N.T. Wright: Romans

I've been making it a habit (or, better put, a semi-habit) to spend time in prayer, scripture reading, and reflection each day (usually at The Anchor, surprise, surprise). Isaac and I sat in my room just this past week talking about our spiritual discipline (or lack thereof), and the conversation ignited a further spark in my own quest to become more regimented in my religious observances. There's always the risk that they become nothing more than hollow ritual, but excising them for fear of what they could become doesn't make sense (because then you're just making the risk complete and justifying the fear). Back in the day I used to hate "Quiet Times" (and to be honest, that very phrase sends shivers up my spine), but I can't deny that setting aside time to reorient oneself is nothing short of wise. Even if you aren't Christian, the very practice itself has value: Buddhists have been advocating it for as long as they've been around (and it's much cooler to practice "Quiet Times" in Eastern mysticism than in orthodox Christianity, let me assure you). 

I went to Family Christian in Florence looking for a good bible study, and I couldn't find one fitting my tastes. I'm pretty picky when it comes to bible studies, and I think it all boils down to this: I want something of substance, and I want something that won't make me go, "Wait, that's not what the text actually means..." How many bible studies did I come across with Jeremiah 29.11 as the centerpiece? You really don't want to know (and I bet none of them were about the future hopes of nationalistic, post-exilic Israel). The bane of going to a Christian college and majoring in biblical studies is that by getting a good dose of common-sense hermeneutics, you realize just how little common sense hermeneutics are actually out there. Bible college teaches you to be critical, and when you come to sermons, to bible studies, to small groups, whatever, that tendency remains. This isn't a phenomenon regulated to me: most of my friends who went to bible college and took the same classes I did have this little quirk. So there I was, in the aisles, leafing through various bible studies, feeling frustrated, thinking maybe I should just throw one together for myself (an idea which I didn't like in the least, for multiple reasons), and then I came across the savior of western theology, N.T. Wright (and, yes, I use "savior" in a sardonic sense).

N.T. Wright, he's a solid fellow. He's primarily a historian, not a theologian, though he's renowned for the latter. He's sort of a bastard child when it comes to theological camps: conservatives don't like him because he goes too far, and liberals don't like him because he points out all the fluff and inconsistencies in their arguments. He writes about the awkward place in which he finds himself in his book on justification (a book aptly titled), but this doesn't deter him from bringing the biblical texts to fresh light in lieu of historical discoveries and research. When I worked at Starbucks (what seems years ago), most of my Christian friends didn't like him. They were bigger fans of Chesterton, Piper, and Driscoll (the latter two who stand in conflict with some of Wright's ideas). Having read many of Wright's books and articles, either for class or pleasure, I've found my own faith enlivened, and I've found that many of the attacks lodged against him really fall flat. Some accuse him of being in the New Perspective on Paul camp, with people like Sanders and Dunn; but this shows how wildly caricatures fly, for Wright himself asserts that while they have similarities in their convictions, there's some pretty hefty differences (it is for this reason, I suspect, that Wright's most popular book on Paul is titled, "Paul in Fresh Perspective"). Not liberal and not orthodox, Wright's under fire from everybody. But I can't help but wonder, "Why revolt against fresh readings of scripture in light of historical study?" The basic premises of the faith are not short-changed but reinforced, and I can't help but subsequently wonder if all those who so viciously oppose him would change tables if historical study supported rather than challenged their traditional beliefs? It's all about keeping the status quo, after all; no one likes their feathers to be ruffled.

Getting back to the main point, I found a series of bible studies written by him and instantly bought one. They're short and sweet, easy to wedge into any busy day, and Wright's good at directing prayer in light of the scriptures read. And, best of all, he weaves lots of history and culture into the bible study, illuminating different aspects of scriptures that we were hitherto blinded to because of the vast distance in time, culture, and geography between our world and Paul's. These bible studies are definitely worth your while if you're looking for something to keep you accountable, something to keep you interested, and they're very applicable to everyday life (being a more theoretical, abstract-thought kinda guy, I need lots of goading when it comes to application). Next up is his study on the pastoral epistles (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus), and for once in my life, I'm excited about a bible study. That's a good sign, I think.