THE NEW PERSPECTIVE ON PAUL “BIG 3″: N.T. WRIGHT [CRASH COURSE 7]

 Final Judgment According to Works, According to N.T. Wright

“…remarkably controversial” – N.T. Wright

“…there has been a massive conspiracy of silence” – N.T. Wright

“Shock, horror…” – N.T. Wright

Are these quotations part of a self-promotional-hype-building marketing ploy or are they genuine observations of solid scholar?  These statements from N.T. Wright were delivered in full at the 10^th Edinburgh Dogmatics Conference in 2003 while addressing our topic: the Final Judgment According to Works. 

As we have discovered so far, N.T. Wright has redefined at least two extremely important doctrines critical to the Christian faith: “the gospel” and the “righteousness of God.”  We have also discovered that in both cases he has done so in order to promote an alternative grand narrative (the overriding big story) that he believes exist.  In order to sell the “big picture”, the obstacles that stand in the path of his goal must be dissolved.  In sales, it’s called “overcoming an objection.”  There are correct and ethical ways to do this, and there are incorrect and unethical ways to do this. 

Take for example, the car salesperson.  If his customer objects to purchasing the vehicle on a financed installment payment contract by saying: “I’ll have to think about it.  Those payments are a little too high.  I might not be able to afford it.”, then the ethically trained car salesperson could ask: “If I were able to get the payments a little lower, say, another $50, would you drive it home today?”  This is correct and ethical being that the customer’s objection is being addressed openly.  If the customer agrees, and if the car salesperson lowers the payment to within the customer’s budget, then the sale is a good deal for both. 

If, on the other hand, the salesperson asks: “how much lower would the payments need to be in order for you to drive it home today?”, and the customer answers: “no more than $300 per month.”, then the salesperson knows what he needs to do in order to make the sale.  The salesperson may say: “O.K., I’ll do it.  I’ll get your payments down to $300 per month.  It’s the least I can do for you.”  The customer may, seeing that the vehicle payment is affordable for him and that there remains no further objections, decide to drive home in his new vehicle. 

You may wonder how this second example is unethical.  Let’s continue.  The customer, upon signing the final documents in the finance office, may notice that the contract he is signing is not for an installment contract (where you make a fixed amount of payments for a fixed amount of time until paid off, then get the certificate of title), but rather a lease agreement (basically a shorter term rental where you make payments, usually much lower than on an installment contract, for a shorter-term, with a balloon payment due on a fixed date in the future or a return of the leased vehicle).  He may say: “Hey, I didn’t agree to do a lease, I wanted to do a purchase!”  The salesperson may respond by saying: “But I told you it was a lease.  Remember, you wanted lower payments, around $300, and I said ‘O.K., there’s a lease I can do for you?”  The customer will either feel tricked and deceived, because he heard “It’s the least I can do for you”, or he’ll question whether or not he heard wrong when the salesperson said “It’s a LEASE I can do for you.” 

Either way, it is the craftiness and cunning of the salesperson that has created this confusion, leaving him with a better opportunity to still sell the vehicle than he did when the initial objection was raised.  In both examples, the salesperson’s “grand narrative” is that he sells vehicles, and any little detail that comes up along the way that may prevent this from happening can either be ethically handled or unethically handled.

The reason that I bring this up in regards to N.T. Wright is because he has a grand scheme, a predetermined grid if you will, that he is attempting to shove theology into in order to persuade those whom he is able to attract by his charm and credentials.  He knows, like the car salesperson knows, what it is going to take in order for you to buy from him.  He knows that he must refer often to Scripture in the name of Sola Scriptura.  He knows that he cannot deny an essential doctrine outwright, oops, I mean outright.  He knows that in order to maintain an evangelical audience and their money, he must use familiar Christian terms like gospel, Jesus, faith etc.  He also knows that if he can get you to bite, in other words, fall for the “least/lease” trick, your defenses will be down, your mind will be unguarded and that he will have a wide open entry way to your belief system which he plans to rearrange in such a way that it will ultimately lead to death!

After this lengthy introduction, which I am thankful that you have endured, we begin this NPP Crash Course and examine N.T. Wright’s teaching on the Final Judgment According to Works.  We’ll start with a quote from him:

“The third point is remarkably controversial, seeing how well founded it is at several points in Paul. Indeed, listening to yesterday’s papers, it seems that there has been a massive conspiracy of silence on something which was quite clear for Paul (as indeed for Jesus). Paul, in company with mainstream second-Temple Judaism, affirms that God’s final judgment will be in accordance with the entirety of a life led – in accordance, in other words, with works. He says this clearly and unambiguously in Romans 14.10-12 and 2 Corinthians 5.10. He affirms it in that terrifying passage about church-builders in 1 Corinthians 3. But the main passage in question is of course Romans 2.1-16.”

This reminds me of a car salesperson saying: “This new model was designed in a wind tunnel for optimal aerodynamics.  Notice the sleek lines.”  It is no surprise that Wright begins with this type of opening.  Imagine if he had said: “This point has been thoroughly addressed by reformed theologians and proven by solid exegesis to refer not to salvation, but rather the degree of reward that saints receive in heaven.”  What if he were to open like that and then say: “But I, the Bishop of Durham, teach otherwise.  I believe that they are all wrong, because I am Wright!”  That would be like the car salesperson saying, instead of the wind tunnel line, “Car and Driver magazine ranks this new design 19^th among American car manufacturers, only 18 beat it!”  I think you get my point.  Let’s move on.

Wright’s statement about Paul, in company with second-Temple Judaism, affirming that God’s final judgment will be according to works, is rather inconsistent with the New Perspective.  After all, isn’t that the main axiom for NPP, that second-Temple Judaism was misunderstood by Protestants as legalistic?  Now, I’m sure that Wright, like Dunn and Sanders, will cleverly redefine works as only circumcision, food laws, Sabbath etc.  Here though, Wright seems to align “works” with “merit” as the basis of the believer’s acceptability before God.  Before moving on, let’s take a look at some of this intertestamental literature so we can get an idea of what Judaism believed at the time.

2 Baruch 51:1-9 aka the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch

51 1 And it shall come to pass, when that appointed day has gone by. That then shall the aspect of those 2 who are condemned be afterwards changed, and the glory of those who are justified. For the aspect of those who now act wickedly shall become worse than it is, as they shall suffer torment. 3 Also (as for) the glory of those who have now been justified in My law, who have had understanding in their life, and who have planted in their heart the root of wisdom, then their splendour shall be glorified in changes, and the form of their face shall be turned into the light of their beauty, that they may be able to acquire and receive the world which does not die, which is then promised to 4 them. For over this above all shall those who come then lament, that they rejected My law, and stopped 5 their ears that they might not hear wisdom or receive understanding. When therefore they see those, over whom they are now exalted, (but) who shall then be exalted and glorified more than they, they shall respectively be transformed, the latter into the splendour of angels, and the former shall yet 6 more waste away in wonder at the visions and in the beholding of the forms. For they shall first behold and afterwards depart to be tormented. 7 But those who have been saved by their works. And to whom the law has been now a hope, And understanding an expectation, And wisdom a confidence, Shall wonders appear in their time. 8 For they shall behold the world which is now invisible to them, And they shall behold the time which is now hidden from them: 9 And time shall no longer age them. – From The Apocrypha and Pseudeipgrapha of the Old Testament by R. H. Charles, vol. II , Oxford Press

4 Ezra 7:17-24 aka 2 Esdras (KJV)

17: Then answered I and said, O Lord that bearest rule, thou hast ordained in thy law, that the righteous should inherit these things, but that the ungodly should perish.
18: Nevertheless the righteous shall suffer strait things, and hope for wide: for they that have done wickedly have suffered the strait things, and yet shall not see the wide.
19: And he said unto me. There is no judge above God, and none that hath understanding above the Highest.
20: For there be many that perish in this life, because they despise the law of God that is set before them.
21: For God hath given strait commandment to such as came, what they should do to live, even as they came, and what they should observe to avoid punishment.
22: Nevertheless they were not obedient unto him; but spake against him, and imagined vain things;
23: And deceived themselves by their wicked deeds; and said of the most High, that he is not; and knew not his ways:
24: But his law have they despised, and denied his covenants; in his statutes have they not been faithful, and have not performed his works. 29: O Lord, thou that shewest thyself unto us, thou wast shewed unto our fathers in the wilderness, in a place where no man treadeth, in a barren place, when they came out of Egypt. – King James Version of the Apocrypha – Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library

And 4 Ezra 9:30-37 (KJV)

30: And thou spakest saying, Hear me, O Israel; and mark my words, thou seed of Jacob.
31: For, behold, I sow my law in you, and it shall bring fruit in you, and ye shall be honoured in it for ever.
32: But our fathers, which received the law, kept it not, and observed not thy ordinances: and though the fruit of thy law did not perish, neither could it, for it was thine;
33: Yet they that received it perished, because they kept not the thing that was sown in them.
34: And, lo, it ls a custom, when the ground hath received seed, or the sea a ship, or any vessel meat or drink, that, that being perished wherein it was sown or cast into,
35: That thing also which was sown, or cast therein, or received, doth perish, and remaineth not with us: but with us it hath not happened so.
36: For we that have received the law perish by sin, and our heart also which received it
37: Notwithstanding the law perisheth not, but remaineth in his force. – King James Version of the Apocrypha – Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library

Testament of Judah 26:1a

26.  Observe, therefore, my children, all the law of the Lord, for there is hope for all them who follow His way aright. – [Translated by the Rev. Robert Sinker, M.A., Trinity College, Cambridge.]

Jubilees 23:19, 26

• 19 And they shall strive one with another, the young with the old, and the old with the young, the poor with the rich, the lowly with the great, and the beggar with the prince, on account of the law and the covenant; for they have forgotten commandment, and covenant, and feasts, and months, and Sabbaths, and jubilees, and all judgments.

• 26 And in those days the children shall begin to study the laws,
  And to seek the commandments,
  And to return to the path of righteousness. – From the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha by R.H. Charles, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913

From these snippets, it becomes extremely difficult to buy into the NPP scholar’s claim that Protestantism has misunderstood second-Temple Judaism as a “works-based” merit system of religion.  The passages leave no doubt that many Jews believed that the Law was the grounds for justification, life, righteousness, hope etc.  According to N.T. Wright, the Apostle Paul was “in company with mainstream second-Temple Judaism, affirms that God’s final judgment will be in accordance with the entirety of a life led – in accordance, in other words, with works.”  One must ask at this point why N.T. Wright is using NPP as a vehicle to promote his heresies if his views do not align with the new perspective’s fundamental element and warrant to reinterpret Paul in the first place.  But for Wright’s position to fly, he must have you understand that Paul was just another Jew following a long line of Jewish tradition so that it can be established as the context in which to interpret Paul.  I bring this up because D. A. Carson, in Vol. 2 of Justification and Variegated Nomism – The Paradoxes of Paul, writes: “The warrant for these fresh exegeses of Paul was, in no small measure, the hegemonic control of covenantal nomism, because the various exegeses of Paul that stemmed from the Reformation heritage could no longer stand.”  [pg. 395]  This “covenantal nomism” that Carson mentioned, as you may remember from previous Crash Courses, was the defined category that “works of the law” fell under by E.P. Sanders in 1977.  Therefore, when N.T. Wright says his view is that Paul was in company with mainstream second-Temple Judaism and affirmed final judgment according to works, the necessary question is regarding his motive.  Why, Tom?  Carson continues on page 395 to say: “It follows that once the complexity of Second Temple Judaism is appreciated afresh, the analysis of Sanders, for all that it introduces as corrective, is exposed as a major reductionism, and its control is broken – and that means that the exegesis of Paul can no longer appeal to this reconstruction of Judaism as the necessary background against which Paul must be interpreted.”   

In case I lost you with all that, please allow me the attempt to explain.  N.T. Wright has great fame.  A large portion of that fame is attributed to his association with the new perspective on Paul, as it is generally recognized.  The public perception is that Wright is just another Pauline scholar who adds meaningful dimension to the NPP.  Because of that perception, many Christians do not discern a threat to Christianity because, after all, there is a legitimate reason, or as Carson put it, a warrant for fresh exegesis of Paul.  Here we demonstrate that Wright is not in-line with the axiom of the new perspective, and throughout our investigation of N.T. Wright we have proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that he is not in-line with historic Christianity.  This further validates our assessment that he is an antichrist on his way to hell and needs Jesus as his Savior.  If he is not within the new perspective’s “boundary-markers,” and not within the boundary-markers of authentic Biblical Christianity, then he is no different than any of the other heretics that have caused the church to have itchy rashes throughout her history.  Like Marcion, as previously noted, on a theological island of his own, selling one way vacation travel packages for visitors that are never seen again.  Let it be known that certain men have crept in unnoticed (Jude 4a)!

I am not denying that there was the concept of final judgment according to works present in Paul’s day, but I reject that Paul was affirming, as Wright says, that God’s final judgment would be based on “works” other than the work of Christ alone!  Let’s allow for N.T. Wright to clear it up for us.

“The ‘works’ in accordance with which the Christian will be vindicated on the last day are not the unaided works of the self-help moralist. Nor are they the performance of the ethnically distinctive Jewish boundary-markers (Sabbath, food-laws and circumcision). They are the things which show, rather, that one is in Christ; the things which are produced in one’s life as a result of the Spirit’s indwelling and operation.”

Wright says that the “works” are not:

• Unaided works of the self-help moralist

• Performance of the ethnically distinctive Jewish boundary-markers (Sabbath, food-laws and circumcision) – [Law redefined] added by the author.

Rather, Wright says that the “works” are:

• Things which show that one is in Christ

• Things which are produced in one’s life as a result of the Spirit’s indwelling and operation

Let us note that here Wright creates two categories for works.  The first is produced by man and the second is produced by the Spirit, whom he goes on later to say does “what the Law could not do – ultimately, to give life.”  This two category division of “works” is very helpful in demonstrating inconsistency in Wright’s argument.  To deny that God’s “righteousness” is imputed to the believer which becomes the believer’s basis for justification, and then propose that the believer is ultimately justified by “his” works, calls into question which category the “works” come from that determine God’s final verdict.  If the “works” that Wright says determine the Christian’s vindication on the last day come from the Spirit’s category, then whatever credit Wright claims to be attributed to the account of the believer for vindication is God’s and not man’s!  On the other hand, he will at least be consistent if he argues for the “works” that he has placed in the “man’s” category to be what God’s judgment is based upon.  Let’s see what he says:

“I am fascinated by the way in which some of those most conscious of their reformation heritage shy away from Paul’s clear statements about future judgment according to works. It is not often enough remarked upon, for instance, that in the Thessalonian letters, and in Philippians, he looks ahead to the coming day of judgment and sees God’s favourable verdict not on the basis of the merits and death of Christ, not because like Lord Hailsham he simply casts himself on the mercy of the judge, but on the basis of his apostolic work. ‘What is our hope and joy and crown of boasting before our Lord Jesus Christ at his royal appearing? Is it not you? For you are our glory and our joy.’ (1 Thess. 3.19f. [sic]; cp. Phil. 2.16f.) I suspect that if you or I were to say such a thing, we could expect a swift rebuke of ‘nothing in my hand I bring, simply to thy cross I cling’. The fact that Paul does not feel obliged at every point to say this shows, I think, that he is not as concerned as we are about the danger of speaking of the things he himself has done – though sometimes, to be sure, he adds a rider, which proves my point, that it is not his own energy but that which God gives and inspires within him (1 Cor. 15.10; Col. 1.29). But he is still clear that the things he does in the present, by moral and physical effort, will count to his credit on the last day, precisely because they are the effective signs that the Spirit of the living Christ has been at work in him.”

That statement is packed with all sorts of linguistic relativism and requires in several places a clear definition of terms.  We have to be like the now-wise car-shopper, and remember how we got ripped last time and ask: “Did you say least or lease?”  Let’s back up and ask some questions.  Will all people from all ages stand in the same line to present their works for divine examination at Christ’s royal appearing?  If Paul is looking ahead on a Tuesday to the coming Day of Judgment to present his works, is it possible that he can do something on the following Wednesday that would cause God to rule unfavourably toward him?  Are Paul’s “clear statements” about future judgment of the believer?  Will everyone who ever lived go to heaven, and then present their works to determine whether or not they can stay there based on their works? 

Many more questions should arise after a statement is made like that.  You’ll have to ask them yourselves.  One thing is clear from Wright’s murky pond, he fails to acknowledge the varying degrees of reward in heaven, and that a person must first be justified in order to get there!  For Wright, this final judgment pertains to salvation.  I submit to you on the basis of Scripture that salvation is by grace (unmerited favor) through faith, not of our own doing, it is the gift of God, not of works, so no one can boast (Eph. 2:8-9).  I also submit that any good work that we do here in this life is merely living up to one of the intended the purposes that we were created in Christ Jesus for, that they were prepared beforehand by God, and done so that we should walk in them (Eph. 2:10).  The “walking in them” (the good works) is antithetical to what we previously walked in according to v.1-3 of Ephesians:

“2:1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience- 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body [1] and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.” – Eph. 2:1-3 [ESV]

Notice that we were children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.  Notice that we were dead in trespasses and sins.  Notice that verse 2 speaks of the past and no longer applies to the believer in Christ Jesus who performs the good works now. 

“4 But [2] God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ-by grace you have been saved- 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.” – Eph. 2:4-7 [ESV]

Notice that the past-tense is still in use when Paul speaks of our salvation.  Notice how being raised up and seated with God in heaven in Christ Jesus is not something that hopefully will happen in the future!  Notice that when Paul does refer to the future, he doesn’t mention any final vindication or divine verdict that hangs in the balance awaiting some presentation of works for a merit validation check.  Notice what he does say, that our being saved (past-tense) by grace is so that in the coming ages (future) God will be glorified by demonstrating his immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus!  If you are a sinner and acknowledge that there is no work that you can ever do that can please God and merit your salvation, then look to Christ!  There you will find the offer of salvation that God has (past-tense) provided for you.  Put your faith in Christ Jesus’ work now (immediate-present-tense), which God has already accepted and raised him from the dead to demonstrate his acceptance.  God is not revealed in Scripture as waiting to be pleased with someone.  He is revealed as One whom is already well pleased (Matt. 3:17, 17:5, Mk. 1:11, Lk. 3:22, 2 Pt. 1:17)!  The text above (Eph. 2) reveals that God saves sinners in order to demonstrate the immeasurable riches of his grace (which is unmerited favor) in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.  If you are presently trusting in anything else other than Christ Jesus for your salvation, then according to verse 3, you’re like the rest of mankind without Jesus: children of wrath!  It is either your works or his, just as it is either his wrath or his kindness toward you.  Now is the day for salvation Bishop Wright! 

“8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” – Eph. 2:8-10 [ESV]

For N.T. Wright to so energetically teach what is clearly the opposite of what is revealed in Scripture, particularly Ephesians 2, only further demonstrates other revealed truth in Scripture:

6 Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. 7 But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. – 1 Cor. 2:6-7 [ESV]

9 But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him”- 10 these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. – 1 Cor. 2:9-10 [ESV]

14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. 16 “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ. – 1 Cor. 2:14-15 [ESV]

Let all the heathen Pauline scholars chew on that!  The amazing thing is that a new believer, say, 3 months old in Christ, according to Scripture, has an incalculably better knowledge of God than even the most decorated heathen NT scholar ever will, unless he finds, by way of surprise, that sovereign grace.  That is because it is a saving knowledge.  Still wanna trust in works?  Read this:

 ”30 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33 as it is written, “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.” 10:1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. – Romans 9:30-10:4 [ESV]

This completes this Crash Course on the Final Judgment According to Works.  If anything, I pray that the Scripture references from the Word preserve you from N.T. Wright’s poison and keeps you in a saving knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:4).  Tom, if you’re reading this, according to Scripture, you’re an outsider!  In the name of Jesus, repent from your satanic service in afflicting the people of God, or, to your surprise, you will be at the final judgment according to works while we are in the arms of King Jesus, watching you get flicked like a crumb into the lake that John described to us.

Next Crash Course we look into N.T. Wright’s Ordo Salutis.  If you are not familiar with the term, the next Crash Course will give a brief and concise introduction to some of the controversy over the Ordo Salutis (the order of the application of the elements of salvation), and how N.T. Wright sits perched over controversial areas amongst Christians and swoops in like a hawk and preys on the weaker vessels.