He Never Says ‘Um…’: Interview with NT Wright

Jason Micheli —  June 10, 2016 — 1 Comment

nt-wrightThe Crackers and Grape Juice Team interviewed NT Wright for a couple of hours. We wracked our brains to come up with good questions and in between stammered plenty to collect our thoughts. ‘Tom’ on the other hand spoke as though he were in his kitchen, making a sandwich, and had a ready-made recorded answer for any question we posed to him. The dude never said ‘Um’ once.

You should listen to him.

In a few hundred years from now, he’ll be a bold-faced term in a church history book.

For those of you not in the know, NT Wright is the former Bishop of Durham. He is the author of popular works like Simply Christian and Surprised by Hope as well as paradigm-shifting professional books like The Resurrection of the Son of God and the recent Paul and the Faithfulness of the God. Without exaggeration, NT Wright is the primary influence on preachers, mainline and evangelical, of the New Testament today. In this particular episode Wright eviscerates the ‘apocalyptic reading’ of Paul espoused by my paramour Fleming Rutledge in her new book The Crucifixion (see previous C&J Podcast episodes).

Not only that but he squashed (a few weeks too late) the premise of my Eastertide sermon ‘Bigger than Burning.’

Download the episode and subscribe to future ones in the iTunes store here.Teer spends unpaid HOURS editing this crap, so spread the love.

Give us a Many Starred review there in the iTunes store. It’ll make it more likely more strangers and pilgrims will happen upon our meager podcast.

‘Like’ our Facebook Page too. You can find it here.

Jason Micheli

Posts

One response to He Never Says ‘Um…’: Interview with NT Wright

  1. Rev. Micheli,

    I’m a longtime reader, first-time commenter. I love your work! I studied with Dr. Soulen who recommended your work to me.

    In a great coincidence, I just finished reading Paul and the Faithfulness of God. I thought that it was a really great read and, yes, I “fell for” Dr. Wright’s arguments. While I would agree that he does “eviscerate” the apocalyptic reading, I think that he is doing it so that the scales are tipped back in favor of a reading where God’s faithfulness to God’s word takes priority. The book is extremely long, but I have a recollection of him being very clear that he *does not* favor a reading where salvation through Christ is part of a long, sweeping, crescendoing history that was the plan all along. He does, indeed, argue that what Paul saw in Christ’s crucifixion and, especially, resurrection was something new and radical. It reshaped Paul’s reading of the entire history but did not invalidate his (Paul’s) believe that God kept God’s promise to the world.

    On a somewhat related note, I thought that another one of your recent posts (http://tamedcynic.org/are-we-justified-by-our-faith-in-or-the-faith-of-jesus/) was particularly timely given your interview with Dr. Wright. In that post, you make a very similar point to one that Dr. Wright repeatedly makes throughout the book. I’m sure you realized that, but I just thought it was particularly interesting timing.

    I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.

    Thanks again for the great work on this blog. Keep up the great work!

Leave a Reply

Text formatting is available via select HTML. <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*