Jesus and the Victory of God by N.T. Wright
The Open Volume
Thoughtful Reviews in Theology and Ministry
Jesus and the Victory of God
N.T. Wright
Bibliographic Information
Author: Wright, N.T. Full Title: Jesus and the Victory of God Publisher: Fortress Press (USA) / SPCK (UK) Year of Publication: 1996 Pages: 741 pp. (+ bibliography and indices) ISBN: 978-0-8006-2682-3 Series: Christian Origins and the Question of God, Vol. 2
Author Background
N.T. Wright (D.Phil., Oxford University) is Research Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at St. Andrews University. His full scholarly profile and institutional context are described in the companion review of The New Testament and the People of God (Vol. 1) in this series, and readers are directed to that review for background. At the time of this volume's publication Wright was Canon Theologian of Westminster Abbey, a position that placed him simultaneously at the center of Anglican institutional life and at the forefront of academic New Testament scholarship — a dual location that shapes this book's unusual combination of technical historical rigor and urgent theological seriousness.
Jesus and the Victory of God is the volume in which the methodological framework established in Volume 1 meets its most demanding test. Where Volume 1 was primarily a programmatic statement — announcing a method, establishing a context, and describing a framework — this volume is the execution of that program against the most contested body of evidence in New Testament scholarship: the historical Jesus. The Third Quest for the Historical Jesus had produced, by the mid-1990s, a remarkable diversity of reconstructions — the cynic sage of Burton Mack, the Mediterranean peasant of John Dominic Crossan, the social prophet of Marcus Borg, the eschatological prophet of E.P. Sanders — and Wright's engagement with this diversity is simultaneously the book's most technically demanding feature and its most theologically consequential. His historical Jesus is neither the domesticated teacher of liberal Protestantism nor the purely transcendent Christ of docetism but a thoroughly Jewish first-century figure whose self-understanding, actions, and proclamation constitute the most historically credible and the most theologically serious account of Jesus available in the literature.
The contextual factor most relevant to this volume's significance is the explicit engagement with the question of Jesus's self-consciousness — his own understanding of his identity and vocation — which Wright pursues with a historical directness that most scholarship since Schweitzer had abandoned as methodologically illegitimate. The willingness to ask, on historical grounds, what Jesus thought he was doing and who he believed himself to be is the most distinctive and most controversial feature of the book, and it defines the point at which the historical and the theological dimensions of the project are most fully integrated and most directly exposed to critical scrutiny.
Thesis and Central Argument
The governing thesis of Jesus and the Victory of God is that Jesus of Nazareth understood himself as the agent through whom Israel's God was bringing the long-awaited return from exile to its climax — the one through whose ministry, death, and vindication the divine kingdom was arriving, the covenant was being renewed, and the powers of evil were being defeated — and that this self-understanding, grounded in a thorough and historically credible engagement with the Jewish scriptures and the prophetic tradition, provides the most adequate historical explanation of his words, actions, and fate. The book responds to the fundamental question that has governed New Testament scholarship since the Enlightenment — the question of the relationship between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith — by arguing that the dichotomy is a product of inadequate historical method and that a rigorously historical reconstruction of Jesus's aims, beliefs, and actions produces a figure whose theological significance is not imposed from outside but emerges from the evidence itself.
Wright's proposed contribution is simultaneously historical, hermeneutical, and theological. Historically, he argues that the Third Quest's diverse reconstructions — however methodologically sophisticated — have consistently failed to place Jesus adequately within the specific Jewish context of first-century Palestine, and that the return from exile framework established in Volume 1 provides the historical context within which Jesus's words and actions become most fully intelligible. Hermeneutically, he argues that the parables, the kingdom proclamation, the symbolic actions (particularly the Temple action and the Last Supper), and the passion narrative are best understood as moves within the story of Israel's climactic moment rather than as timeless moral teachings, social programs, or mythological symbols. Theologically, he argues that the historical reconstruction of Jesus's aims and beliefs provides genuine — though not complete — grounds for the church's confession of his identity, and that the gap between the historian's Jesus and the church's Christ is considerably smaller than the Enlightenment tradition has assumed.
Overview of Contents
Jesus and the Victory of God is organized across four major parts: the context of the Third Quest (Part One), the kingdom proclamation and the parables (Part Two), the aims and beliefs of Jesus (Part Three), and the intention and meaning of the crucifixion (Part Four).
Part One: The Context — The Third Quest and Its Methods
The book's opening section surveys the landscape of historical Jesus scholarship from Reimarus through the Third Quest, applying the critical realist methodology of Volume 1 to the assessment of the major reconstructions. Wright's engagement with the Jesus Seminar — whose Fellows Votes on the authenticity of individual sayings had become the most publicly visible feature of the Third Quest — is particularly direct: he argues that the Seminar's methodology, which privileges aphoristic wisdom sayings and treats apocalyptic and eschatological material as secondary, systematically eliminates the most historically credible elements of the Jesus tradition and produces a Jesus shaped more by twentieth-century American liberal values than by first-century Palestinian Judaism. The engagement with Crossan's The Historical Jesus (1991) and Borg's Jesus: A New Vision (1987) is the most sustained and the most technically detailed, and Wright's demonstration that both reconstructions depend on methodological assumptions that cannot survive rigorous historical scrutiny is among the most persuasive sections of the book.
The positive account of historical method that emerges from this survey applies the worldview analysis of Volume 1 to the specific challenge of Jesus research: the goal is to reconstruct the story Jesus inhabited, the symbols he deployed, the practices he engaged in, and the questions his ministry was designed to address within the specific context of first-century Jewish Palestine. The criterion of double similarity and dissimilarity — the claim that historically credible Jesus material is both similar enough to first-century Judaism to be intelligible within it and different enough to explain why a movement emerged from it — is the most important methodological refinement over the standard criteria of the historical Jesus debate, and it governs the analysis throughout the subsequent parts.
Part Two: The Kingdom Proclamation and the Parables
The book's most exegetically detailed section applies the return from exile framework to the specific content of Jesus's kingdom proclamation. Wright argues that Jesus's announcement of the kingdom of God is not primarily a proclamation of individual salvation, a social program for the improvement of earthly conditions, or a prediction of cosmic apocalyptic events in the near future but the announcement that Israel's God was returning to Zion, that the exile was ending, that the covenant was being renewed, and that the powers — both the spiritual powers of evil and their earthly representatives in the Roman Empire and the Jerusalem establishment — were being defeated. The parables are read as Jesus's primary medium for this announcement: each parable is a move within the story of Israel's climactic moment, inviting its hearers to understand where they are in that story and what response the moment requires.
The treatment of specific parables — the Prodigal Son, the Good Samaritan, the Talents, and the parables of judgment — is the most sustained and most detailed exegetical work in the book, and it demonstrates the productivity of the narrative framework most fully. The reading of the Prodigal Son as a parable about Israel's return from exile — with the younger son representing the Israel that had gone into exile and the older son representing the Israel that had stayed home and resented the returnees — is among the book's most illuminating proposals and has generated both enthusiastic reception and sustained critical engagement. The account of Jesus's characteristic announcement of the arrival of the kingdom as present in his own ministry — the healings, the exorcisms, the table fellowship with sinners — is developed with historical precision and theological richness, and it provides the most compelling account available in the literature of why first-century Jews would have found Jesus's ministry both exhilarating and threatening.
Part Three: The Aims and Beliefs of Jesus
The book's most theologically consequential section addresses the question that most historical Jesus scholarship since Schweitzer had treated as methodologically illegitimate: what did Jesus think he was doing, and who did he believe himself to be? Wright argues that this question is not only historically answerable but historically unavoidable — the evidence of the Gospels cannot be adequately explained without some account of Jesus's self-understanding — and that the critical realist method provides the tools for addressing it responsibly.
The account of Jesus's aims is organized around three proposals: that Jesus understood his vocation as the fulfillment of Israel's prophetic tradition, specifically as the one in whom the divine return to Zion was occurring; that he understood his death as the means by which the powers of evil were to be defeated and the covenant renewed — the new Passover, the new Exodus, the new covenant sacrifice; and that he believed his vindication — the resurrection — would demonstrate that his reading of Israel's story was correct and that the divine kingdom had arrived through him. The account of Jesus's beliefs about his own identity is the most carefully argued and the most contested section of the book: Wright argues that Jesus understood himself as embodying the return of Israel's God to Zion — that in his ministry, Israel's God was personally present and acting — without necessarily deploying the ontological categories that the later creedal tradition would use to express this conviction. This is the point at which the historical and the theological are most directly integrated, and the question of whether Wright's historical reconstruction is adequate to the church's confession of Jesus's full divinity is addressed in the doctrinal analysis below.
Part Four: The Intention and Meaning of the Crucifixion
The book's final section addresses Jesus's understanding of his own death — the question of whether Jesus anticipated his crucifixion and understood it as redemptively significant. Wright argues, against the tendency of much Third Quest scholarship to treat the passion as an unexpected end to a failed prophetic ministry, that Jesus moved deliberately toward Jerusalem with a specific understanding of his death as the means by which the divine victory over evil would be accomplished — the bearing of Israel's exile in himself, the defeat of the powers through apparent defeat, the new covenant sacrifice through which the forgiveness of sins and the renewal of creation would be achieved. The account of the Last Supper as a deliberate symbolic enactment of this understanding — Jesus interpreting his death through the categories of Passover, Exodus, and covenant renewal — is the most theologically rich section of the volume and the most directly relevant to the church's eucharistic theology and its account of the atonement.
Wright's account of the atonement in this section is notably multidimensional: he resists the reduction of Jesus's death to a single atonement theory — penal substitution, moral influence, Christus Victor — and argues instead that the different dimensions of the death's significance are best understood as facets of a single historical act that the diverse atonement theories have each partially illuminated and partially distorted. This is pastorally generous and theologically nuanced, but it has drawn criticism from Reformed scholars who argue that the specifically penal and substitutionary dimensions of the atonement deserve more than partial illumination, and this tension is addressed in the doctrinal analysis below.
Theological Evaluation and Critique
Exegetical and Hermeneutical Method
The exegetical method of Jesus and the Victory of God is the most historically disciplined and the most contextually grounded in the series. The application of the return from exile framework to the specific sayings, parables, and actions of Jesus is executed with genuine exegetical precision — the readings of individual parables are among the most careful and most illuminating available in the scholarly literature — and the engagement with the Greek text and the relevant Jewish primary sources is consistently competent and frequently insightful.
The most significant exegetical tension — pressed with the greatest scholarly precision by Craig Evans (Jesus and His Contemporaries, 1995), Scot McKnight (A New Vision for Israel, 1999), and Dale Allison (Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet, 1998) — concerns the degree to which the return from exile framework determines the reading of specific texts rather than emerging from them. Allison in particular has argued that Wright's reconstruction systematically downplays the genuinely apocalyptic and cosmic dimensions of Jesus's eschatology — the expectation of a decisive end-of-the-world intervention — in favor of a more politically and historically specific account of the kingdom's arrival, and that the evidence of the Jesus tradition supports a more robustly apocalyptic Jesus than Wright's framework accommodates. This is a genuine exegetical tension that runs through the book's most distinctive proposals, and readers should assess it carefully before accepting Wright's framework as the definitive account of Jesus's eschatological vision.
Doctrinal Analysis
The doctrinal stakes of Jesus and the Victory of God are the highest in the series, because they bear directly on the church's confessional account of Jesus's identity and on the doctrine of the atonement — the two most fundamental Christological questions in systematic theology.
From a Reformed perspective, the most significant benchmarks are the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), Chapter VIII — "Of Christ the Mediator" — which affirms that "the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance, and equal with the Father, did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon him man's nature" — and the Heidelberg Catechism (1563), Questions 12–18, which develop the necessity and nature of the atonement in terms of satisfaction for sin. Wright's account of Jesus's identity — grounded in the historical reconstruction of Jesus's self-understanding as the one in whom Israel's God was returning to Zion — is compatible with the Confession's affirmation of Jesus's full divinity but does not straightforwardly generate it, and the question of whether the historical reconstruction is sufficient to ground the ontological claims of the creedal tradition is one that Reformed readers must address directly. On the atonement, Wright's multidimensional account sits in genuine tension with the Heidelberg Catechism's specifically penal account: the Catechism affirms that Christ "bore in body and soul the wrath of God against the sin of the whole human race" — language that implies the specifically penal dimension of the atonement that Wright's more diffuse account of the death's significance tends to subsume rather than foreground. John Piper's The Future of Justification (2007) and Thomas Schreiner's The Wrath of God Against the Ungodly represent the Reformed tradition's most direct engagement with Wright's atonement proposals, and both press the question of whether the penal substitutionary dimension receives adequate weight.
From a Wesleyan-Arminian perspective, Wright's multidimensional account of the atonement is broadly compatible with the Wesleyan tradition's resistance to reducing the atonement to a single theory, and Wesley's own account — which held together governmental, moral influence, and satisfaction dimensions without reducing one to another — resonates with Wright's approach. The Articles of Religion (1784), Article II, affirms that Christ "truly suffered, was crucified, dead and buried, to reconcile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins of men" — language that implies a sacrificial and reconciling dimension that Wright's historical account develops, though with different theological emphases than the Wesleyan tradition has characteristically deployed. H. Ray Dunning's Grace, Faith and Holiness (1988) and Kenneth Collins's The Theology of John Wesley (2007) represent the most careful Wesleyan engagements with the atonement question, and readers from that tradition will want to assess Wright's proposals against these benchmarks.
From a Roman Catholic perspective, the most significant engagement is with the doctrine of the atonement as developed in the Council of Trent and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992), §606–618, which affirms that Christ's sacrifice is both the fulfillment of Israel's sacrificial system and the definitive act of redemption "for our sins" — language that implies both the substitutionary and the sacrificial dimensions that Wright develops historically. The Catholic tradition's comfort with the multidimensional account of the atonement — which has never reduced the death of Christ to a single mechanism — makes Wright's approach more congenial from a Catholic perspective than from a Reformed one, and Catholic scholars including Brant Pitre (Jesus and the Last Supper, 2015) have developed the historical account of Jesus's self-understanding as the new Passover sacrifice with even greater technical detail than Wright, providing a productive Catholic engagement with the book's most important historical proposals.
From a Lutheran perspective, the tension with Wright's program is most acute at the point of the atonement. Luther's account of the cross — developed most fully in the Heidelberg Disputation (1518) as the theology of the cross (theologia crucis) in antithesis to the theology of glory (theologia gloriae) — insists that God is known precisely in the hiddenness and apparent defeat of the cross, and that the cross's significance is most fundamentally the bearing of divine wrath against sin rather than the historical-political defeat of the powers of evil that Wright's account foregrounds. Gerhard Forde's On Being a Theologian of the Cross (1997) represents the most theologically precise Lutheran engagement with the question, and readers from that tradition should assess whether Wright's historical account of the cross as the defeat of the powers adequately preserves the specifically propitiatory dimension that Luther's theologia crucis insists upon.
From a Pentecostal and Charismatic perspective, Wright's account of Jesus's exorcisms and healings as eschatological signs of the kingdom's arrival — the defeat of the powers of evil as part of the announcement that Israel's God was returning to reclaim his creation — resonates deeply with the Pentecostal tradition's account of spiritual warfare and the Spirit's power to defeat demonic forces. Craig Keener's Miracles (2011) and The Historical Jesus of the Gospels (2009) represent the most technically detailed Pentecostal engagement with the historical Jesus question and share Wright's commitment to taking the miracle traditions seriously as historical evidence rather than theological overlay.
From a Baptist and broader evangelical perspective, the book's account of Jesus's identity has been received with considerable engagement within conservative evangelical scholarship, and the willingness to ground the church's confession of Jesus's divine identity in historical reconstruction rather than purely in confessional assertion has been both welcomed and challenged. The Baptist Faith and Message (2000) affirms that Jesus Christ is "the eternal Son of God" who "was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, honored the divine law by His personal obedience, and atoned for our sins by His blood" — a confessional statement whose Christological and soteriological content Wright's historical account is broadly compatible with, even if the account's historical grounding does not generate the full ontological specificity that the confession implies. Darrell Bock's Jesus According to Scripture (2002) and Craig Blomberg's The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (2nd ed., 2007) represent conservative evangelical engagements with the historical Jesus question that share Wright's historical commitments while pressing different methodological and theological concerns.
Engagement with Secondary Literature
The secondary literature engagement in Jesus and the Victory of God is the most comprehensive survey of historical Jesus scholarship available for its date of publication, and it remains a model of scholarly breadth and precision within the genre of historical Jesus monographs. The engagement with the Jesus Seminar, Crossan, Borg, Meier, and Sanders is thorough and technically precise, and the engagement with the relevant Jewish primary sources — Josephus, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Pseudepigrapha — is consistently competent. John Meier's A Marginal Jew (vols. 1–2, 1991–1994) — the most technically detailed historical Jesus monograph in the literature — is engaged with appropriate respect and appropriate critical distance, and the comparison between Wright's and Meier's reconstructions is one of the most illuminating features of the book's engagement with the field.
The most significant gap is in the systematic theological tradition. The book's account of the atonement — one of its most important proposals — is developed with historical breadth but without sustained engagement with the systematic tradition's most careful treatments of the question. Leon Morris's The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross (1955), Henri Blocher's In Him We Have Redemption (2004), and John Stott's The Cross of Christ (1986) — the evangelical tradition's most careful engagements with the atonement — are not adequately engaged, and the book's most theologically consequential proposals are proportionally less robustly defended against the systematic tradition's strongest objections than their importance demands. This gap is more consequential for the book's theological reception than for its historical scholarship, but it is significant enough to note explicitly.
Strengths
The contextual reading of the parables. The book's most durable exegetical contribution is its reading of the parables as moves within the story of Israel's climactic moment — as announcements of the kingdom's arrival that invited their hearers to locate themselves within the divine drama rather than as timeless moral teachings or existential illustrations. The specific readings of the Prodigal Son, the Good Samaritan, and the parables of judgment are among the most illuminating available in the literature, and they have transformed the way pastors and scholars read and preach these texts. Even readers who resist the return from exile framework as the master key to Jesus's ministry will find these readings enriching their engagement with the Gospel narratives in ways that persist beyond their engagement with Wright's specific historical proposals.
The account of Jesus's symbolic actions. The treatment of the Temple action and the Last Supper as deliberate symbolic enactments of Jesus's understanding of his vocation — the Temple action as the announcement of judgment on the current Temple order and its replacement by the community of the new covenant, the Last Supper as the new Passover in which Jesus interpreted his death as the means of the new Exodus — is the most historically precise and the most theologically generative section of the book. The account of the Last Supper's eucharistic significance is developed with a combination of historical precision and theological richness that makes it directly useful for pastors and teachers engaging the church's eucharistic practice, and it provides the strongest available historical grounding for the claim that the church's eucharist is not a post-Easter innovation but a practice rooted in Jesus's own deliberate symbolic action.
The integration of history and theology. The book's most distinctive achievement is its demonstration — across 741 pages of technical historical scholarship — that rigorous historical method and genuine theological seriousness are not merely compatible but mutually reinforcing. The historical reconstruction of Jesus's aims, beliefs, and actions produces a figure whose theological significance is not imposed from outside the evidence but emerges from the most careful and most contextually grounded reading of that evidence available in the literature. This demonstration is more important for the discipline of New Testament studies than any specific historical proposal, and it has permanently enlarged the horizon of what the integration of historical and theological inquiry can achieve.
The account of Jesus's self-understanding. The historical reconstruction of Jesus's self-understanding — his conviction that he was the one in whom Israel's God was returning to Zion, that his death would be the means of the divine victory over evil, and that his vindication would demonstrate the arrival of the kingdom — is the most ambitious and the most consequential proposal in the book, and it is also the most historically disciplined account of this question available in the literature. The willingness to ask the question of Jesus's self-consciousness on historical grounds, and to answer it with a specificity that both the reductionist critics of the left and the docetist tendencies of the right have avoided, is itself a significant contribution to the discipline — a demonstration that the question is not methodologically illegitimate but historically answerable.
Weaknesses and Limitations
The apocalyptic dimension of Jesus's eschatology is underweighted. The book's most significant exegetical weakness — pressed with the greatest scholarly precision by Dale Allison in Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet (1998) and in his subsequent exchanges with Wright — is the systematic downplaying of the genuinely cosmic and apocalyptic dimensions of Jesus's eschatological vision in favor of a historically and politically specific account of the kingdom's arrival. Wright's reading of Jesus's apocalyptic language as metaphorical description of historical-political events — the fall of Jerusalem, the defeat of Rome, the vindication of the covenant community — rather than as prediction of literal cosmic transformation has been one of the most contested proposals in the book, and the exegetical case for it, while carefully argued, does not resolve the tension between the political-historical and the cosmic-eschatological dimensions of the relevant texts. Readers from traditions with strong commitments to a future eschatological kingdom — including dispensationalists, historic premillennialists, and amillennialists who expect a literal resurrection of the dead and a new creation — will need to engage Allison's critique and Wright's responses carefully before accepting the political-historical reading of Jesus's eschatological language.
The transition from historical reconstruction to confessional claim is not fully bridged. The book's most significant theological limitation is the gap between the historical reconstruction of Jesus's self-understanding and the church's confessional claim about his divine identity. Wright's historical Jesus — the one who understood himself as the embodiment of Israel's returning God — is a figure whose theological significance is considerable and whose historical credibility is substantial. But the gap between "Jesus believed himself to be the one in whom Israel's God was personally present and acting" and the Chalcedonian Definition's "truly God and truly man, of one substance with the Father according to the Godhead" is a gap that historical method alone cannot close, and the book is more honest about this limitation in its methodological sections than in its constructive proposals, where the transition is sometimes made more quickly than the argument's own standards of rigor require.
The atonement account is too diffuse for the systematic theological tradition. The book's multidimensional account of the cross's significance — while historically generous and theologically nuanced — does not provide the systematic theological tradition with sufficient specificity to adjudicate between the competing atonement theories that the tradition has developed. The claim that Jesus understood his death as the bearing of Israel's exile in himself, the defeat of the powers, and the inauguration of the new covenant is historically credible and theologically suggestive, but it does not specify the mechanism by which the death achieves its redemptive effect with the precision that the theological tradition — particularly in the Reformed and Lutheran streams — has rightly demanded. This is not merely a failure of systematic application; it is a gap in the historical argument itself, because the mechanism of the atonement is precisely what the historical account of Jesus's intentions needs to specify if it is to provide the theological grounding Wright claims for it.
Engagement with the Broader Scholarly Conversation
Jesus and the Victory of God enters a field shaped by the Third Quest's diverse reconstructions and by the Jesus Seminar's public profile. The most important scholarly responses have come from three directions. From the left: John Dominic Crossan's The Birth of Christianity (1998) and the ongoing exchanges between Wright and the Jesus Seminar Fellows represent the most sustained critical engagement from a more skeptical historical direction. From within evangelical scholarship: Craig Evans, Darrell Bock, and the essays collected in Jesus Under Fire (Wilkins and Moreland, eds., 1995) represent conservative evangelical engagement with both Wright's proposals and the Third Quest more broadly. From the systematicians: Kevin Vanhoozer's The Drama of Doctrine (2005) and Richard Bauckham's Jesus and the God of Israel (2008) — which argues for a "divine identity" Christology grounded in the Jewish monotheistic tradition rather than in Wright's specifically return-from-exile framework — represent the most productive systematic-theological engagements with the book's Christological proposals. Bauckham's account in particular deserves direct engagement alongside this volume: the divine identity approach provides a historically grounded but theologically more precise account of how Jesus's identity relates to the identity of Israel's God than Wright's return-from-exile framework, and the comparison between the two approaches is one of the most illuminating conversations in contemporary New Testament Christology.
Conclusion and Recommendation
Jesus and the Victory of God is the most exegetically substantial and the most theologically consequential volume in the Christian Origins and the Question of God series — the work in which Wright's historical program meets the evidence of the Gospel narratives most directly and produces the most illuminating and the most provocative results. Its genuine contributions — the contextual reading of the parables, the account of Jesus's symbolic actions, the integration of history and theology, and the historically disciplined engagement with Jesus's self-understanding — represent a landmark in historical Jesus scholarship that has permanently altered the terms of the debate. Its limitations — the underweighted apocalyptic dimension, the unbridged gap between historical reconstruction and confessional claim, and the excessively diffuse account of the atonement — are real and define the points at which the book's most significant proposals require the most careful critical engagement. Read alongside Allison's Jesus of Nazareth, Bauckham's Jesus and the God of Israel, and Pitre's Jesus and the Last Supper, Jesus and the Victory of God is essential reading for any serious student of the Gospels, the historical Jesus, or the theological foundations of Christian faith.
Recommended for: Ph.D. students and faculty in New Testament, historical Jesus studies, and systematic theology; M.Div. and Th.M. students in advanced Gospels, Christology, and hermeneutics courses; pastors with sufficient historical and theological formation to engage the exegetical arguments and their doctrinal implications; any serious reader who has engaged Wright's popular-level Christological works — Simply Jesus, How God Became King — and wants the scholarly foundations; scholars from any tradition who want the most ambitious and most historically disciplined account of Jesus's aims and beliefs available in the literature.
Not recommended for: Readers without background in the historical Jesus debate or Second Temple Judaism — the book presupposes familiarity with Sanders, Crossan, Borg, and the relevant Jewish primary sources; those from dispensationalist traditions who require sustained engagement with the political-historical reading of Jesus's apocalyptic language before accepting Wright's eschatological framework; readers from confessional Reformed traditions who require direct engagement with penal substitutionary atonement before assessing Wright's multidimensional account of the cross; those looking for a pastoral or devotional engagement with the Gospels rather than a technical historical monograph — Wright's popular-level works serve that purpose more accessibly.
Overall Assessment: ☐ Highly Recommended | ☑ Recommended | ☐ Recommended with Reservations | ☐ Not Recommended
Comments
Post a Comment