Wright has never meant anything else

Nevertheless, Wright conceded in his exchange with Schreiner that if he did use the phrase “on the basis of” that he would want to “nuance” it to mean “in accordance with” works. Don’t miss that. Wright believes that justification is in accordance with works, not on the basis of them. This is huge in my view, and I don’t want anyone to miss the significance of this statement. This brings him much closer to the traditional Protestant position (and the biblical one too!), and that is no small matter considering how the debate has unfolded thus far.

via » N.T. Wright on Justification at ETS | Denny Burk.

Anyone who didn’t already know that this was Wright’s meaning has not been reading him or has been reading him with gargantuan levels of bias against him.

2 thoughts on “Wright has never meant anything else

  1. pduggie

    True on final. But I’ve been wondering about that in Wright myself. “On the basis of” has the idea of grounding, the ‘base’ that the ‘basis’ is. The causal thing. I kept wondering why Wright felt the need to use that language, and if he didn’t know what a hot button it was.

    But if final justification is something of a different character it shouldn’t matter much. The reformed trad usually makes a point about how the point of final justification isn’t “acceptance” but public recognition.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *