Frank: When you talk about carrying on Jesus’ work in our time, our brothers and sisters in the Charismatic movement will respond, saying, “Yes! But Jesus’ work includes casting out demons, healing the sick (supernaturally), and raising the dead. So we are to do the same.” What do you say to this?
N.T. Wright: God is the healer and hasn’t stopped healing. But, as in ancient times so today, (a) many healings take place through regular doctors and nurses (the early Christians were good at nursing people), and (b) healing always was a mystery (why some, not others: note Paul in 2 Corinthians 12, and his concern over Epaphroditus in Philippians 2:25-30 – clearly, Paul didn’t just say a prayer and heal him). Yes, people sometimes were raised from the dead, but other people die, in Acts and the rest of the New Testament, and nobody tries to raise them. There are well-reported instances of this on the mission field to this day, but I don’t know anyone who seriously says we should be trying/hoping to do it day by day. Yes, casting out demons still happens; that is a specialized and dangerous and difficult ministry, and we should pray for those who are called to it. I know (as a bishop) enough about that to have the highest respect for those who engage in it and the highest gratitude that I’m not called to it.
Frank: What are the three main objections (or misrepresentations) of your work among evangelical Christians, and what are your responses to those objections or misrepresentations?
N.T. Wright: People have sometimes said, ridiculously, that I don’t believe in the second coming, because I insist that in the New Testament a reference to “the son of man coming on the clouds” is to Jesus’ vindication (in resurrection, ascension, and not least in the destruction of the Jerusalem that had opposed and rejected him) rather than to his return. The second coming is taught all over the place, and I have expounded it, I hope biblically, in Surprised by Hope.
Second, people have sometimes said that I downplay the divinity of Jesus (someone once accused me even of denying the virginal conception). This is a serious misunderstanding. I have done my best, rather, to oppose modern forms of Docetism (the view that Jesus wasn’t really human but only “seemed” to be). Some modern Docetists, not surprisingly, see this as a denial of Jesus’ divinity. I hope the present book and its sequel, How God Became King, will put the record straight on this one.
Third, many have been puzzled at my embrace of (one form of) what has been called the “New Perspective” on Paul. Actually, one of the key things about the NP, at its best, is that it takes seriously the larger vision of God’s purposes for his people and for the whole creation that we find precisely in the four gospels. Often, evangelicals have offered a would-be “Pauline” gospel that not only doesn’t do justice to Paul but leaves no room for the four gospels. That has to be wrong, and I’ve tried to show how.
Frank: You are one of the most prolific authors of our time. Talk about your writing routines. What does a normal day and week look like in your writing?
N.T. Wright: Sadly, there is no such thing as a “normal day and week.” I wish there was, but life isn’t like that. There is teaching, grandchildren, chickens to feed and clean out, shopping, examining PhD theses, and all the other fun of family and academic life. But left to myself (as has happened all too rarely!), I get up very early (5ish), say my prayers, have breakfast, and ideally am at the desk by about 6:30 or 7. Then I can have a really good morning before a late lunch, perhaps a walk, then back to work mid-afternoon, with supper around 7:30, read something for an hour or two, prayers and bed by 10:30 or 11.
However, even within this (highly idealized) scenario, sometimes the “work” will consist of simply writing, as fast as I can, sometimes of reading, slowly and carefully, a major new commentary or monograph, sometimes of a mixture of the two plus combing through journals, reviews, online materials…of all of these, I prefer the writing task because of the sheer joy of words and language and the delight in finding a creative way of saying something. The week in my life that most nearly corresponds to the ideal was the week, in spring 2006, when I wrote Acts for Everyone. I began it on a Saturday, had most of the Sunday off, and finished it in the small hours of the following Sunday. I have no idea how many thousand words that was, but all I had to do was to sit down at the desk and turn on the tap. It was exhilarating.
Read Page 5 >>
