Tag Archives: Paul

Reading Tom Wright’s Paul and the Faithfulness of God (3)

Here’s the third of my series of posts as I read through Tom Wright’s Paul and the Faithfulness of God (= PFG). The earlier posts are here and here. I am enjoying reading it, I must say: as always, Wright writes in an engaging and readable style which makes material accessible and clear. Chapter 3 is the second of four chapters looking at Paul’s context in the first century: chapter 2 looked at Judaism, this chapter focuses on Greek thought, and the next two focus (respectively) on religion Continue reading →

Reading Tom Wright’s Paul and the Faithfulness of God (2)

This is my second post as I’m reading through N. T. Wright’s Paul and the Faithfulness of God (= PFG). For introduction to the series, see here. After his preface and introductory chapter, where he engages with Philemon and lots of methodological stuff, Wright turns to a series of four chapters on the dominant worldviews of Paul’s day: Judaism, Greek thought, Graeco-Roman religion and culture, and the Roman imperial scene. Chapter 2, which this post focuses on, is about Judaism, especially Pharisaism. This is a very readable chapter Continue reading →

Reading Tom Wright’s Paul and the Faithfulness of God (1)

I’m reading through N. T. Wright’s massive Paul and the Faithfulness of God (hereafter PFG), so I shall put up a series of periodic posts on what I’m reading and my thoughts about it. Disclaimer: I am not a Pauline specialist, so these are the views of an interested amateur, rather than someone like Simon Gathercole, whose valuable review of PFG I posted about recently. I did substantial review articles of the second and third books in Wright’s big series Christian Origins and the Question of God, namely Jesus and Continue reading →

Simon Gathercole on Tom Wright’s Paul and the Faithfulness of God

  Here’s a fresh, generous and stimulating review of N. T. Wright’s big Paul and the Faithfulness of God by my friend Simon Gathercole, who teaches in the Faculty of Divinity at Cambridge. I’ve greatly enjoyed reading Simon’s review, which is gracious and clear, and clarifies and maps areas of agreement and disagreement nicely. It’s preparing me for reading Wright himself—I am going to take the big book on hols and will hope to blog about it.