Paul J Dean’s Comments on Wright do seem a bit thin
Thirdly, in Duncan’s own words, the New Perspective ‘has gotten the Reformers wrong. They have done a disservice to Luther’s and Calvin’s exegesis. This has been pointed out not only by Carl Trueman, but by Lee Gatiss, Kim Riddlebarger and many others who have done good historical work on this issue.’ Duncan enjoyably offers this shot: ‘I love the quotation from Stephen Westerholm (no flaming evangelical, mind you), who in responding to Dunn and Wright and Stendahl and others, says this: ‘Students who want to know how a Rabbinic Jew perceived humanity’s place in God’s world will read Paul with caution and Luther not at all. On the other hand, students who want to understand Paul, but feel that they have nothing to learn from Martin Luther, should consider a career in metallurgy. Exegesis is learned from the masters.’
So in telling us why Wright is wrong, we don’t get an argument, but we get a citation of an authority (Duncan), citing an authority (Trueman, Riddlebarger, Westerholm) to the effect that an authority (Luther and Calvin) got it right.
And why is it important to note that Duncan “enjoys” his “shot”? Though I guess I’ve never much cared for the ‘wailing and gnashing’ variety of theological trial (“My heart is greived brother…”) I think I prefer it to the thrill of the hunt.
Well, shooting is more merciful than taking apart limb by limb.