the Church? I would think not. Anybody can call themselves the “Church”, but Christ said we would know them by their fruits.
    The entire Protestant/Catholic faith hinges on the single event of Christ raising from the dead. Anything less is heresy.

  16. Here’s the paradox: Can anybody who denies the resurrection of Christ actually be called the Church? I would think not. Anybody can call themselves the “Church”, but Christ said we would know them by their fruits.
    The entire Protestant/Catholic faith hinges on the single event of Christ raising from the dead. Anything less is heresy.

  17. 1 Corinthians 15:14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.
    Steve, I am not the one judging here. Wright is. He is making a judgement. He IS making a statement about someone’s eternal destiny. So, I agree with you to some degree. It would be a double standard to allow NT Wright to judge one’s eternal position without allowing another to do the same. Can you see the logic in this?

    So, I am not advocating judging, but basically saying that the emergents cannot have it both ways. They should not judge in the positive where others should not judge in the negative. Just be “silent” on it rather than be more “right” by saying you are more inclusive would be logical and fair. Really, the emergents are setting up a whole new legalism of discourse that is dangerous here.

  18. 1 Corinthians 15:14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.
    Steve, I am not the one judging here. Wright is. He is making a judgement. He IS making a statement about someone’s eternal destiny. So, I agree with you to some degree. It would be a double standard to allow NT Wright to judge one’s eternal position without allowing another to do the same. Can you see the logic in this?

    So, I am not advocating judging, but basically saying that the emergents cannot have it both ways. They should not judge in the positive where others should not judge in the negative. Just be “silent” on it rather than be more “right” by saying you are more inclusive would be logical and fair. Really, the emergents are setting up a whole new legalism of discourse that is dangerous here.

  19. 1 Corinthians 15:14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.
    Steve, I am not the one judging here. Wright is. He is making a judgement. He IS making a statement about someone’s eternal destiny. So, I agree with you to some degree. It would be a double standard to allow NT Wright to judge one’s eternal position without allowing another to do the same. Can you see the logic in this?

    So, I am not advocating judging, but basically saying that the emergents cannot have it both ways. They should not judge in the positive where others should not judge in the negative. Just be “silent” on it rather than be more “right” by saying you are more inclusive would be logical and fair. Really, the emergents are setting up a whole new legalism of discourse that is dangerous here.

  20. 1 Corinthians 15:14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.
    Steve, I am not the one judging here. Wright is. He is making a judgement. He IS making a statement about someone’s eternal destiny. So, I agree with you to some degree. It would be a double standard to allow NT Wright to judge one’s eternal position without allowing another to do the same. Can you see the logic in this?

    So, I am not advocating judging, but basically saying that the emergents cannot have it both ways. They should not judge in the positive where others should not judge in the negative. Just be “silent” on it rather than be more “right” by saying you are more inclusive would be logical and fair. Really, the emergents are setting up a whole new legalism of discourse that is dangerous here.

  21. Maybe you and I are referring to two different statements? I recall that Wright stated, ” I don’t want to say he isn’t a Christian.”
    Which is not a positive statement about Borg’s status, but rather a refusal to make a negative assertion.

    Also, Wright seems hardly emergent? I know I have not read much of his stuff, would you place him in that camp, would he?

  22. Maybe you and I are referring to two different statements? I recall that Wright stated, ” I don’t want to say he isn’t a Christian.”
    Which is not a positive statement about Borg’s status, but rather a refusal to make a negative assertion.

    Also, Wright seems hardly emergent? I know I have not read much of his stuff, would you place him in that camp, would he?

  23. Maybe you and I are referring to two different statements? I recall that Wright stated, ” I don’t want to say he isn’t a Christian.”
    Which is not a positive statement about Borg’s status, but rather a refusal to make a negative assertion.

    Also, Wright seems hardly emergent? I know I have not read much of his stuff, would you place him in that camp, would he?

  24. Maybe you and I are referring to two different statements? I recall that Wright stated, ” I don’t want to say he isn’t a Christian.”
    Which is not a positive statement about Borg’s status, but rather a refusal to make a negative assertion.

    Also, Wright seems hardly emergent? I know I have not read much of his stuff, would you place him in that camp, would he?

  25. I would agree with Mark Driscoll and, more importantly the scripture, that calling someone a Christian who does not believe in the resurrection and who denies Christ’s deity is a problem.
    So, yes, it is a “positive” if one reads the quote in its entirety. Personally, I would not say that anyone who denies Jesus was raised from the dead and is the Son of God IS a Christian. He is something other than a follower of the biblical Jesus based on his profession.

    As far as I know, NT Wright is indeed a beloved among the emergents even though he may not be associated with them formally.

  26. I would agree with Mark Driscoll and, more importantly the scripture, that calling someone a Christian who does not believe in the resurrection and who denies Christ’s deity is a problem.
    So, yes, it is a “positive” if one reads the quote in its entirety. Personally, I would not say that anyone who denies Jesus was raised from the dead and is the Son of God IS a Christian. He is something other than a follower of the biblical Jesus based on his profession.

    As far as I know, NT Wright is indeed a beloved among the emergents even though he may not be associated with them formally.

  27. I would agree with Mark Driscoll and, more importantly the scripture, that calling someone a Christian who does not believe in the resurrection and who denies Christ’s deity is a problem.
    So, yes, it is a “positive” if one reads the quote in its entirety. Personally, I would not say that anyone who denies Jesus was raised from the dead and is the Son of God IS a Christian. He is something other than a follower of the biblical Jesus based on his profession.

    As far as I know, NT Wright is indeed a beloved among the emergents even though he may not be associated with them formally.

  28. I would agree with Mark Driscoll and, more importantly the scripture, that calling someone a Christian who does not believe in the resurrection and who denies Christ’s deity is a problem.
    So, yes, it is a “positive” if one reads the quote in its entirety. Personally, I would not say that anyone who denies Jesus was raised from the dead and is the Son of God IS a Christian. He is something other than a follower of the biblical Jesus based on his profession.

    As far as I know, NT Wright is indeed a beloved among the emergents even though he may not be associated with them formally.

  29. Driscoll has gone a bit off the deep end lately. Though I do respect him and have many friends that are part of Mars Hill in Seattle, I am troubled by his retrenchment over the past year.
    Driscoll has an ax to grind with Pagitt, Jones and McLaren, among others with whom he formed the Leadership Network.

    What I find disheartening is that Driscoll is now just a “tonto’ (a claim he made on Pagitt in relation to McLaren) of Ed Stetzer and other people like John Piper, whom he considers sufficiently reformed.

    Finally, I doubt Mark Driscoll has actually read the 3 volume series which N.T. Wright has published through Fortress Press. Clearly in Wright’s work, The Resurrection of the Son of God he adimately affirms a literal bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth!

    Read it for yourself.

  30. Driscoll has gone a bit off the deep end lately. Though I do respect him and have many friends that are part of Mars Hill in Seattle, I am troubled by his retrenchment over the past year.
    Driscoll has an ax to grind with Pagitt, Jones and McLaren, among others with whom he formed the Leadership Network.

    What I find disheartening is that Driscoll is now just a “tonto’ (a claim he made on Pagitt in relation to McLaren) of Ed Stetzer and other people like John Piper, whom he considers sufficiently reformed.

    Finally, I doubt Mark Driscoll has actually read the 3 volume series which N.T. Wright has published through Fortress Press. Clearly in Wright’s work, The Resurrection of the Son of God he adimately affirms a literal bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth!

    Read it for yourself.

  31. Driscoll has gone a bit off the deep end lately. Though I do respect him and have many friends that are part of Mars Hill in Seattle, I am troubled by his retrenchment over the past year.
    Driscoll has an ax to grind with Pagitt, Jones and McLaren, among others with whom he formed the Leadership Network.

    What I find disheartening is that Driscoll is now just a “tonto’ (a claim he made on Pagitt in relation to McLaren) of Ed Stetzer and other people like John Piper, whom he considers sufficiently reformed.

    Finally, I doubt Mark Driscoll has actually read the 3 volume series which N.T. Wright has published through Fortress Press. Clearly in Wright’s work, The Resurrection of the Son of God he adimately affirms a literal bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth!

    Read it for yourself.

  32. Driscoll has gone a bit off the deep end lately. Though I do respect him and have many friends that are part of Mars Hill in Seattle, I am troubled by his retrenchment over the past year.
    Driscoll has an ax to grind with Pagitt, Jones and McLaren, among others with whom he formed the Leadership Network.

    What I find disheartening is that Driscoll is now just a “tonto’ (a claim he made on Pagitt in relation to McLaren) of Ed Stetzer and other people like John Piper, whom he considers sufficiently reformed.

    Finally, I doubt Mark Driscoll has actually read the 3 volume series which N.T. Wright has published through Fortress Press. Clearly in Wright’s work, The Resurrection of the Son of God he adimately affirms a literal bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth!

    Read it for yourself.

  33. I should have never accused NT Wright of not believing in the bodily resurrection! That is my bad. I now assume that he does. But, Wright seems to not require someone to believe these in order to be called a follower of Christ. I think this is simply wrong. This was my concern–his calling someone a Christian who rejects these points and to publically call someone a Christian who rejects these points.

  34. I should have never accused NT Wright of not believing in the bodily resurrection! That is my bad. I now assume that he does. But, Wright seems to not require someone to believe these in order to be called a follower of Christ. I think this is simply wrong. This was my concern–his calling someone a Christian who rejects these points and to publically call someone a Christian who rejects these points.

  35. I should have never accused NT Wright of not believing in the bodily resurrection! That is my bad. I now assume that he does. But, Wright seems to not require someone to believe these in order to be called a follower of Christ. I think this is simply wrong. This was my concern–his calling someone a Christian who rejects these points and to publically call someone a Christian who rejects these points.

  36. I should have never accused NT Wright of not believing in the bodily resurrection! That is my bad. I now assume that he does. But, Wright seems to not require someone to believe these in order to be called a follower of Christ. I think this is simply wrong. This was my concern–his calling someone a Christian who rejects these points and to publically call someone a Christian who rejects these points.

Leave a Reply