Product Description

Lively & topical overview of the issues involved when the authority of scripture is cited or called into question An account of how the church does, and should, understand the authority of scripture - how do we read the Bible, how does our understanding change over time, who has power to change or challenge what the church believes, how do we balance the claims of the Bible against those of Christian tradition and of personal discernment? This is particularly topical at the moment especially when questions of authority and schism are live issues.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #86675 in Books
• Published on: 2005-03-18
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 112 pages

About the Author
Tom Wright is the Bishop of Durham. A well-known and highly respected theologian and author, he has a large following. He is the author of the For Everyone series of guides to the New Testament, which display his ability to write for lay Christians. He is also author of the current best-seller The Resurrection of the Son of God.

Customer Reviews

Yes, but in what sense is Scripture the word of God?
This book is a mixed bag as far as I'm concerned. I was helped by much of what was said, puzzled about what was left unsaid.

It an attempt to get `beyond the Bible wars' (from the subtitle of the American edition), Wright (deliberately?) omits any meaningful affirmation and explication of Scripture as the inspired word of God.

Wright defines `inspiration' in the following terms:-

"By his Spirit God guided the very different writers and editors, so that the books they produced were the books God intended his people to have."

Well, yes. But in the providence of God something similar could be said of any collection of books. For Wright, divine inspiration seems to imply divine providence, but the real question is whether inspiration implies divine endorsement.

It's OK to list some of the more troublesome misreadings of the `Right' and of the `Left' (78-81). It's helpful to be urged to see our role within the "five acts" of the narrative (creation, fall, Israel, Christ, the church). It's fine to be reminded that our reading of Scripture should be "totally contextual," "liturgically guided, "privately studied," "refreshed by appropriate scholarship," and "taught by the church's accredited leaders" (84-104).

But Wright simply does not discuss the most pressing question about the authority of Scripture. In Scripture, `the Word of God' implies, among other things, divine speech. We need to know, then, in what sense and to what extent the words of the Bible can be regarded as the words of God. On this point, he is unhelpfully silent.

The (W)Right Authority
Wright has written at great length about his views on the authority of Scripture, especially in NTPG. You get the impression that when he dedicates the book to Stephen Sykes and Robin Eames, the chairs of two boards Wright sits on, it is more than just a polite nod in their direction. This book seems to be a rapid response to a particular set of issues facing him in his ministry.

As such, it is a brilliant little book. In 100 pages it is never going to resolve the labyrinthine issues that face anyone asking the question "How can the Bible be authoritative" but Wright posts up a few signs in the right direction.

Superb illustrations and turns of phrase abound leaving you very clear as to what the author intends as he steps into a morass of contested terms. It is a superb little book to get one thinking anew on this crucial topic. Accessible to any interested reader. I cannot lay any major faults at its door.

Could be clearer
Refreshing and perplexing is how I found my first experience of reading the new Bishop of Durham. God's authority is excercised through Scripture is his thesis. I do not think he would add a Reformation sola, alone there, or would he? No, I think not. Wright gives us a good survey of how Scripture has been used and misused in church history. His ctitique of Enlightenment rationalism is a joy to read but I am not clear how he gets both liberals and fundamentalists to be heirs of Enlightenment.
He gives examples of what he considers misreadings of Scripture from both left and right. I only fall foul of one of his condemnations, believing capital punishment by the state is required by Scripture. Wright rules it out because he says many Church Fathers did. An appeal to tradition?

I understand from this what the good bishop does not believe but I think he could have clarified to us just what his belief really does mean. Perhaps the post-modernism he critiques so well has left him averse to giving a new creedal formulation for today concerning the authority of Scripture? Perhaps I need to read him again and more slowly. One thing I would have to look for is whether or not he ever uses the term evangelical in his work.

Revealed truth does need to be restated to meet the needs of the 21st century but is it to much too ask for a concise formula on Scripture, and the authority of God, preferrably one that could be used liturgically to confess the faith once delivered before the watching world?