Search

Search this blog



View Comments

Comments:


11 thoughts on “N.T. Wright on Gay “Marriage””

  1. PJ Tibayan says:

    I agree. But I don’t think it’s either the grand narrative or “simply one or two verses.” It’s both/and. And at least in our American context we can’t simply point our culture to the deep biblical meaning of marriage, but to the goodness of marriage to our society practically since they may still reject the Bible’s authority.

  2. Josh says:

    If a person will reject the authority of the Scriptures, what would make us believe they would agree with our interpretation of what qualifies as “goodness…to our society practically.”

    Every person is born with a sense of the Divine, a knowledge of the truth that he or she suppresses. We can and should meet them with the voice of Scripture since the Spirit of God through the Word of God is the only way any worthwhile change will be achieved–in the individual or in our society as a whole.

  3. When Wright is right, he is really really right.

  4. Tom Beetham says:

    Well said Steve. I think Wright nails it here, and it is so refreshing to hear his voice speak so clearly and courageously on this topic. I am giving thanks for you, Dr. Wright!

  5. Tom says:

    This strand sounds like a lot of people firming up their particular version of the christian experience, or version of how authority is understood, or how a thing like the ‘Word of God’ feels to say. There are no texts, no self examining, no challenge to the communities we find ourselves vested – only the desire for a universal claim that keeps us free from conflict with ‘that’ group. Yes, I used the word ‘experience’ because Tom Wright has one of those too, it just so happens to align this time.

  6. Well said. Unfortunately the larger point that Dr. Wright is trying to make does not fly very high in our sound-bite driven media and culture.

  7. My comment was meant for Steve from Canada above.

  8. David Fairchild says:

    PJ,
    I think Tom would agree with your point. Of course the biblical text (specifically texts which seem to address sexuality) would and should be considered carefully. The problem, it seems to me, is that we do so at times without the force of the biblical narrative. We take a text and play grammatical games with the original language and end up with an etymological fallacy (whether pro homosexual or not). That work is critical, but not fully sufficient when we analyze text in a clinical and almost acontexual way. The biblical storyline helps to unpack authorial meaning with the analysis so we stay anchored to the authors intentions.

    Again, I’m certainly not disagreeing with your point, just wanting to offer what may be the reasoning behind Tom’s comments. Also, doing work here in Seattle, I’ve found that the meaning/intention/purpose questions goes a very long way in this discussion with sincere inquirers.

  9. Peter Alley says:

    The views that N.T. Wright expresses here are what I consider to be the view of the majority within our Christian communities. However, many of us live in democracies, and the legislatures of many of those democracies may have or will in the future allow same-sex marriage. The question that the church needs to be asking is how does it respond? How does it differentiate a Christian marriage from a secular marriage? In Australia where I live, Christian ministers are empowered by the state to perform marriage ceremonies – should the churches separate from the state by only performing Christian marriages and not legal marriages?

  10. PJ Tibayan says:

    Amen and amen brother. Both/and. I completely agree with you and pray your continued faithfulness in Seattle though So Cal misses your gospel ministry here. It sounds to me in Wright’s passing comment like he’s not merely saying yes the narrative is the indispensable context and must be highlighted but also disdaining those who cling to the one or two verses. But I completely agree with your comment brother. I don’t think Wright makes it sound like what you assert, that “the work is critical” on the specific texts.

  11. Jeremy says:

    I wonder if Wright could have said these things in as much detail in his position with the Church of England

Comments are closed.

Search this blog


About


Justin Taylor photo

Justin Taylor, PhD


Justin Taylor is executive vice president of book publishing and book publisher for Crossway and blogs at Between Two Worlds. You can follow him on Twitter.

Justin Taylor's Books