Skip to main content

Wheaton Theology Conference - Wright and Bockmuehl Explained

This is a follow up on my earlier post summarizing Bockmuehl's talk. I won't attempt to cover all of the ground they covered in their exchanges, some of it dealt with rather technical exegetical issues. Wright did feel that Bockmuehl didn't accurately capture his eschatology. Wright disputes that he implied that the final state is earthly only. Earth and heaven are fused at the end. He also seemed to push back on the issue of whether or not we go to heaven after we die. He doesn't like the language 'heaven' because of the baggage it brings, but he does affirm that we go to an intermediate state where we are with Christ.

Bockmuehl responded by saying that he was somewhat exaggerating Wright's position to prove a point, it was a rhetorical move and it wasn't completely without grounding in some things that Wright had said (he mentioned a Time Magazine interview).
Labels:

Comments

  1. dannyApril 17, 2010 at 6:39 PM

    In Bockmuehl's defense, Wright says things that could be taken either way (regarding the intermediate state, that is), though I've heard him say explicitly we are with Christ.

    For what it's worth, here is the link for the audio/video. They don't have Bockmuehl on there as a presenter at the conference (at least not right now). I wonder if that'll be changed.

    http://www.wheaton.edu/wetn/lectures-theology10.htm

    ReplyDelete
  2. Marcus MaherApril 17, 2010 at 6:42 PM

    The omission of Bockmuehl's talk is interesting. I am sure that it will soon be corrected. Even though I do think he pushed Wright into places he's not comfortable, there were some excellent elements to his talk (which is no surprise).

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat...
19 comments
Read more

Galatians 2:11-14: The circumcision group

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (TNIV) There's an important issue that we need to wrestle with in this passage, and it's the question of whether or not the people from James and the circumcision group are the same group. I am not inclined to think that they are. The ensuing discussion is drawn from Longenecker's commentary pp 73-5...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Series of Questions on Soteriology

I have a question that I would like to ask, what is the relationship between justification, salvation, and judgment? Are justification and salvation coterminous, do they occur at the same time, can one be justified and ultimately not saved, does justification affect judgment and if so how? On a related note, what are the grounds of judgment, on what basis (or bases) does (do) one survive the judgment and experience salvation? I ask these questions because I truly think they're difficult to answer. How does judgment on the basis of works mesh with justification by faith? I think that if we can get clarity on the relationship between justification, salvation, and judgment then this latter question becomes easier to answer (I also ask them because I'm working on a paper on judgment for my biblical theology class).
6 comments
Read more