This is N.T. Wright at his best. I have followed him for so many years and my life has been transformed by his unveiling of the Bible's full message. Thank you, Rev. Dr. Wright. You will go down in the history of the Church (hopefully world, too) as a revolutionary figure.
Bravos! brother Wright. Well said all the way through. Thank you for being so insightful and sharing the richness of Christ with us. My understanding of the Gospel has been enlarged and deepened. Big thank you!
"I'd like to thank my co-sponsor, Baylor's Truett Seminary. Pastors and scholars, educators and mentors, students and ministers; and the official seminary of my new creation unto ages of ages, amen." -- God
I really appreciate this lecture. Not that I understand it that we'll. But it is a joy to see Mr Wright dig so deeply and we'll into scripture and consistently and almost scientifically identify good theology. It's a light for me. Personally I rest in hope that this vision is accurate. Mt calling resides day to day in the two primary commandments and living in hope. It is enough to sense the the truth that our love in unity with God's love is in fact it's salvation. The Spirit is my daily help. All easy to say but much more difficult to do. Thanks for this message which ties so much together.
Merritt Cluff, NT Wright is a deep thinker and needs to be listened to more than once. No one gets it all right but as one reviewer said, “there is way more wheat than chaff”.
I really love Dr. Wright. I totally agree about the resurrection. My Church, the Coptic Orthodox Church, celebrates 50 days of resurrection and we use joyful tunes, resurrection hymns even during funerals. In the Coptic Church we consider resurrection THE greatest feast even in the early Church they did not even celebrate Christmas.
Thank you. Yes, I totally agree and I love your Archbishop Angaelos. What wonderful sermons and spot on about the resurrection and the lives we can expect on a restored earth with the Lord Jesus. Bless you.
"I think the safe place to go, if there is a safe place to go with that, is to say, we are part of a larger continuum than that of which we are normally aware." 1:16:00 That's a great quote.
The renewal of Creation has begun in Jesus Christ, who ascended ("higher than the heavens to fill the entire Universe" -Ephesians 4:10), so that the Holy Spirit empowering Him could descend upon us, in full measure as it was upon Him ("what I have done you shall do and more"). Now the Renewal of Creation is continued through His followers, those who believe in His name. All things are being restored, by Him through us.. even now the process is at hand, one day to be fulfilled in fullness throughout every corner of creation
32:45 is the most British thing I have ever seen. Tom Wright beautifully and poetically describes the human uniting of heaven and earth by living like Christ, and then as if what he said wasn’t the most life giving idea ever, calmly moves to his next point with “anyway”... haha. Keep calm and carry on, indeed.
Gray Yates Christians living like Christ is not the uniting of heaven and earth, Jesus is. We prove ourselves His disciples when we love one another as He loves us but Jesus alone is Jacob’s ladder, Jesus alone is Bethel. Do I guess you can say that when we follow in Jesus’ foot steps as born again followers we are representing the uniting of Heaven and earth which has been established in Jesus who is God who became man, fully God and fully man to save us and unite us with God.
The answer to the question about the corpses that came to life at the end of Matthew is that yes they were raised but they most likely died again and are waiting the Resurrection. Like Lazarus they were brought back from the dead, like Tabitha but not resurrected with a body like that of Jesus, one which is eternal and sinless.
@@fleetwd1 I've listened to it 4 times since I commented and shared it with a dear friend. It has been profoundly helpful and uplifting. (I can hardly listen to most things once)
@@faultycracker7805 they say, repetition is the mother of wisdom. I have learned a great deal from the videos which require watching several times through the process. I also re-watch some to be accurate in my replies. I am blessed with such good material to offer. Thank you for sharing with friends.
Great talk as usual from Wright. I love the questions at the end as well. And gotta love Mark Lanier. He still reminds me of Chael Sonnen 2.0 with his wit and humor.
The guy asking the questions borders on rude in the guise of being funny -- Wright is so gracious in his response to the weird way in which questions were posed.
Can you help me understand this over lap better? Why did have to and what did HE actually do???! I know the Christian pat answers. But what did HE actually finish by HIS death, burial, & RESURRECTION do?? Scriptures please.
Thank you NT Wright for your passion, knowledge and explanation being surely given by the Holy Spirit... Please get a more mature host for future presentations.
My reaction to the host's demeanor changed the second time listening to the Q&A. My now revised opinion is that he's a chap who knows his audience well -- and the questions he put to the good bishop were exactly the ones I wanted him to. But yeah, it was a bit shocking and off-putting the first time.
Could the bodies coming out of the graves possibly correlate between His ministering to the souls after His sacrifice before His ascension to the right hand of the Father? It was the first thing that came to my mind. Any feedback would be welcome. God bless in Jesus name!
his initials. the T is for Tom which he goes by among friends. Nicholas Thomas Wright FRSE (born 1 December 1948), known as N. T. Wright or Tom Wright,
‘Seventy weeks are determined For your people and for your holy city, To finish the transgression, To make an end of sins, To make reconciliation for iniquity, To bring in everlasting righteousness, To seal up vision and prophecy, And to anoint the Most Holy.’ Daniel 9:24 Gabriel predicted the day the Most Holy will return a second time for the salvation of Israel. (Luke 1:35, Dan. 9:24) Before the Lord can bring in everlasting righteousness, Israel must suffer 490 years (70 weeks) of Gentile persecution. Sixty-nine weeks were fulfilled when Jesus died on the cross. (Dan. 9:25-26) There is still a seven-year week left before the Holy One returns to complete the mystery of God. (Heb. 9:28, Rev. 10:1-7)
Listening to the many cynical dissenting comments I realize that most people listening are on a different paradigm, to understand the paradigm that informs Wright's approach to preaching and teaching go listen to his 2018 Gifford lectures they are online. You may still end up not agreeing with him but you will grasp the premise of his thinking.
For your interest I was drawn to him by the many of my reformed preachers always dumbing on him the pinacle was James White and John macarthur calling him a heretic so I went sicking and it was like waking up from a long sleep. What irritates about these men who I admire and respect as Ive gained a lot from their ministries was that none respond to his biblical arguments except with insults and condescending dismissal, typical reform calvinistic attitude towards anyone who challenges their esteemed positions.
@@fleetwd1 Probably due to Matthew 22:30 - "For when the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage." Almost certainly spurious. Conflicts & contradicts Genesis 2:18 - "The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone." If millions/billions are resurrected, planet earth would become a global singles-club, with TWO classes of people.
@@fontybits Ridiculous. The vocation of marriage is to orient man, male and female, toward his final end, which is God, by the complete gift of himself to another. Marriage is an image of the intensity and exclusivity of one's relationship with God in the Body of Christ; as such, it has a real but provisional meaning that will take on its fulness in the eschaton. Your objection reflects an overly-immanentized view of the Resurrection.
@@fontybits You literally looked at the New Testament text which clearly addresses and repudiates the notion that we will be married in the eschaton, and said it was spurious. "Bible-based" indeed. Insult me all you want, it doesn't change the truth.
Jesus in Matthew 10 would not and is not telling us to fear satan. He wants us to fear God so that we will seek Him for the fear of God is the beginning of all knowledge and wisdom. Fear of God leads to salvation from fear. For there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus ; fear has to do with punishment.
yes this answer really took the moderator Mark Lanier by surprise. they were in discussions long after. i have since researched all of my Greek scholar resources and not one agrees with Wright on this. So I certainly would not agree with him either. it seems clear God is the one to fear because he is the only one who can destroy both body and soul in the Lake of Fire, the second death.
I'd like Tom to comment on John 20:1. It does not say "on the first day of the week". It says, "mia ton sabbaton" -- on one of the sabbath. This should really mean the first sabbath during the Passover week which would be the "one" of the seven sabbath until the Feast of Weeks/Pentecost. The word "day" does not appear. There is a Greek word for "first" but it is not used, mia--"one" is used. "Sabbaton" is translated as "week". There is also a Greek word for "week" but it is not used. Much more work needs to be done on this sticky problem. Problem, it may be that Jesus (Yeshua) actually arose at the end of the sabbath--which would make sense given that he went into the tomb right before the other Sabbath. Jesus didn't necessarily arise right before the women got there.
John and Luke use the same exact wording. Mark and Matthew both use Mia and Sabbaton the first of the week is in each translation. if it were only John using the expression one might be led to think him to be referring to the first day of the 50 to count because John more than any other records the feasts throughout Christ's ministry. but all use these same words to describe the first day of the seven (week) So i doubt there is much to it. it must have been a way they referred to the first day of the week since they all used Sabbaton for week. and yes Jesus may have awakened from the tomb after sunset Sabbath while it was yet dark. I am sure Mary left as soon as she could to finish dressing the body which she had begun to do on Friday but was interrupted by the need to return home for Sabbath. But she would not have left till after sunset. if she traveled from Bethany it would take some time to walk. She arrived it was still dark.
I have been searching out this Phrase using Sabbaton for week and coming up empty till just now. Strong's has Sabbaton used for week 9 times. There are 1 in Matt. 2 in Mark 1 in Luke and 2 in John that pertain to after the Resurrection but that leaves 3 more 1 in Luke 18:12 I fast twice a week (sabbaton) 1 in Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week (sabbaton), when and 1 in 1 Cor 16:2 Upon the first day of the week (sabbaton) so every one of the 9 uses of Sabbaton for week suggest it was the way the first day of the week was referred to. I do not know of any other text that uses the other Greek word for week in the NT. so it was perhaps the only way they referred to a week. Your Question certainly raised question marks but it seems Strong's helped show that it was a commonly used expression for a week since all nine times the NT refers to the first day of the week it uses these words exclusively now first on the other hand is used mainly by two other Greek words many many times except in the 8 that couple with Sabbaton the one Luke passage about fasting does not have the word first in it but all the others referring to the first day of the week including Acts and 1 Cor use the same greek word for first and it is only used in those 8 places. so it is exclusive to only those texts.
fleetwd1 I there are 7 sabbaths counted to Shavuot/ Pentecost. Every time you see the translation, “first day of the week” it should be translated first of the sabbaths in reference to the first of 7 counted Sabbaths. This is the proper interpretation. Also as much as I appreciated this message and NT Write, it killed me to hear him say Easter a number of times. Biblically there is no such thing as Easter! That firs of sabbaths was the feast of first fruits that Yahoshua fulfilled. This smart man talks about interpretation according to Jewish 1st century mindset, and then commits that error. That baffles my mind. Also the fact that the term “Easter” comes from the goddess Ishtar and pagan worship and practices! This “holiday” is part of the syncretism of the Roman Catholic Church. We are called as a people to “be separate says YHWH of hosts”................
John Bottone, i totally understand what you’re saying but the term Easter has been used for centuries and as with Christmas, it is a matter of Who and what you celebrate, to me, at least. Yeshua was born September/October at the latest but try changing the date. ( and if His birth is what people celebrate, I say let them ) The tree and other aspects of Xmas have nothing to do with Christianity but again, no harm done if they are really celebrating the birth of the Savior. Let us not quibble about little things. Shalom..
Michael Brickley I 1000 percent disagree with you! The Father has set times and laws that we are prescribed to follow. Firstly because these things are what are done in the heavenly sanctuary, the actual temple in the heavens. Yeshua said “thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven”. Why did he say that? Because like God told Moses, make everything according to the pattern. We are to mirror on earth what is done in the heavens. What the angels do in the actual throne room defines what worship is and if we do things outside that pattern according to those specific times and seasons we are NOT worshiping the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Maybe you are ignorant of these facts but it still remains facts weather you agree or not!
While agreeing that resurrection has been the most misunderstood concept in the Scriptures, it seems that progress in research on it has been hampered by our pressure to conform with the church creeds which asserted that resurrection must be the bodily raising of the righteous dead from their graves to immortality at the parousia of Jesus for His Kingdom on earth. This assertion basically says that the terms heaven and earth were taken to mean the physical space-time of the original (“sinful”) planet earth and the universe which was then “renovated” to become “sinless”. Do the Scriptures say so or are we reading into the texts? If you read 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 8 as the authoritative texts on resurrection without any preconceived ideas from the church creeds, you will understand that resurrection is actually the indwelling of the life-giving Spirit of Christ in the righteous people of God so that they become new creation in the Kingdom of God (Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem, Hebrews 12:22-28) in the spiritual realm. As new creation of God, the resurrected people of God (sons of God) become a spiritual body, the body of Christ, being born again in the image of Christ Jesus, who is the life-giving Spirit (the last Adam) from heaven. Therefore the parousia of Jesus must necessarily be his coming as God , who is Spirit, so that he can impute righteousness to his elect by his indwelling in them. This is redemption and salvation for the resurrected people of God, who can then freely come to God’s presence in the Holy of holies in the Kingdom of God. Thus immortality is achieved through our righteous standing before God, made possible by the Spirit of Christ in us, which makes us sinless. It is not due to the renovation of our biological body or the planet earth itself that we become sinless. This understanding of resurrection would also explain the eschatological texts in the Scriptures perfectly. For example, the time statements concerning the imminent parousia of Jesus in the first century in the New Testament were fully fulfilled and explained by the occurring of the end of the old covenant age in 70CE when the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple were historically verified.
while there is some truth in what you say. Paul sill talks about the day of the Lord where this mortal shall put on immortality. so while there is a sense of our participation in the age to come now in the present there still is a "not yet" to the current "yet." often truth is expressed in paradox and you are tapping into a neglected side but it takes both sides to be wholy true.
Indeed at the time when the Pauline epistles were written (50-60CE), the eschatological events leading to the coming of the Kingdom of God could be described as “already but not yet” , already because the promise of the Holy Spirit was fulfilled at the Pentecost of Acts 2 and not yet because the parousia of Jesus (if taken as 70CE) was still pending. According to 2Corinthians 5:5, Ephesians 1:13-14, etc., the outpouring of the Holy Spirit to the believers was a deposit or guarantee for the inheritance of the Kingdom when Jesus was revealed at his parousia, namely the redemption and salvation through resurrection which would come. Therefore if you take the parousia of Jesus as 70CE according to the time statement about the Day of the Lord at the end of the old covenant age in the Scriptures, then we have gone past this time frame and all of us who are in Christ today are new creation as sons of God who inherit the heavenly Jerusalem as our heavenly dwelling so that we are already clothed with immortality. Sure we still fall sick and die (physically) eventually but spiritually we are immortal. We are Holy and blameless (sinless) in the sight of God because Christ dwells in us so that we live according to the Spirit and not the flesh. Sure we see evils in this world but we do not live according to the world. As recipients of the new covenant of Jesus, we are in the new heaven and new earth. Not everyone on planet earth is in the new heaven and new earth of course, even though we share the same physical space-time in this universe, only those who are in Christ. If you choose to believe that the parousia of Jesus is yet to come, you are still living in the “already but not yet” era namely, the old covenant age has not ended and your redemption and salvation are still pending, because the atonement for sins have not been completed and hence death has not been conquered. You only can hold on to the hope of salvation to come.
@@soonhietan3319 the old covenant, made by fire with Abraham, as God passed between the slain animals is not ended but restored in the coming of the messiah. Being that the Lord alone preformed the ritual as abraham whatched, only He can end that covenant and it was to be an everlasting one. Hence "atonement", which signals the repairing of a covenant not creation of a new one. Anyway...... we are most assuredly to have a physical resurrection, for God made the earth to be inhabited, and not made to be void. As Job said(19).... I know that my redeemer lives, and that in the end he will STAND on the EARTH. 26 And AFTER my skin has been destroyed, YET IN MY FLESH I will see God; 27 I myself will see him with my own eyes-I, and not another........ As for being immortal, I do not think it will be our new condition or our new nature but rather through our permitted access to the tree of life, waters of life, yay God himself we will live..... Shalom Soon Hie Tan. Long days and pleasant nights!
@@mikewagner1614 I know that the early creeds are agreeing on a future bodily resurrection. But I get confused on this issue when I read Paul's words to the Corinthians, which seem to contradict the bodily resurrection: "So we are always confident, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord... We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord... Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption... But someone will say, “How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come? Foolish one, what you sow is not made alive unless it dies. what you sow, you do not sow that body that shall be, but mere grain... There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another... It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body." Of course people like N.T. Wright solve this problem by referring to the intermediate state of the soul after death and before the bodily resurrection. But Paul is not talking about this indermediate state, but about the resurrection. And he seemed to believe that at death he will indeed be with the Lord in a spirit body. Another point which Soon Hie Tan also made, is that contrary to what Wright says, Paul says that the new creation (New Jerusalem, new heaven and earth) is already a reality now. "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new." Paul doesn't say anything about a new creation in the future, when we shall receive a new physical body.
I am not sure if I follow Dr. Wrigth as a hole or undesrstood him right. if we compare christian cosmology and anthropology, we understand that first creation must vanish. There is contiunity but not similarity or sameness, rigth?
Paul states that we cannot know the type of bodies (tent) we might have in the resurrection so from that it might be reasonable to conclude the whole of the New Creation would be unlike anything we presently know. However we are told we have a down payment of the life to come in the portion of the Spirit given us in the present. So it is a yet not yet idea.. i think Tom would like us to realize our responsibility as part of the new creation to care for the present creation more responsibly even though it has yet to undergo it's complete transformation. The earth made new is our destination not going elsewhere as is commonly thought. I am not Tom but that is my take on what he might say with regard to this complex question..
I watched the Q&A from about 1:04 to the end again and am not sure where you felt like Mark was mocking Tom. I can assure you that each have a great deal of respect for the other. they sometimes will banter with the other but each like that. so there is a give and take between them.
@@fleetwd1 From the looks (his body language), yes sir that's how I feel too, the same as Endless Song. In addition to that, his conversation also shows he tries to level up his knowledge with the Speaker. Instead of asking from the notes in his hand. He starts to go on with his own questions. By spirit, I don't know, Mark knows deep inside of him well & better than anyone else. His body language shows exactly that and maybe he never meant to be. If he stands straight while speaking, it would be much polite and acceptable. Please forgive me if my comment offends you or it causes any disturbing feelings. God Bless.
@@singkhaooudom8317 no offense taken. this is not the only Video i have of them interacting. Mark is a top trial lawyer even though he has degrees in Biblical languages also. His manorisms may not appeal to everyone but in these Library events the scholars including Wright have a great deal of respect for his thought process and biblical understanding but he comes across as a bumbling hick from Lubbach TX to many. To balance this video I suggest seeing this breif exchange which happened previous to this Q&A it shows the great repect they each have for each other, and while they might come at things differently it is more complimentry. NT Wright incorporated the difference between Ezekiel and Zachariah which both have similar imagery in a talk he had within a few Months of this exchange NT Wright is returning later this year for his 3rd visit and he has said how he expected a lot from all the positive talk his coleagues had told him about these Larnier Library events but the actual experience was beyond his expectations. ua-cam.com/video/ZXdtohAsm_0/v-deo.html
@@fleetwd1 Please forgive me for my short-sighted comments and personal emotion coming into play. I should concentrate like others on the important biblical subjects. Professor NT Wright said it so right about seeing the big picture/the whole picture. I should start my journey here on. It's been a great learning experience. Thank you for sharing these valuable gatherings. God Bless.
@@singkhaooudom8317 it truly is a blessing to me to be able to share these. no problem. i attend most of these and this Q&A ended on a note that seemed contentious betweenn Mark and Tom. so I do understand how some might get the wrong impression from it. However they really appreciate oneanother. i think that comes through better in the interview video.
I note with some consternation the Bio info: "On the other hand, he has criticized the idea of a literal rapture". I hardly see this as a mitigation of his contribution. The 'rapture' is a modern innovation largely encouraged by that other modern innovation 'dispensationalism', a largely US obsession and unknown before it was invented in the mid 1800s. Perhaps you should have written "Happily he has also criticized the idea of a literal 'rapture' ".
There is a lot of scriptural insight here..but I think his applications are way off from scripture. For example he talks of church opening hospitals rather than praying for healing and deliverance. I m not saying doing "Good works" isn't important, but non Christians cannot do kingdom work..but they can open hospitals. I work for a church social welfare organization but most aren't Christians, I might do kingdom work there but as I bring Jesus in that context. Most of what it does just isn't kingdom advancing...even though some might use the the rhetoric that Wright uses. As Scot McKnight has questioned about Wright's approach...."Did Ghandi do kingdom work?"
Luke 9 verse 60 Jesus - "let the dead bury the dead". There must have been a lot of corpses jumping out of their graves, picking up shovels, and pushing new arrivals into the pits, long before the "Crucifixion".
there are other resurrections that predate Lazarus. The Shulamite woman's son for one. But Firstborn is not necessarily birth order. In the Psalms God says David is his firstborn and David was the last birth of his family. firstborn carries with it favored status. I have heard other explanations like Jesus did not die again the others did but the meaning of firstborn is most significant.
He is the first one to be resurrected in an imperishable body. He is resurrected as imperishable/ immortal. All the others who are resurrected, are resurrected as perishable.. *1 corinth **15:42* So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; *1 corinth **15:53* For the *perishable* must clothe itself with the *imperishable* , and the *mortal* with *immortality* . The following verses say that jesus is the first born from the dead *Colossians 1:15* He is the image of the invisible God, the *firstborn of all creation* . *Colossians 1:18* He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the *firstborn from the dead* *Revelation 1:5* and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, *the firstborn of the dead* , and the ruler of the kings of the earth. This means *christ is the first one to be resurrected as imperishable / immortal from dead* .
@@ujwaldeep while this is a favored argument to make, Firstborn is not linked to birth order but to favored status. And while i do not dispute this argument the one I raised is less put forth but actually stronger. David is called firstborn but was the baby of his siblings. So firstborn has an independent meaning from the natural assumption being made by Ian Hall having to do with the resurrection order. But it is true the resurrection of Christ's was that he never will Die again and all previous resurrections did die afterward..
@@fleetwd1 Here it is both. Jesus is the second/last adam. *1 corinth **15:45* So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; *the last Adam* , a life-giving spirit. From the following verse *Revelation 1:5* and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, *the firstborn of the dead* , and the ruler of the kings of the earth. So, the *last* adam is the *first* one to be bestowed with the blessing of being raised imperishable, with immortality. This is because the first adam is perishable or mortal.
I would like NT to consider moving the comma from “I tell you, today you will be to I tell you today, you will be.” Paradise is a garden motif. The new creation. The criminal on the cross was promise to someday be in the new creation with Jesus. This seems more in line with the resurrection emphasis of the Bible and early Christian writings.
It is clear from John 20:17 NASB Jesus had not Yet ascended to the Father when he tells Mary to stop clinging to him. So this helps clarify where the comma should be placed but punctuation was not put in the Greek
fleetwd1 yes, commas, no spaces, all caps. I think “paradise” reflects the parousia and coming kingdom on earth. John 3:13 has not been argued in support of the pearly gates existence.
@@bradbrown2199 yes there are many other explanations that are plausible. I think those who try saying at death they went to heaven is wrong based on Jesus words to Mary. That whole notion NT Wright seems to wish to correct. I agree. Resurrection happens not individually at death but on the Day of the Lord. If Jesus remained in the tomb till resurrection we will also.
you seem to not understand the New Testament hope is in resurrection not in death itself. there is an intermediate state which many want to bypass but it is very real. And a world made new not going off somewhere. Tom at least gets it.
@@fleetwd1 I get it. I read the New Testament, and Tom Wright . I agree with him in his theology. To be absent from the body, is to be present with the Lord. God himself is the Christians home. That is the point I was trying to make. You are not looking at it from this perspective.
I had never heard this until this evening NT Wright brought it up. i checked every scholarly resource I have and none to that position it has always been God as who Jesus is referring to in every reference i could find. Scripture never gives Satan final say on destiny..
Just my thought tonight...IF...if all these influential men of "God" loved God, His Word, and people...they would get in one room and work out all divisions...because they cannot all be correct...and if this is true, oh fearful it will be to stand before God and deceive the flock...that alone should drive them to seek resolution! How can you say you love God and yet are not willing to give up traditions in order to minister the gospel to the lost! Evangelicals need to repent first before asking the world to repent...if NT is saying anything true here, there needs a radical re-correction!
unanimity on all things was never a requirement. Jesus was baptized when he did not require it "in order to fulfill all righteousness" He is the Lord our righteousness. In him we are made complete no matter what we lack. His disciples lacked much yet they succeeded by focusing on him rather than self. "We love because he first loved us." not because we all resolved every issue. the Gospel reveals the righteousness of God which we have by faith. It is his accomplishments rather than our complete understanding of them. for we all see through darkened glass. we will only see clearly when he returns and this mortal shall put on immortality.
You know, no matter how well prepared and presented a speech may be, it says nothing about the credibility thereof.Accordingly, in a limited response to Dr. Wright's eloquently delivered presentation I submit the following.All my life, I have heard that God can be taken at his word. Really? Then, let's take Him at his word.Numbers 23:19 states the case that God is not a man that He should lie. It this true? Now if Numbers 23:19 is true then it follows that Genesis 3:19 is also true. In the latter verse, God (judging) told Adam: "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return to the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Now, if Numbers 23:19 is true then this should be the end of the story. Note that God told Adam nothing about another future judgment, heaven, hell, damnation or eternal life. He told Adam nothing about a resurrection, saving grace or faith. And, He told Adam nothing about a Satan. Now, if all the stuff that follow Numbers 23:19 are true, then that would mean that God is an intentional deceptive liar in that He failed to tell Adam the most important parts of the story, namely another future judgment, Satan, damnation and hell. You know if you violate a law that calls for a $100.00 fine, when you go before the judge, you are certain that the fine, though it could be less, will be $100.00 and not $1000.00. Yet, a total reading of the Bible suggests that that is just what God did to Adam, in effect. In effect, Adam became the first known victim of "bait and switch" and whimsical and capricious laws.My point is this. If Numbers 23:19 and Genesis 3:19 are true, then Dr. N.T. Wright's presentation, though well prepared and presented, is little more than kissing the wind. That is, it's not going to do anything for you.
Greetings friend. Surely God can not lie, the word goes from his mouth and will not return empty, it will accomplish what he desires..... I do not see the "lie" you are trying to highlight. In eating of the fruit Adam transgressed and is subject to death as he was told. And remember 1tim2:14 "Adam was not deceived" yay he knowingly transgressed....
Mike, I don't know what God can and cannot do. Numbers 23:19 states that God is not a man that he should lie. It does not say that He can't. Similarly, when and if I say I don't eat snake meat, I am not saying that I can't. Furthermore, I frankly can't buy into the concept of a maker creating an activity, good or bad, that he, the maker, can't perform even if he doesn't. That is not a practical or logical proposition, in my view.
@@ernestmonroe2240 , greetings friend.... I see what you are saying, I think... surely God could "lie" and say the sky is green though he made it to appear blue and wishes it to stay that way. But at the same time he could make it happen and truly make the sky appear green if it pleases him. I think it is more that he can not be called a liar as far as his promises regarding creation. For if it is promised it will come to pass though maybe not in the time frame or manner we might expect. For; is anything too hard for the Lord? Once we the reader get our heads around genesis 1:1 its apparent the creator has power to do all things, so you are right, I was foolish to say he can not lie though why he would want or need to is beyond me. It is unrighteous and there is no darkness in him. Peace friend.
Numbers 23:19 Is basically Balaam, some weird witch doctor, acknowledging that the one true God of Israel cannot lie and keeps His promises. So he is not able to make God break his covenant with Israel. Genesis 3:19 is a great example of this. Back in Genesis 2:17 God says to Adam, “don’t eat the fruit of this tree or you will surely die.” At this point human beings would live physically forever. Fair warning. Genesis 3:19 God is saying “guess what Adam, you ate the fruit, I don’t lie, I keep my promises, you are now mortal and you’re going to die.” That’s it for Adam, God didn’t lie, God kept his promise, no further explanation required. The rest of the Bible is God revealing how Adam’s fate need not be the rest of human kinds fate. For those that believe and trust in God’s promises, ie the faithful, he has a plan. That plan has been the same plan as before creation. Trust Him and obey, ie have faith that God keeps His promises and you will dwell with Him for eternity. Now God’s great promise is that from all the nations, those that trust and believe that through The Christ’s death and resurrection, you now have forgiveness for your doubt and rebellion, and you now have a place in His new Creation, to dwell with Him for eternity in peace. That’s no lie.
Dr. Wright is obviously well versed and well spoken; however, the truth takes a severe beating from him. The prophecies destroyed the veracity of Jesus and the New Testament some 700 years before they were created and written respectively.Isaiah 55:8-9 "My ways are higher than yours." Remark: In this verse, God is saying that He morally superior to man. As such, we should not expect him to be capricious, whimiscal, deceitful, etc., as is man. Consequently, the below verses should be held to be solid and dependable.Isaiah 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my (glory) will I not give to another.John 12:23 King James Version (KJV) 23 And Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be (glorified). Remark: If Jesus was correct, then God is a liar. Matthew 28:18 “And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” Remark: So, what happened to God? Did Jesus pull a coup and replaced Him? Isaiah 45:6 "So that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting people may know there is none besides me. I am the Lord, and there is no other." No wife, no uncle and no son (no Jesus).Remark: Did God lie? If, on answering my door, I proclaim to the FBI Agent that there is "none besides me", but I have a son there with me, then I have lied. And, I am going to jail. Jeremiah 16:19 "O Lord, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, (the Gentiles) shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit." Remark: Why aren't the gentiles going to their Popes and Bishops? And, if Jesus/Christianity is true, why aren't Jews running to gentiles seeking Jesus in that day? Zechariah 8:22-23 King James Version (KJV) " Yea, many people and strong nations shall come to seek the Lord of hosts in Jerusalem, and to pray before the Lord." " Thus saith the Lord of hosts; In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you." Remarks: Where are the Popes and Bishops? Is it that they are totally wrong and misled? So, today, who is it that's truly blind? According to these prophecies, the gentiles are the blind ones. If the truth matters, then let it be told.
Greetings friend..... Jn14 Jesus replied, "Have I been with you all this time, Philip(/Ernest monroe) and yet you still don't know who I am? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father! So why are you asking me to show him to you?"...... if you have ears to hear please hear. Peace friend
I repeat: In Number 23:19 God declared to the world and all creation that: "I am not a man". There have been over a hundred people, who came along and made claims similar to those made by Jesus. Notwithstanding, mentally bent on their determination to create a religion to replace Judaism, mostly Europeans, in 325 CE, at the Nicaean Council, voted in the majority to call God and liar and his declaration a lie. From my studies to date, they debated and then made their vote without having ever discussed Numbers 23:19. So, the net effect of their votes was to replace God with a man.
@@ernestmonroe2240 greetings friend.... per adventure what of the prophesy of Isaiah 40:3 and the cry of John the baptist in John 1:23? ........ Isaiah, 40:3 - The voice of one who calls out, "Prepare the way of Yahweh in the wilderness! Make a level highway in the desert for our GOD."..... or of Malachi, 3:1 - "Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before ME; and the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to HIS temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, behold, he comes!".... Are we to assume these prophecies were carried out by someone other than Yahweh?????? Does the temple belong to another??? Peace friend.
I stop reading your post when you measure The Ultimate Goodness merely as Super-man. You have not know the true living God. "If you see Me, you have seen the Father" says the Son. Know the Lord and you'll have correct or true theology. May the Holy Spirit be with you and in you.
What rubbish St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15 verse 32 "what advantage is there to me, if the dead rise not? “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die!”.So, according to St. Paul, this life is worthless unless there is an Afterlife. It's a good job Bishop Wright's ancestors, the cavemen, did not share St. Paul's attitude. Over to you, Bishop.
"It's striking in fact that the New Testament isn't terribly interested in what happens to people immediately after they die." Matthew 9:24 - He said, “Go away. The girl is not dead but asleep.” John 11:11- “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.” Acts 7:60 - “When he had said this, he fell asleep.” Acts 13:36 - “Now when David had served God’s purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep.” 1 Corinthians 15:6 - “most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.” 1 Corinthians 15:20 - “But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.” 1 Corinthians 15:51 - “Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed.” 1 Thessalonians 4:13 - “Brothers and sisters, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you do not grieve like the rest of mankind, who have no hope. 1 Thessalonians 4:14 - “and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him.” 1 Thessalonians 4:15 - “will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.” 1 Thessalonians 5:10 - “He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him.” All of the above Scriptures show that 1st century Christians knew that those who had died were UNCONCIOUS - not conscious of ANYTHING, like someone who has been deeply anaesthetised and is unable to move, communicate, reason, or even worship! Ecclesiastes 9:5,10 - “For the living know that they will die, but the dead know NOTHING; in the realm of the dead, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.” The dead will be awakened and resurrected by Christ - in the LAST day.
You conveniently omit those passages that clearly refer to the souls of deceased Christians as being quite conscious and aware of what they are doing, as in Revelation 6, among other places in the New Testament, and 2 Maccabees 15, which, although pre-Christian, was nevertheless accepted by the early Church.
@@joshuaorsi4771 The majority of Revelation is SYMBOLIC, so to verify/repudiate something, we refer to the rest of the Bible. Since Ezekiel 18:4 disproves an "immortal" soul, and Eclesiastes 9:5,10 emphatically states that dead people are totally unaware of EVERYTHING, it's comforting to know that when you're dead, you're DEAD - until resurrection! But, each to his own beliefs.
@@fontybits No, not to each his own. Truth, period. So here are the facts: "Revelation is symbolic, so I don't have to deal with it." Uh, nope. 'When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne; they cried out with a loud voice, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before thou wilt judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell upon the earth?” Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.' So St. John, in your view, created a symbolic universe in which the souls of the martyrs are clearly in the presence of God, waiting for the eschaton, only then to make another symbolic point? *Maybe* I could accept that, if it actually contradicted the *symbolic* biblical language about sleep, which is by no means in tension with the plain meaning of St. John. "Ezekiel 18:4 'disproves' the idea of an immortal soul." "The soul that sins shall die." 1) This has nothing to do with the concept of "soul sleep." To reiterate, the question of the immortality and the concept of soul sleep have nothing to do with each other. 2) Of course, the notion by which you *choose* to interpret Ezekiel would have been alien to Our Lord and his Apostles, as the inspired authors have no problem affirming that souls can "die" and yet remain eternally conscious, e.g., Revelation 20:10, 14. "Ecclesiastes says that the dead know nothing." Yes, Ecclesiastes does, because that was how the ancients thought of the netherworld. Read Homer, or look up some Babylonian mythology, or, better yet, read 1 Samuel 28. Common trope of the afterlife, doesn't imply soul sleep. Also, and this should go without saying, this reflects a pre-Christian understanding of death (and not even all pre-Christians held this; cf. my reference to 2 Maccabees).
Yea Paul you should explain. However I agree. 2 Thessalonians 2 talks about false prophets who say the resurrection already happened. Similarity NT Wright says apocalyptic literature is nonsense. He’s so wrong. Apocalyptic literature in the bible is the revealing of Christ and is of utmost importance. It contradicts nt wright’s views
How is it that thousands of years ago, people knew what happens after death, yet, today, we don’t know except for what they said happens? Also interesting how the religious change their beliefs capriciously, like the belief in purgatory or infant baptism. It’s all man-made rubbish.
This is N.T. Wright at his best. I have followed him for so many years and my life has been transformed by his unveiling of the Bible's full message. Thank you, Rev. Dr. Wright. You will go down in the history of the Church (hopefully world, too) as a revolutionary figure.
Amen.
"heaven and earth are designed to overlap and interlock. they work together. they were always meant to." Beautiful Truth. Thank you Dr. Wright.
Thank you Professor NT Wright ~ for your refreshing teaching on "The Resurrection" of Jesus !!
▪︎Hallelujah !! 🙏🙏🙏
Bravos! brother Wright. Well said all the way through. Thank you for being so insightful and sharing the richness of Christ with us. My understanding of the Gospel has been enlarged and deepened. Big thank you!
Riveting!! So comforting too.
What a joy to listen to and to think of the nearness of Heaven. Will go back to this many times.
Could this be the best line: "that is not the defeat of death, that is merely the description of death". So good.
not sure of your reference?
@@fleetwd1 43:10
@@aaronschmidt8631 thx
"I'd like to thank my co-sponsor, Baylor's Truett Seminary. Pastors and scholars, educators and mentors, students and ministers; and the official seminary of my new creation unto ages of ages, amen."
-- God
I really appreciate this lecture. Not that I understand it that we'll. But it is a joy to see Mr Wright dig so deeply and we'll into scripture and consistently and almost scientifically identify good theology. It's a light for me. Personally I rest in hope that this vision is accurate. Mt calling resides day to day in the two primary commandments and living in hope. It is enough to sense the the truth that our love in unity with God's love is in fact it's salvation. The Spirit is my daily help. All easy to say but much more difficult to do. Thanks for this message which ties so much together.
Merritt Cluff, NT Wright is a deep thinker and needs to be listened to more than once. No one gets it all right but as one reviewer said, “there is way more wheat than chaff”.
I really love Dr. Wright. I totally agree about the resurrection. My Church, the Coptic Orthodox Church, celebrates 50 days of resurrection and we use joyful tunes, resurrection hymns even during funerals. In the Coptic Church we consider resurrection THE greatest feast even in the early Church they did not even celebrate Christmas.
Thank you. Yes, I totally agree and I love your Archbishop Angaelos. What wonderful sermons and spot on about the resurrection and the lives we can expect on a restored earth with the Lord Jesus. Bless you.
Signs & agents of God’s new creation-yes!
"I think the safe place to go, if there is a safe place to go with that, is to say, we are part of a larger continuum than that of which we are normally aware." 1:16:00 That's a great quote.
So so so good. Exhortation! Encouraging.
The renewal of Creation has begun in Jesus Christ, who ascended ("higher than the heavens to fill the entire Universe" -Ephesians 4:10), so that the Holy Spirit empowering Him could descend upon us, in full measure as it was upon Him ("what I have done you shall do and more"). Now the Renewal of Creation is continued through His followers, those who believe in His name. All things are being restored, by Him through us.. even now the process is at hand, one day to be fulfilled in fullness throughout every corner of creation
32:45 is the most British thing I have ever seen. Tom Wright beautifully and poetically describes the human uniting of heaven and earth by living like Christ, and then as if what he said wasn’t the most life giving idea ever, calmly moves to his next point with “anyway”... haha. Keep calm and carry on, indeed.
Gray Yates Christians living like Christ is not the uniting of heaven and earth, Jesus is. We prove ourselves His disciples when we love one another as He loves us but Jesus alone is Jacob’s ladder, Jesus alone is Bethel. Do I guess you can say that when we follow in Jesus’ foot steps as born again followers we are representing the uniting of Heaven and earth which has been established in Jesus who is God who became man, fully God and fully man to save us and unite us with God.
anthony jones thank you for your correction. I’ll go repent for not reaching your understanding
The answer to the question about the corpses that came to life at the end of Matthew is that yes they were raised but they most likely died again and are waiting the Resurrection. Like Lazarus they were brought back from the dead, like Tabitha but not resurrected with a body like that of Jesus, one which is eternal and sinless.
Thank you. This was incredibly helpful for me.
my pleasure really
@@fleetwd1 I've listened to it 4 times since I commented and shared it with a dear friend. It has been profoundly helpful and uplifting. (I can hardly listen to most things once)
@@faultycracker7805 they say, repetition is the mother of wisdom.
I have learned a great deal from the videos which require watching several times through the process. I also re-watch some to be accurate in my replies. I am blessed with such good material to offer.
Thank you for sharing with friends.
The Christ IN YOU the hope of glory. Amen
Great talk as usual from Wright. I love the questions at the end as well. And gotta love Mark Lanier. He still reminds me of Chael Sonnen 2.0 with his wit and humor.
It ain’t often u find someone searching these matters out that’s also a fan of Uncle Chael lol
@@K1NG_D0ME Haha. I thought I might be the only one who got that. Glad to see I’m in good company! Lol. #BadGuyInc.
The guy asking the questions borders on rude in the guise of being funny -- Wright is so gracious in his response to the weird way in which questions were posed.
Bravo bravo bravo 👏👏👏
i love this guy!
Let me just say that the embodiment of the over lapping of heaven and earth, of God and creation is Jesus Christ the Son of the Living God.
Amen X infinity! God bless!
Can you help me understand this over lap better? Why did have to and what did HE actually do???!
I know the Christian pat answers.
But what did HE actually finish by HIS death, burial, & RESURRECTION do??
Scriptures please.
Can I translate this video to my language and post in my UA-cam Chanel?
Yes!
@@mikewagner1614 May I have your email address? mine is infomahubiritv@gmail.com
Thank you NT Wright for your passion, knowledge and explanation being surely given by the Holy Spirit...
Please get a more mature host for future presentations.
Thank you for your compliments to Tom. Tom appreciates the host and the events orchestrated by him.
My reaction to the host's demeanor changed the second time listening to the Q&A. My now revised opinion is that he's a chap who knows his audience well -- and the questions he put to the good bishop were exactly the ones I wanted him to. But yeah, it was a bit shocking and off-putting the first time.
@@joachim847 yes Mark is not everyone's cup of tea. But as you get to know him there are rewards. Tom really appreciates Mark.
Could the bodies coming out of the graves possibly correlate between His ministering to the souls after His sacrifice before His ascension to the right hand of the Father? It was the first thing that came to my mind. Any feedback would be welcome. God bless in Jesus name!
His message is for safe Christians with today’s worldly ideas of morality
Hi. Whst does N T mean please in his name? I love this man
his initials. the T is for Tom which he goes by among friends.
Nicholas Thomas Wright FRSE (born 1 December 1948), known as N. T. Wright or Tom Wright,
There were so many passing comments that would be fantastic to flesh out in detail. It behold take a lifetime or more to do that. Hummmm
‘Seventy weeks are determined For your people and for your holy city, To finish the transgression, To make an end of sins, To make reconciliation for iniquity, To bring in everlasting righteousness, To seal up vision and prophecy, And to anoint the Most Holy.’ Daniel 9:24
Gabriel predicted the day the Most Holy will return a second time for the salvation of Israel. (Luke 1:35, Dan. 9:24) Before the Lord can bring in everlasting righteousness, Israel must suffer 490 years (70 weeks) of Gentile persecution. Sixty-nine weeks were fulfilled when Jesus died on the cross. (Dan. 9:25-26) There is still a seven-year week left before the Holy One returns to complete the mystery of God. (Heb. 9:28, Rev. 10:1-7)
NT Wright’s message is for affluent westerners who have both feet in the world
Missed sorry
Listening to the many cynical dissenting comments I realize that most people listening are on a different paradigm, to understand the paradigm that informs Wright's approach to preaching and teaching go listen to his 2018 Gifford lectures they are online. You may still end up not agreeing with him but you will grasp the premise of his thinking.
For your interest I was drawn to him by the many of my reformed preachers always dumbing on him the pinacle was James White and John macarthur calling him a heretic so I went sicking and it was like waking up from a long sleep. What irritates about these men who I admire and respect as Ive gained a lot from their ministries was that none respond to his biblical arguments except with insults and condescending dismissal, typical reform calvinistic attitude towards anyone who challenges their esteemed positions.
Will there be marriage in the resurrection?
why do you ask?
@@fleetwd1 Probably due to Matthew 22:30 - "For when the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage."
Almost certainly spurious. Conflicts & contradicts Genesis 2:18 - "The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone."
If millions/billions are resurrected, planet earth would become a global singles-club, with TWO classes of people.
@@fontybits Ridiculous. The vocation of marriage is to orient man, male and female, toward his final end, which is God, by the complete gift of himself to another. Marriage is an image of the intensity and exclusivity of one's relationship with God in the Body of Christ; as such, it has a real but provisional meaning that will take on its fulness in the eschaton. Your objection reflects an overly-immanentized view of the Resurrection.
@@joshuaorsi4771 Your "Bible-based" refutation & reasoning are overwhelming.
Not to mention your self-righteous tone. Tx & bye. Enjoy. 😀
@@fontybits You literally looked at the New Testament text which clearly addresses and repudiates the notion that we will be married in the eschaton, and said it was spurious. "Bible-based" indeed.
Insult me all you want, it doesn't change the truth.
Praise God for N.T. Wright and Walter C. Kaiser Jr.. The two Olive Trees of the 21st century!
Jesus in Matthew 10 would not and is not telling us to fear satan. He wants us to fear God so that we will seek Him for the fear of God is the beginning of all knowledge and wisdom. Fear of God leads to salvation from fear. For there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus ; fear has to do with punishment.
yes this answer really took the moderator Mark Lanier by surprise. they were in discussions long after. i have since researched all of my Greek scholar resources and not one agrees with Wright on this. So I certainly would not agree with him either. it seems clear God is the one to fear because he is the only one who can destroy both body and soul in the Lake of Fire, the second death.
Thanks for beautifully articulating this.
I'd like Tom to comment on John 20:1. It does not say "on the first day of the week". It says, "mia ton sabbaton" -- on one of the sabbath. This should really mean the first sabbath during the Passover week which would be the "one" of the seven sabbath until the Feast of Weeks/Pentecost. The word "day" does not appear. There is a Greek word for "first" but it is not used, mia--"one" is used. "Sabbaton" is translated as "week". There is also a Greek word for "week" but it is not used. Much more work needs to be done on this sticky problem. Problem, it may be that Jesus (Yeshua) actually arose at the end of the sabbath--which would make sense given that he went into the tomb right before the other Sabbath. Jesus didn't necessarily arise right before the women got there.
John and Luke use the same exact wording. Mark and Matthew both use Mia and Sabbaton the first of the week is in each translation. if it were only John using the expression one might be led to think him to be referring to the first day of the 50 to count because John more than any other records the feasts throughout Christ's ministry. but all use these same words to describe the first day of the seven (week) So i doubt there is much to it. it must have been a way they referred to the first day of the week since they all used Sabbaton for week. and yes Jesus may have awakened from the tomb after sunset Sabbath while it was yet dark. I am sure Mary left as soon as she could to finish dressing the body which she had begun to do on Friday but was interrupted by the need to return home for Sabbath. But she would not have left till after sunset. if she traveled from Bethany it would take some time to walk. She arrived it was still dark.
I have been searching out this Phrase using Sabbaton for week and coming up empty till just now. Strong's has Sabbaton used for week 9 times. There are 1 in Matt. 2 in Mark 1 in Luke and 2 in John that pertain to after the Resurrection but that leaves 3 more 1 in Luke 18:12 I fast twice a week (sabbaton) 1 in Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week (sabbaton), when and 1 in 1 Cor 16:2 Upon the first day of the week (sabbaton) so every one of the 9 uses of Sabbaton for week suggest it was the way the first day of the week was referred to. I do not know of any other text that uses the other Greek word for week in the NT. so it was perhaps the only way they referred to a week. Your Question certainly raised question marks but it seems Strong's helped show that it was a commonly used expression for a week since all nine times the NT refers to the first day of the week it uses these words exclusively now first on the other hand is used mainly by two other Greek words many many times except in the 8 that couple with Sabbaton the one Luke passage about fasting does not have the word first in it but all the others referring to the first day of the week including Acts and 1 Cor use the same greek word for first and it is only used in those 8 places. so it is exclusive to only those texts.
fleetwd1 I there are 7 sabbaths counted to Shavuot/ Pentecost. Every time you see the translation, “first day of the week” it should be translated first of the sabbaths in reference to the first of 7 counted Sabbaths. This is the proper interpretation. Also as much as I appreciated this message and NT Write, it killed me to hear him say Easter a number of times. Biblically there is no such thing as Easter! That firs of sabbaths was the feast of first fruits that Yahoshua fulfilled. This smart man talks about interpretation according to Jewish 1st century mindset, and then commits that error. That baffles my mind. Also the fact that the term “Easter” comes from the goddess Ishtar and pagan worship and practices! This “holiday” is part of the syncretism of the Roman Catholic Church. We are called as a people to “be separate says YHWH of hosts”................
John Bottone, i totally understand what you’re saying but the term Easter has been used for centuries and as with Christmas, it is a matter of Who and what you celebrate, to me, at least. Yeshua was born September/October at the latest but try changing the date. ( and if His birth is what people celebrate, I say let them ) The tree and other aspects of Xmas have nothing to do with Christianity but again, no harm done if they are really celebrating the birth of the Savior. Let us not quibble about little things. Shalom..
Michael Brickley I 1000 percent disagree with you! The Father has set times and laws that we are prescribed to follow. Firstly because these things are what are done in the heavenly sanctuary, the actual temple in the heavens. Yeshua said “thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven”. Why did he say that? Because like God told Moses, make everything according to the pattern. We are to mirror on earth what is done in the heavens. What the angels do in the actual throne room defines what worship is and if we do things outside that pattern according to those specific times and seasons we are NOT worshiping the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Maybe you are ignorant of these facts but it still remains facts weather you agree or not!
While agreeing that resurrection has been the most misunderstood concept in the Scriptures, it seems that progress in research on it has been hampered by our pressure to conform with the church creeds which asserted that resurrection must be the bodily raising of the righteous dead from their graves to immortality at the parousia of Jesus for His Kingdom on earth. This assertion basically says that the terms heaven and earth were taken to mean the physical space-time of the original (“sinful”) planet earth and the universe which was then “renovated” to become “sinless”. Do the Scriptures say so or are we reading into the texts?
If you read 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 8 as the authoritative texts on resurrection without any preconceived ideas from the church creeds, you will understand that resurrection is actually the indwelling of the life-giving Spirit of Christ in the righteous people of God so that they become new creation in the Kingdom of God (Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem, Hebrews 12:22-28) in the spiritual realm. As new creation of God, the resurrected people of God (sons of God) become a spiritual body, the body of Christ, being born again in the image of Christ Jesus, who is the life-giving Spirit (the last Adam) from heaven. Therefore the parousia of Jesus must necessarily be his coming as God , who is Spirit, so that he can impute righteousness to his elect by his indwelling in them. This is redemption and salvation for the resurrected people of God, who can then freely come to God’s presence in the Holy of holies in the Kingdom of God. Thus immortality is achieved through our righteous standing before God, made possible by the Spirit of Christ in us, which makes us sinless. It is not due to the renovation of our biological body or the planet earth itself that we become sinless. This understanding of resurrection would also explain the eschatological texts in the Scriptures perfectly. For example, the time statements concerning the imminent parousia of Jesus in the first century in the New Testament were fully fulfilled and explained by the occurring of the end of the old covenant age in 70CE when the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple were historically verified.
while there is some truth in what you say. Paul sill talks about the day of the Lord where this mortal shall put on immortality. so while there is a sense of our participation in the age to come now in the present there still is a "not yet" to the current "yet." often truth is expressed in paradox and you are tapping into a neglected side but it takes both sides to be wholy true.
Indeed at the time when the Pauline epistles were written (50-60CE), the eschatological events leading to the coming of the Kingdom of God could be described as “already but not yet” , already because the promise of the Holy Spirit was fulfilled at the Pentecost of Acts 2 and not yet because the parousia of Jesus (if taken as 70CE) was still pending. According to 2Corinthians 5:5, Ephesians 1:13-14, etc., the outpouring of the Holy Spirit to the believers was a deposit or guarantee for the inheritance of the Kingdom when Jesus was revealed at his parousia, namely the redemption and salvation through resurrection which would come. Therefore if you take the parousia of Jesus as 70CE according to the time statement about the Day of the Lord at the end of the old covenant age in the Scriptures, then we have gone past this time frame and all of us who are in Christ today are new creation as sons of God who inherit the heavenly Jerusalem as our heavenly dwelling so that we are already clothed with immortality. Sure we still fall sick and die (physically) eventually but spiritually we are immortal. We are Holy and blameless (sinless) in the sight of God because Christ dwells in us so that we live according to the Spirit and not the flesh. Sure we see evils in this world but we do not live according to the world. As recipients of the new covenant of Jesus, we are in the new heaven and new earth. Not everyone on planet earth is in the new heaven and new earth of course, even though we share the same physical space-time in this universe, only those who are in Christ.
If you choose to believe that the parousia of Jesus is yet to come, you are still living in the “already but not yet” era namely, the old covenant age has not ended and your redemption and salvation are still pending, because the atonement for sins have not been completed and hence death has not been conquered. You only can hold on to the hope of salvation to come.
You cannot read anything without anything pre conceived
@@soonhietan3319 the old covenant, made by fire with Abraham, as God passed between the slain animals is not ended but restored in the coming of the messiah. Being that the Lord alone preformed the ritual as abraham whatched, only He can end that covenant and it was to be an everlasting one. Hence "atonement", which signals the repairing of a covenant not creation of a new one. Anyway...... we are most assuredly to have a physical resurrection, for God made the earth to be inhabited, and not made to be void. As Job said(19).... I know that my redeemer lives,
and that in the end he will STAND on the EARTH.
26 And AFTER my skin has been destroyed,
YET IN MY FLESH I will see God;
27 I myself will see him
with my own eyes-I, and not another........ As for being immortal, I do not think it will be our new condition or our new nature but rather through our permitted access to the tree of life, waters of life, yay God himself we will live..... Shalom Soon Hie Tan. Long days and pleasant nights!
@@mikewagner1614 I know that the early creeds are agreeing on a future bodily resurrection. But I get confused on this issue when I read Paul's words to the Corinthians, which seem to contradict the bodily resurrection:
"So we are always confident, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord... We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord... Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption... But someone will say, “How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come? Foolish one, what you sow is not made alive unless it dies. what you sow, you do not sow that body that shall be, but mere grain... There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another... It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body."
Of course people like N.T. Wright solve this problem by referring to the intermediate state of the soul after death and before the bodily resurrection. But Paul is not talking about this indermediate state, but about the resurrection. And he seemed to believe that at death he will indeed be with the Lord in a spirit body.
Another point which Soon Hie Tan also made, is that contrary to what Wright says, Paul says that the new creation (New Jerusalem, new heaven and earth) is already a reality now. "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new." Paul doesn't say anything about a new creation in the future, when we shall receive a new physical body.
I am not sure if I follow Dr. Wrigth as a hole or undesrstood him right. if we compare christian cosmology and anthropology, we understand that first creation must vanish. There is contiunity but not similarity or sameness, rigth?
Paul states that we cannot know the type of bodies (tent) we might have in the resurrection so from that it might be reasonable to conclude the whole of the New Creation would be unlike anything we presently know. However we are told we have a down payment of the life to come in the portion of the Spirit given us in the present. So it is a yet not yet idea.. i think Tom would like us to realize our responsibility as part of the new creation to care for the present creation more responsibly even though it has yet to undergo it's complete transformation. The earth made new is our destination not going elsewhere as is commonly thought.
I am not Tom but that is my take on what he might say with regard to this complex question..
How do we wrestle with the scriptures about devil being loosed for a short time? Is that in reference to Satan falling from Heaven to the present age?
Jesus says he saw Satan fall from heaven when he sent out his disciples and they were marveling about the powerful deeds they accomplished.
It feels like the host is mocking Wright at some points during the Q and A. I didn’t care for that.
I watched the Q&A from about 1:04 to the end again and am not sure where you felt like Mark was mocking Tom. I can assure you that each have a great deal of respect for the other. they sometimes will banter with the other but each like that. so there is a give and take between them.
@@fleetwd1 From the looks (his body language), yes sir that's how I feel too, the same as Endless Song. In addition to that, his conversation also shows he tries to level up his knowledge with the Speaker. Instead of asking from the notes in his hand. He starts to go on with his own questions. By spirit, I don't know, Mark knows deep inside of him well & better than anyone else. His body language shows exactly that and maybe he never meant to be. If he stands straight while speaking, it would be much polite and acceptable. Please forgive me if my comment offends you or it causes any disturbing feelings. God Bless.
@@singkhaooudom8317 no offense taken. this is not the only Video i have of them interacting. Mark is a top trial lawyer even though he has degrees in Biblical languages also. His manorisms may not appeal to everyone but in these Library events the scholars including Wright have a great deal of respect for his thought process and biblical understanding but he comes across as a bumbling hick from Lubbach TX to many. To balance this video I suggest seeing this breif exchange which happened previous to this Q&A it shows the great repect they each have for each other, and while they might come at things differently it is more complimentry. NT Wright incorporated the difference between Ezekiel and Zachariah which both have similar imagery in a talk he had within a few Months of this exchange NT Wright is returning later this year for his 3rd visit and he has said how he expected a lot from all the positive talk his coleagues had told him about these Larnier Library events but the actual experience was beyond his expectations. ua-cam.com/video/ZXdtohAsm_0/v-deo.html
@@fleetwd1 Please forgive me for my short-sighted comments and personal emotion coming into play. I should concentrate like others on the important biblical subjects. Professor NT Wright said it so right about seeing the big picture/the whole picture. I should start my journey here on. It's been a great learning experience. Thank you for sharing these valuable gatherings. God Bless.
@@singkhaooudom8317 it truly is a blessing to me to be able to share these. no problem. i attend most of these and this Q&A ended on a note that seemed contentious betweenn Mark and Tom. so I do understand how some might get the wrong impression from it. However they really appreciate oneanother. i think that comes through better in the interview video.
I note with some consternation the Bio info: "On the other hand, he has criticized the idea of a literal rapture". I hardly see this as a mitigation of his contribution. The 'rapture' is a modern innovation largely encouraged by that other modern innovation 'dispensationalism', a largely US obsession and unknown before it was invented in the mid 1800s. Perhaps you should have written "Happily he has also criticized the idea of a literal 'rapture' ".
So, he uses the phrase "raise up" as meaning Resurrection? Hmmmm...? Why not such a thought as 'bring to pass'? "bring to the forefront"? Just sayin'
Time Stamp?
There is a lot of scriptural insight here..but I think his applications are way off from scripture. For example he talks of church opening hospitals rather than praying for healing and deliverance. I m not saying doing "Good works" isn't important, but non Christians cannot do kingdom work..but they can open hospitals. I work for a church social welfare organization but most aren't Christians, I might do kingdom work there but as I bring Jesus in that context. Most of what it does just isn't kingdom advancing...even though some might use the the rhetoric that Wright uses.
As Scot McKnight has questioned about Wright's approach...."Did Ghandi do kingdom work?"
Luke 9 verse 60 Jesus - "let the dead bury the dead". There must have been a lot of corpses jumping out of their graves, picking up shovels, and pushing new arrivals into the pits, long before the "Crucifixion".
"Jesus is the firstborn from the dead?" Paul obviously had never read the Gospels. Wasn't that supposed to be Lazarus?
there are other resurrections that predate Lazarus. The Shulamite woman's son for one. But Firstborn is not necessarily birth order. In the Psalms God says David is his firstborn and David was the last birth of his family. firstborn carries with it favored status. I have heard other explanations like Jesus did not die again the others did but the meaning of firstborn is most significant.
He is the first one to be resurrected in an imperishable body. He is resurrected as imperishable/ immortal. All the others who are resurrected, are resurrected as perishable..
*1 corinth **15:42* So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable;
*1 corinth **15:53* For the *perishable* must clothe itself with the *imperishable* , and the *mortal* with *immortality* .
The following verses say that jesus is the first born from the dead
*Colossians 1:15* He is the image of the invisible God, the *firstborn of all creation* .
*Colossians 1:18* He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the *firstborn from the dead*
*Revelation 1:5* and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, *the firstborn of the dead* , and the ruler of the kings of the earth.
This means *christ is the first one to be resurrected as imperishable / immortal from dead* .
@@ujwaldeep while this is a favored argument to make, Firstborn is not linked to birth order but to favored status. And while i do not dispute this argument the one I raised is less put forth but actually stronger. David is called firstborn but was the baby of his siblings. So firstborn has an independent meaning from the natural assumption being made by Ian Hall having to do with the resurrection order. But it is true the resurrection of Christ's was that he never will Die again and all previous resurrections did die afterward..
@@fleetwd1 Here it is both. Jesus is the second/last adam.
*1 corinth **15:45* So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; *the last Adam* , a life-giving spirit.
From the following verse
*Revelation 1:5* and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, *the firstborn of the dead* , and the ruler of the kings of the earth.
So, the *last* adam is the *first* one to be bestowed with the blessing of being raised imperishable, with immortality. This is because the first adam is perishable or mortal.
Paul never read the gospels because he wrote his epistles before the Gospels we're written?
I would like NT to consider moving the comma from “I tell you, today you will be to I tell you today, you will be.” Paradise is a garden motif. The new creation.
The criminal on the cross was promise to someday be in the new creation with Jesus. This seems more in line with the resurrection emphasis of the Bible and early Christian writings.
It is clear from John 20:17 NASB Jesus had not Yet ascended to the Father when he tells Mary to stop clinging to him. So this helps clarify where the comma should be placed but punctuation was not put in the Greek
fleetwd1 yes, commas, no spaces, all caps. I think “paradise” reflects the parousia and coming kingdom on earth. John 3:13 has not been argued in support of the pearly gates existence.
@@bradbrown2199 yes there are many other explanations that are plausible. I think those who try saying at death they went to heaven is wrong based on Jesus words to Mary. That whole notion NT Wright seems to wish to correct. I agree. Resurrection happens not individually at death but on the Day of the Lord. If Jesus remained in the tomb till resurrection we will also.
Tom, God is our home. To die is to go home.
you seem to not understand the New Testament hope is in resurrection not in death itself. there is an intermediate state which many want to bypass but it is very real. And a world made new not going off somewhere. Tom at least gets it.
@@fleetwd1 I get it. I read the New Testament, and Tom Wright . I agree with him in his theology.
To be absent from the body, is to be present with the Lord. God himself is the Christians home. That is the point I was trying to make. You are not looking at it from this perspective.
Recently, I’ve pondered of “The one” who can destroy both body and soul was in reference to Satan 🤔
I had never heard this until this evening NT Wright brought it up. i checked every scholarly resource I have and none to that position it has always been God as who Jesus is referring to in every reference i could find. Scripture never gives Satan final say on destiny..
The guy doing the Q&A apparently believed that his role was to be a contrarian clown. That was unfortunate.
Just my thought tonight...IF...if all these influential men of "God" loved God, His Word, and people...they would get in one room and work out all divisions...because they cannot all be correct...and if this is true, oh fearful it will be to stand before God and deceive the flock...that alone should drive them to seek resolution! How can you say you love God and yet are not willing to give up traditions in order to minister the gospel to the lost! Evangelicals need to repent first before asking the world to repent...if NT is saying anything true here, there needs a radical re-correction!
unanimity on all things was never a requirement. Jesus was baptized when he did not require it "in order to fulfill all righteousness" He is the Lord our righteousness. In him we are made complete no matter what we lack. His disciples lacked much yet they succeeded by focusing on him rather than self. "We love because he first loved us." not because we all resolved every issue. the Gospel reveals the righteousness of God which we have by faith. It is his accomplishments rather than our complete understanding of them. for we all see through darkened glass. we will only see clearly when he returns and this mortal shall put on immortality.
I was hoping this would be educational. Good sermon tho.
You know, no matter how well prepared and presented a speech may be, it says nothing about the credibility thereof.Accordingly, in a limited response to Dr. Wright's eloquently delivered presentation I submit the following.All my life, I have heard that God can be taken at his word. Really? Then, let's take Him at his word.Numbers 23:19 states the case that God is not a man that He should lie. It this true?
Now if Numbers 23:19 is true then it follows that Genesis 3:19 is also true. In the latter verse, God (judging) told Adam: "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return to the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Now, if Numbers 23:19 is true then this should be the end of the story.
Note that God told Adam nothing about another future judgment, heaven, hell, damnation or eternal life. He told Adam nothing about a resurrection, saving grace or faith. And, He told Adam nothing about a Satan. Now, if all the stuff that follow Numbers 23:19 are true, then that would mean that God is an intentional deceptive liar in that He failed to tell Adam the most important parts of the story, namely another future judgment, Satan, damnation and hell. You know if you violate a law that calls for a $100.00 fine, when you go before the judge, you are certain that the fine, though it could be less, will be $100.00 and not $1000.00. Yet, a total reading of the Bible suggests that that is just what God did to Adam, in effect.
In effect, Adam became the first known victim of "bait and switch" and whimsical and capricious laws.My point is this. If Numbers 23:19 and Genesis 3:19 are true, then Dr. N.T. Wright's presentation, though well prepared and presented, is little more than kissing the wind. That is, it's not going to do anything for you.
Greetings friend. Surely God can not lie, the word goes from his mouth and will not return empty, it will accomplish what he desires..... I do not see the "lie" you are trying to highlight. In eating of the fruit Adam transgressed and is subject to death as he was told. And remember 1tim2:14 "Adam was not deceived" yay he knowingly transgressed....
Mike, I don't know what God can and cannot do. Numbers 23:19 states that God is not a man that he should lie. It does not say that He can't. Similarly, when and if I say I don't eat snake meat, I am not saying that I can't. Furthermore, I frankly can't buy into the concept of a maker creating an activity, good or bad, that he, the maker, can't perform even if he doesn't. That is not a practical or logical proposition, in my view.
@@ernestmonroe2240 , greetings friend.... I see what you are saying, I think... surely God could "lie" and say the sky is green though he made it to appear blue and wishes it to stay that way. But at the same time he could make it happen and truly make the sky appear green if it pleases him. I think it is more that he can not be called a liar as far as his promises regarding creation. For if it is promised it will come to pass though maybe not in the time frame or manner we might expect. For; is anything too hard for the Lord? Once we the reader get our heads around genesis 1:1 its apparent the creator has power to do all things, so you are right, I was foolish to say he can not lie though why he would want or need to is beyond me. It is unrighteous and there is no darkness in him. Peace friend.
Numbers 23:19 Is basically Balaam, some weird witch doctor, acknowledging that the one true God of Israel cannot lie and keeps His promises. So he is not able to make God break his covenant with Israel. Genesis 3:19 is a great example of this. Back in Genesis 2:17 God says to Adam, “don’t eat the fruit of this tree or you will surely die.” At this point human beings would live physically forever. Fair warning. Genesis 3:19 God is saying “guess what Adam, you ate the fruit, I don’t lie, I keep my promises, you are now mortal and you’re going to die.” That’s it for Adam, God didn’t lie, God kept his promise, no further explanation required. The rest of the Bible is God revealing how Adam’s fate need not be the rest of human kinds fate. For those that believe and trust in God’s promises, ie the faithful, he has a plan. That plan has been the same plan as before creation. Trust Him and obey, ie have faith that God keeps His promises and you will dwell with Him for eternity. Now God’s great promise is that from all the nations, those that trust and believe that through The Christ’s death and resurrection, you now have forgiveness for your doubt and rebellion, and you now have a place in His new Creation, to dwell with Him for eternity in peace. That’s no lie.
Dr. Wright is obviously well versed and well spoken; however, the truth takes a severe beating from him. The prophecies destroyed the veracity of Jesus and the New Testament some 700 years before they were created and written respectively.Isaiah 55:8-9
"My ways are higher than yours."
Remark: In this verse, God is saying that He morally superior to man. As such, we should not expect him to be capricious, whimiscal, deceitful, etc., as is man. Consequently, the below verses should be held to be solid and dependable.Isaiah 42:8
I am the LORD: that is my name: and my (glory) will I not give to another.John 12:23 King James Version (KJV)
23 And Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be (glorified).
Remark: If Jesus was correct, then God is a liar. Matthew 28:18
“And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.”
Remark: So, what happened to God? Did Jesus pull a coup and replaced Him? Isaiah 45:6
"So that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting people may know there is none besides me. I am the Lord, and there is no other." No wife, no uncle and no son (no Jesus).Remark: Did God lie? If, on answering my door, I proclaim to the FBI Agent that there is "none besides me", but I have a son there with me, then I have lied. And, I am going to jail. Jeremiah 16:19
"O Lord, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, (the Gentiles) shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit."
Remark: Why aren't the gentiles going to their Popes and Bishops? And, if Jesus/Christianity is true, why aren't Jews running to gentiles seeking Jesus in that day? Zechariah 8:22-23 King James Version (KJV)
" Yea, many people and strong nations shall come to seek the Lord of hosts in Jerusalem, and to pray before the Lord."
" Thus saith the Lord of hosts; In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you."
Remarks: Where are the Popes and Bishops? Is it that they are totally wrong and misled?
So, today, who is it that's truly blind? According to these prophecies, the gentiles are the blind ones.
If the truth matters, then let it be told.
Greetings friend..... Jn14 Jesus replied, "Have I been with you all this time, Philip(/Ernest monroe) and yet you still don't know who I am? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father! So why are you asking me to show him to you?"...... if you have ears to hear please hear. Peace friend
I repeat: In Number 23:19 God declared to the world and all creation that: "I am not a man". There have been over a hundred people, who came along and made claims similar to those made by Jesus. Notwithstanding, mentally bent on their determination to create a religion to replace Judaism, mostly Europeans, in 325 CE, at the Nicaean Council, voted in the majority to call God and liar and his declaration a lie. From my studies to date, they debated and then made their vote without having ever discussed Numbers 23:19. So, the net effect of their votes was to replace God with a man.
@@ernestmonroe2240 greetings friend.... per adventure what of the prophesy of Isaiah 40:3 and the cry of John the baptist in John 1:23? ........ Isaiah, 40:3 - The voice of one who calls out, "Prepare the way of Yahweh in the wilderness! Make a level highway in the desert for our GOD."..... or of Malachi, 3:1 - "Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before ME; and the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to HIS temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, behold, he comes!".... Are we to assume these prophecies were carried out by someone other than Yahweh?????? Does the temple belong to another??? Peace friend.
I stop reading your post when you measure The Ultimate Goodness merely as Super-man. You have not know the true living God. "If you see Me, you have seen the Father" says the Son. Know the Lord and you'll have correct or true theology. May the Holy Spirit be with you and in you.
Best
Nt wright on the resurrection of the Don of God ? SORT IT OUT
I suspect Mr Lanier thinks he.s funny. Joke.s on him.
What rubbish St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15 verse 32 "what advantage is there to me, if the dead rise not? “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die!”.So, according to St. Paul, this life is worthless unless there is an Afterlife. It's a good job Bishop Wright's ancestors, the cavemen, did not share St. Paul's attitude. Over to you, Bishop.
You completely missed what Wright believes 😂
You seem to have gotten Wright's point almost exactly backwards. Wow.
"It's striking in fact that the New Testament isn't terribly interested in what happens to people immediately after they die."
Matthew 9:24 - He said, “Go away. The girl is not dead but asleep.”
John 11:11- “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.”
Acts 7:60 - “When he had said this, he fell asleep.”
Acts 13:36 - “Now when David had served God’s purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep.”
1 Corinthians 15:6 - “most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.”
1 Corinthians 15:20 - “But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.”
1 Corinthians 15:51 - “Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed.”
1 Thessalonians 4:13 - “Brothers and sisters, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you do not grieve like the rest of mankind, who have no hope.
1 Thessalonians 4:14 - “and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him.”
1 Thessalonians 4:15 - “will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.”
1 Thessalonians 5:10 - “He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him.”
All of the above Scriptures show that 1st century Christians knew that those who had died were UNCONCIOUS - not conscious of ANYTHING, like someone who has been deeply anaesthetised and is unable to move, communicate, reason, or even worship!
Ecclesiastes 9:5,10 - “For the living know that they will die, but the dead know NOTHING; in the realm of the dead, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.”
The dead will be awakened and resurrected by Christ - in the LAST day.
You conveniently omit those passages that clearly refer to the souls of deceased Christians as being quite conscious and aware of what they are doing, as in Revelation 6, among other places in the New Testament, and 2 Maccabees 15, which, although pre-Christian, was nevertheless accepted by the early Church.
@@joshuaorsi4771 The majority of Revelation is SYMBOLIC, so to verify/repudiate something, we refer to the rest of the Bible.
Since Ezekiel 18:4 disproves an "immortal" soul, and Eclesiastes 9:5,10 emphatically states that dead people are totally unaware of EVERYTHING, it's comforting to know that when you're dead, you're DEAD - until resurrection! But, each to his own beliefs.
@@fontybits No, not to each his own. Truth, period.
So here are the facts:
"Revelation is symbolic, so I don't have to deal with it." Uh, nope.
'When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne; they cried out with a loud voice, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before thou wilt judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell upon the earth?” Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.'
So St. John, in your view, created a symbolic universe in which the souls of the martyrs are clearly in the presence of God, waiting for the eschaton, only then to make another symbolic point? *Maybe* I could accept that, if it actually contradicted the *symbolic* biblical language about sleep, which is by no means in tension with the plain meaning of St. John.
"Ezekiel 18:4 'disproves' the idea of an immortal soul."
"The soul that sins shall die."
1) This has nothing to do with the concept of "soul sleep." To reiterate, the question of the immortality and the concept of soul sleep have nothing to do with each other.
2) Of course, the notion by which you *choose* to interpret Ezekiel would have been alien to Our Lord and his Apostles, as the inspired authors have no problem affirming that souls can "die" and yet remain eternally conscious, e.g., Revelation 20:10, 14.
"Ecclesiastes says that the dead know nothing."
Yes, Ecclesiastes does, because that was how the ancients thought of the netherworld. Read Homer, or look up some Babylonian mythology, or, better yet, read 1 Samuel 28. Common trope of the afterlife, doesn't imply soul sleep. Also, and this should go without saying, this reflects a pre-Christian understanding of death (and not even all pre-Christians held this; cf. my reference to 2 Maccabees).
@@joshuaorsi4771 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@fontybits Childish.
another false prophet
Why don't you try to resemble a man and explain why you would make such a terrible accusation?
@@bobtaylor170 amen
i find this kind of post so hurtful & unChristlike. & sadly we see so many. It's not the one-ness Jesus died for.
Yea Paul you should explain. However I agree. 2 Thessalonians 2 talks about false prophets who say the resurrection already happened. Similarity NT Wright says apocalyptic literature is nonsense. He’s so wrong. Apocalyptic literature in the bible is the revealing of Christ and is of utmost importance. It contradicts nt wright’s views
How is it that thousands of years ago, people knew what happens after death, yet, today, we don’t know except for what they said happens? Also interesting how the religious change their beliefs capriciously, like the belief in purgatory or infant baptism. It’s all man-made rubbish.
Clearly, you know very little about the history or philosophy of religion. I advise you to do some research before embarrassing yourself.
What the fuck