Scan barcode
cdbaker's review against another edition
4.0
It was both interesting and sometimes annoying to read a biography of Paul written by someone who is so much of a believer. I like that Wright didn't try to hide his own perspective, but at times his assessment of Paul seemed just a little too reverent. Overall though, I enjoyed this book and I learned a lot.
drbobcornwall's review against another edition
4.0
As the title of one book puts it, Jesus Have I Loved, But Paul?: A Narrative Approach to the Problem of Pauline Christianity. There are many who believe that Jesus had a great set of ideas, but Paul messed everything up. That Paul's writings appeared twenty years or more before the first canonical Gospel was written doesn't seem to shake the sense that Christianity would be better off without Paul. It is true that Paul can be frustrating and even infuriating at times, while at other times he inspires us to spiritual heights. So, who is Paul?
N. T. Wright is one of the leading Pauline scholars of our day, and is deeply engaged in recent attempts to rethink the history of the early church and Paul's role in it (following his earlier work on Jesus). He is the author of the massive Paul and the Faithfulness of God, a two volume work on Paul written for biblical scholars, and a set that I have not touched. In the aftermath of that work, he has written a volume for the rest of us. It is rooted in the earlier scholarship, but written in a format that is much more accessible.
Wright, who is Professor of New Testament at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland and the former Bishop of Durham, chose the form of the biography to convey his vision of Paul's life and ministry. While his earlier scholarship undergirds the book, he lays out Paul's life along the lines presented in the Book of Acts and his letters. He takes clues from those documents and digs deeper, helping us understand his upbringing in Tarsus, a Roman colony in Asia Minor, and then his further education in Jerusalem. He makes note of Paul's early zealotry for his faith, which leads to his persecution of the church and then the later post-conversion zeal for the Gospel, a zeal that over time gets tempered.
In order to put his scholarship in biographical form, Wright has to make some creative moves, as he envisions conversations that are not recorded, but which make sense of the overarching vision of Paul's life. This requires trying to get into Paul's head, something not easily accomplished with the dearth of primary sources. In addition, there is the challenge of language and terminology. We talk about the Damascus Road experience, but in what way was it a conversion? After all, while Paul chose to be a follower of Jesus, it doesn't appear that he left Judaism for a new religion.
One of the challenges posed by a work like this concerns the issue of history and historical context. Wright seeks to approach the subject as a historian, and yet he also affirms that Acts and Paul's letters are Holy Scripture. Therefore, he makes some interpretive judgments about their contemporary use that we might not make of other historical documents. For this book to work, however, we must see Paul in his historical context. He is a Jew born into a world ruled by the Roman Empire. He is the product of his Jewish faith and practice, but he is also the product of the Greco-Roman world. As a Jew, it appears that he was a Pharisee, and thus a strict observant of the faith. He was also a businessman -- likely taking up the family business as a worker with leather. He was multi-lingual, and could navigate both the Jewish and the Roman worlds, especially since he was a citizen of Rome.
Wright divides the book into three parts. Part One moves us from his early life in Judaism, and his zeal for his faith. This leads to the Damascus Road experience, followed by his sojourn in Arabia and then Tarsus. Wright envisions Paul spending a decade in Tarsus, where he likely engaged in his trade while studying scripture. It was only then that Barnabas retrieved him from this time of exile, bringing him to Antioch, where he shared in the ministry of the church and preparing for his journeys that would come.
Part Two forms the bulk of the book. In these nine chapters, we follow Paul has he moves out into his missionary journeys, first with Baranabas and later with Silas. We follow the script laid out by Acts to Cyprus and Galatia, with a return to Antioch and Jerusalem. This first journey leads to the planting of churches in Galatia, and the first letter, the Galatian letter, which Wright suggests was written around 48 CE (some scholars believe that 1 Thessalonians was written prior to Galatians, but what is important is that the first piece of canonical New Testament likely was penned around 48 CE).
After the return to Antioch, the Jerusalem Council, and the break with Barnabas, we follow him on his next journeys, that take him back to Asia Minor and then into Europe. Having a sense of the dating of the various letters, he intersperses them with the account in Acts to move us to Philippi, Thessaloniki, Berea, Athens and the Corinth. Chapters nine through twelve focus on his ministries in Corinth and Ephesus. Wright does believe that Paul wrote the Ephesian letter, along with Colossians (prior to 2 Corinthians). This leads us back to Jerusalem, where he engages with the apostles, including James, and then is arrested. All of this is told with great details, helping us connect the letters with a vision of Paul's ministry. We are invited into Paul's mindset as he plants churches, and then writes letters to them, trying to help them make sense of their newfound faith.
Part three takes us from Caesarea, where he had been taken to appear before the Roman Governor. Now, having appealed to Rome, he begins his final journey, as a prisoner, aboard ship. One of the questions that I don't feel Wright answers concerns why, if the governor and the Agrippa don't believe Paul to be guilty of anything worth prosecuting, his appeal to Rome needs to be affirmed. Why send him to Rome, if they could easily let him go. Of course, that would wreck out story, which needs to get Paul to Rome, where we can envision him appearing before Nero, trying to make a case for Jesus. Whether Paul got that audience is unknown. Acts doesn't record it, neither do any Roman histories. In other words, we have to fill in the gaps with tradition, and historical accounts of others who made an appeal to Caesar.
As I read the book, I found it to be an intriguing way of sharing good scholarship. I don't feel as if Wright has revealed anything that new. So, its not the underlying information but the format that is most important. I can imagine sharing this with someone who wants to get to know Paul at a deeper level. It is not a difficult read, but it is lengthy (over 400 pages). So, its not for everyone. As for vantage point, Wright gives great credibility to both the Acts account and Paul's letters. As noted above, he believes Ephesians is authentic (and he makes his case for that, which is compelling). He also posits the possibility that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles--at the very least 2 Timothy. The labels conservative and liberal are problematic, as is the label evangelical when applied to a person like Wright. I would say that he is evangelical, but not in the American sense. When there are questions of authenticity, he is willing to give traditional views the benefit of the doubt. Ultimately, he wants to be perceived as a historian who seeks to set out the story of one of history's most important and elusive figures. So, yes, I recommend the book.
N. T. Wright is one of the leading Pauline scholars of our day, and is deeply engaged in recent attempts to rethink the history of the early church and Paul's role in it (following his earlier work on Jesus). He is the author of the massive Paul and the Faithfulness of God, a two volume work on Paul written for biblical scholars, and a set that I have not touched. In the aftermath of that work, he has written a volume for the rest of us. It is rooted in the earlier scholarship, but written in a format that is much more accessible.
Wright, who is Professor of New Testament at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland and the former Bishop of Durham, chose the form of the biography to convey his vision of Paul's life and ministry. While his earlier scholarship undergirds the book, he lays out Paul's life along the lines presented in the Book of Acts and his letters. He takes clues from those documents and digs deeper, helping us understand his upbringing in Tarsus, a Roman colony in Asia Minor, and then his further education in Jerusalem. He makes note of Paul's early zealotry for his faith, which leads to his persecution of the church and then the later post-conversion zeal for the Gospel, a zeal that over time gets tempered.
In order to put his scholarship in biographical form, Wright has to make some creative moves, as he envisions conversations that are not recorded, but which make sense of the overarching vision of Paul's life. This requires trying to get into Paul's head, something not easily accomplished with the dearth of primary sources. In addition, there is the challenge of language and terminology. We talk about the Damascus Road experience, but in what way was it a conversion? After all, while Paul chose to be a follower of Jesus, it doesn't appear that he left Judaism for a new religion.
One of the challenges posed by a work like this concerns the issue of history and historical context. Wright seeks to approach the subject as a historian, and yet he also affirms that Acts and Paul's letters are Holy Scripture. Therefore, he makes some interpretive judgments about their contemporary use that we might not make of other historical documents. For this book to work, however, we must see Paul in his historical context. He is a Jew born into a world ruled by the Roman Empire. He is the product of his Jewish faith and practice, but he is also the product of the Greco-Roman world. As a Jew, it appears that he was a Pharisee, and thus a strict observant of the faith. He was also a businessman -- likely taking up the family business as a worker with leather. He was multi-lingual, and could navigate both the Jewish and the Roman worlds, especially since he was a citizen of Rome.
Wright divides the book into three parts. Part One moves us from his early life in Judaism, and his zeal for his faith. This leads to the Damascus Road experience, followed by his sojourn in Arabia and then Tarsus. Wright envisions Paul spending a decade in Tarsus, where he likely engaged in his trade while studying scripture. It was only then that Barnabas retrieved him from this time of exile, bringing him to Antioch, where he shared in the ministry of the church and preparing for his journeys that would come.
Part Two forms the bulk of the book. In these nine chapters, we follow Paul has he moves out into his missionary journeys, first with Baranabas and later with Silas. We follow the script laid out by Acts to Cyprus and Galatia, with a return to Antioch and Jerusalem. This first journey leads to the planting of churches in Galatia, and the first letter, the Galatian letter, which Wright suggests was written around 48 CE (some scholars believe that 1 Thessalonians was written prior to Galatians, but what is important is that the first piece of canonical New Testament likely was penned around 48 CE).
After the return to Antioch, the Jerusalem Council, and the break with Barnabas, we follow him on his next journeys, that take him back to Asia Minor and then into Europe. Having a sense of the dating of the various letters, he intersperses them with the account in Acts to move us to Philippi, Thessaloniki, Berea, Athens and the Corinth. Chapters nine through twelve focus on his ministries in Corinth and Ephesus. Wright does believe that Paul wrote the Ephesian letter, along with Colossians (prior to 2 Corinthians). This leads us back to Jerusalem, where he engages with the apostles, including James, and then is arrested. All of this is told with great details, helping us connect the letters with a vision of Paul's ministry. We are invited into Paul's mindset as he plants churches, and then writes letters to them, trying to help them make sense of their newfound faith.
Part three takes us from Caesarea, where he had been taken to appear before the Roman Governor. Now, having appealed to Rome, he begins his final journey, as a prisoner, aboard ship. One of the questions that I don't feel Wright answers concerns why, if the governor and the Agrippa don't believe Paul to be guilty of anything worth prosecuting, his appeal to Rome needs to be affirmed. Why send him to Rome, if they could easily let him go. Of course, that would wreck out story, which needs to get Paul to Rome, where we can envision him appearing before Nero, trying to make a case for Jesus. Whether Paul got that audience is unknown. Acts doesn't record it, neither do any Roman histories. In other words, we have to fill in the gaps with tradition, and historical accounts of others who made an appeal to Caesar.
As I read the book, I found it to be an intriguing way of sharing good scholarship. I don't feel as if Wright has revealed anything that new. So, its not the underlying information but the format that is most important. I can imagine sharing this with someone who wants to get to know Paul at a deeper level. It is not a difficult read, but it is lengthy (over 400 pages). So, its not for everyone. As for vantage point, Wright gives great credibility to both the Acts account and Paul's letters. As noted above, he believes Ephesians is authentic (and he makes his case for that, which is compelling). He also posits the possibility that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles--at the very least 2 Timothy. The labels conservative and liberal are problematic, as is the label evangelical when applied to a person like Wright. I would say that he is evangelical, but not in the American sense. When there are questions of authenticity, he is willing to give traditional views the benefit of the doubt. Ultimately, he wants to be perceived as a historian who seeks to set out the story of one of history's most important and elusive figures. So, yes, I recommend the book.
betarayblake's review against another edition
The author believes in women pastors and therefore cannot be trusted.
catronky's review against another edition
4.0
A fantastic companion to the scriptures. N.T. Wright is the world's expert on Paul, but there's still so much about Paul we don't know. Wright does his best to interpret Paul's thoughts and actions and they are beautiful.
I went to hear another Pauline scholar and he had very different opinions and interpretations of Paul's actions and character. I asked him what he thought of the difference and he basically said: there's so much room for interpretation, NT Wright is incredible, but also that Wright's religion relies heavily on Paul's teachings, so he's more likely to view his actions as authoritative and preparitory, where this scholars religion doesn't rely so much on Paul's teachings, so he is more comfortable seeing him as amazing but flawed. As far as we know, either, neither, or both views could be right.
I went to hear another Pauline scholar and he had very different opinions and interpretations of Paul's actions and character. I asked him what he thought of the difference and he basically said: there's so much room for interpretation, NT Wright is incredible, but also that Wright's religion relies heavily on Paul's teachings, so he's more likely to view his actions as authoritative and preparitory, where this scholars religion doesn't rely so much on Paul's teachings, so he is more comfortable seeing him as amazing but flawed. As far as we know, either, neither, or both views could be right.
nate_meyers's review against another edition
5.0
"It is no accident that many of the acknowledged great moments in church history--think of Augustine, Luther, Barth--have come about through fresh engagement with Paul's work. Even those who think that those great men too partially misunderstood Paul will acknowledge the point. Paul had insisted that what mattered was not just what you thought but how you thought. He modeled what he advocated, and generation after generation has learned how to think in the new way by struggling to think his thoughts after him. His legacy has continually generated fresh dividends. It is a challenge that keeps on challenging." -p.420
In "Paul," N.T. Wright takes his decades of study on the New Testament and on Paul and writes a biography of Paul for the lay audience. The result is brilliant, a book I couldn't put down. I learned a tremendous amount, and particularly enjoyed it for these three reasons.
1. This book makes Paul incredibly accessible. Paul was a unique individual; at once a learned scholar versed in multiple languages and cultures and gifted as a writer, a salt-of-the-earth tradesman who used his tent-making craft to support his missionary journeys, and someone so convicted in his beliefs he endured repeated imprisonment, shipwreck, whipping, stoning, and other persecution. His personality was both bold, he was not one to shy away from confrontation, and vulnerable, he had a deep heart for his friends and the churches he was guiding.
2. Wright weaves Paul's letters into Paul's chronological journeys as told in Acts. It was very illuminating to learn the context for each of Paul's letters and understand the particular message he was trying to convey with each of them. The last chapter of the book, "The Challenge of Paul," is a masterclass in conclusions and in tying together all the parts of Paul's journey and character.
3. Pick any one of Paul's letters and you'll easily find scholarly disagreement about various particulars. Wright does a great job of acknowledging these disagreements, while stating his own theory and support for the theory.
Read this book.
In "Paul," N.T. Wright takes his decades of study on the New Testament and on Paul and writes a biography of Paul for the lay audience. The result is brilliant, a book I couldn't put down. I learned a tremendous amount, and particularly enjoyed it for these three reasons.
1. This book makes Paul incredibly accessible. Paul was a unique individual; at once a learned scholar versed in multiple languages and cultures and gifted as a writer, a salt-of-the-earth tradesman who used his tent-making craft to support his missionary journeys, and someone so convicted in his beliefs he endured repeated imprisonment, shipwreck, whipping, stoning, and other persecution. His personality was both bold, he was not one to shy away from confrontation, and vulnerable, he had a deep heart for his friends and the churches he was guiding.
2. Wright weaves Paul's letters into Paul's chronological journeys as told in Acts. It was very illuminating to learn the context for each of Paul's letters and understand the particular message he was trying to convey with each of them. The last chapter of the book, "The Challenge of Paul," is a masterclass in conclusions and in tying together all the parts of Paul's journey and character.
3. Pick any one of Paul's letters and you'll easily find scholarly disagreement about various particulars. Wright does a great job of acknowledging these disagreements, while stating his own theory and support for the theory.
Read this book.
paulataua's review against another edition
I feel I needed to know and understand more about two crucial major religious figures who effected a major transformation in religion, St Paul and Luther , and I saw this book as a chance to have an introduction to Paul. It was readable and quite interesting in parts. There was an excellent warning at the outset about projecting modern interpretations onto past times, but I sensed that there were times when the author did not really heed his own warning. I think that is always going to be so difficult. I was also quite taken by a different understanding of heaven, which made a lot more sense than the one I grew up with. It was well written, but sadly I wanted less life and story and more ideas and discussion and the way they fitted into the world at that time. Yeah I know, what should I have expected from a biography? I think the real problem was not the book but the fact I chose that as the first venture into a world I knew so little about. For this reason, I will refrain from lowering its excellent ratings.
camebrew's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
4.75
It seems to me that nobody can crawl into the mind and time of Paul to observe what Paul thought about his own message quite like NT Wright.
"All God's promises," Paul would later write, "find their yes in him." Saul came to see that these two stories, Israel's story and God's story, had, shockingly, merged together…Jesus was Israel personified; but he was also Israel's God in person. The great biblical stories of creation and new creation, Exodus and new Exodus, Temple and new Temple all came rushing together at the same point.
71
Someone turning up in a city shortly after being stoned or beaten up would hardly cut an imposing figure. … As Paul would later explain, the bodily marks of identification that mattered to him were not the signs of circumcision, but "the marks of Jesus"-in other words, the signs of the suffering he had undergone.
124
Suffering is not simply something through which the faithful people must pass to get to their destination. It is in itself the way in which the dark powers that have ruled the world will exhaust themselves, the way in which the one-off victory won by the Messiah on the cross will be implemented in the world.
129
Christology and therapy go well together, even if, like Jacob, an apostle may limp, in style and perhaps also in body, after the dark night spent wrestling with the angel.
269
Paul explains to Philemon that he is praying that their koinonia will have its full, powerful effect, bringing them all together "into the king," into the Messiah.
From Paul's other uses of this idea we see what he means: "the Messiah" is not only Jesus, but all those who are "in the Mes-siah." It is an incorporative term, as it was in Galatians (*You are all one in the Messiah, Jesus") and 1 Corinthians (*as the body is one, and has many members, ... so also is the Messiah"). 21 "We must," he says in Ephesians, "speak the truth in love, and so grow up in everything into him" that is, into the Messiah.?? This rich unity is one of Paul's constant imperatives; the other is holiness. But how is it to be achieved?
"God was reconciling the world to himself in the Messiah," Paul wrote later, "not counting their transgressions against them, and entrusting us with the message of reconciliation." The message of reconciliation is then, at that point, reembodying God's action.
Paul stands between Philemon and Onesimus, joining them together in his own person and appeal. "Here," he says (stretching out one arm), "is Onesimus, my son, my own heart, who has been looking after me here in prison, on your behalf as it were!"
283
Telos gar nomou Christos, “The Messiah is the goal of the law,” so that covenant membership may be available for all who believe.
332
He wasn't just, as many have wrongly suggested, synthesizing the worlds of Israel, Greece, and Rome; his was a firmly Jewish picture, rooted in Israel's ancient story, with Israel's Messiah in the center and the nations of the world and their best ideas brought into new coherence around him. Nor was he simply teaching a "religion" or a "theology"; if we were to do Paul justice today we ought to teach him in departments of politics, ancient history, economics, and/or philosophy just as much as in divinity schools and departments of religion.
419
Thus, for Paul one might say: Galatians, for the young reformer eager to defend the gospel and attack the heretics; 2 Corinthians, for the adult sadly aware that things are more complicated and disturbing than he had thought; Romans at last, to remind us, despite everything, that nothing "will be able to separate us from the love of God in King Jesus our Lord."
420
"All God's promises," Paul would later write, "find their yes in him." Saul came to see that these two stories, Israel's story and God's story, had, shockingly, merged together…Jesus was Israel personified; but he was also Israel's God in person. The great biblical stories of creation and new creation, Exodus and new Exodus, Temple and new Temple all came rushing together at the same point.
71
Someone turning up in a city shortly after being stoned or beaten up would hardly cut an imposing figure. … As Paul would later explain, the bodily marks of identification that mattered to him were not the signs of circumcision, but "the marks of Jesus"-in other words, the signs of the suffering he had undergone.
124
Suffering is not simply something through which the faithful people must pass to get to their destination. It is in itself the way in which the dark powers that have ruled the world will exhaust themselves, the way in which the one-off victory won by the Messiah on the cross will be implemented in the world.
129
Christology and therapy go well together, even if, like Jacob, an apostle may limp, in style and perhaps also in body, after the dark night spent wrestling with the angel.
269
Paul explains to Philemon that he is praying that their koinonia will have its full, powerful effect, bringing them all together "into the king," into the Messiah.
From Paul's other uses of this idea we see what he means: "the Messiah" is not only Jesus, but all those who are "in the Mes-siah." It is an incorporative term, as it was in Galatians (*You are all one in the Messiah, Jesus") and 1 Corinthians (*as the body is one, and has many members, ... so also is the Messiah"). 21 "We must," he says in Ephesians, "speak the truth in love, and so grow up in everything into him" that is, into the Messiah.?? This rich unity is one of Paul's constant imperatives; the other is holiness. But how is it to be achieved?
"God was reconciling the world to himself in the Messiah," Paul wrote later, "not counting their transgressions against them, and entrusting us with the message of reconciliation." The message of reconciliation is then, at that point, reembodying God's action.
Paul stands between Philemon and Onesimus, joining them together in his own person and appeal. "Here," he says (stretching out one arm), "is Onesimus, my son, my own heart, who has been looking after me here in prison, on your behalf as it were!"
283
Telos gar nomou Christos, “The Messiah is the goal of the law,” so that covenant membership may be available for all who believe.
332
He wasn't just, as many have wrongly suggested, synthesizing the worlds of Israel, Greece, and Rome; his was a firmly Jewish picture, rooted in Israel's ancient story, with Israel's Messiah in the center and the nations of the world and their best ideas brought into new coherence around him. Nor was he simply teaching a "religion" or a "theology"; if we were to do Paul justice today we ought to teach him in departments of politics, ancient history, economics, and/or philosophy just as much as in divinity schools and departments of religion.
419
Thus, for Paul one might say: Galatians, for the young reformer eager to defend the gospel and attack the heretics; 2 Corinthians, for the adult sadly aware that things are more complicated and disturbing than he had thought; Romans at last, to remind us, despite everything, that nothing "will be able to separate us from the love of God in King Jesus our Lord."
420