Think Wink.

Doug Wilson hasn’t stopped his review of Wright’s justification book written in response to Piper. Wilson is quite entertaining when he points out things like if Wright is wrong in his outflanking maneuver, he’s like the Confederate Cavalry commander Gen. Jeb Stuart who “outflanked” the Union army at Gettysburg. He rode around behind an army that annihilated his own army. Good job Jeb! Comparisons like that are amusing, even if a person finds Wilson’s review off.

Michael Bird at Euangelion has interacted a bit with Wilson’s review and I really like what Bird has said. While Bird agrees with Wilson’s call to abandon the idea of Jesus having merit (agreeing with Wright no less!) for covenantal obedience, I concur with Bird who says,

What is missing in this discussion by Wilson is reference to “union with Christ” as the mechanism that communications righteousness since we are only justified in Christ. There is no imputation without participation and incorporation into Christ.

I found this quote from Bird to be very enlightening and I am going to give it more thought,

The question is where does imputation fit into the story? Whereas some want to make justification the centre and imputation the centre of justification; I would make imputation a corollary explains the forensic nature of justification, the representative functions of Adam and Christ, the gift of righteousness, etc.

I really like the following two paragraphs from one of Wilson’s reviews and I’ll conclude with them. If they can be reworded into the NT’s “union with Christ” paradigm, I’d like it even more.

On the question of imputation, I don’t think this is an example of me talking past Wright. I think it is an instance of Wright talking past Wright. He clearly believes in penal substitution, but rejects what he calls imputation of righteousness. But unlike a financial fine or debt, the only way to take on the guilt of another is through imputation . . . either that, or another process that is virtually identical to imputation called by another name. It is clear that Wright believes in the imputation of the passive obedience of Christ, to use our vocabulary. Christ paid the penalty for my rebellion, and I am invited to act as though I had paid that penalty . . . which I have done, in Him. I have been crucified with Christ, and I no longer live (Gal. 2:20).

Wright even believes in the imputation of the active obedience of Christ . . . although he says that he is rejecting it. God’s plan was to put the world to rights through Israel (p. 46). The way He was going to do this was through Israel finally doing it right. Now Israel finally did it right through the perfect, sinless life of Jesus. Jesus in His baptism was Israel. Jesus in His forty days in the wilderness was Israel. Jesus in His conquest of the land, driving out demons, was Israel. Now, how do I get to be in that Israel? How do I get to glory in what He did? Why does the credit of Israel finally “doing it right” accrue to me? The answer to that question is found in the glorious word imputation.

Which leads to my last point. Although he doesn’t say so explicitly here, I believe that Wright is actually kicking against a particular form of the imputation calculus — the idea that somewhere there is a reservoir of merit, and that withdrawals are made from it from time to time in order that we may pay our debts. But let’s forget about merit. Suppose for a moment that we are not talking about the imputation of merit, but rather the imputation of obedience. The former is medieval; the latter is Hebraic and covenantal. Not only do I believe it is fully consistent with what Wright is saying, I believe that it is what he (in essence) is saying.

Click here and here for Bird’s two posts on Wilson’s review and here for the quote from Wilson. Bird has provided links to Wilson’s reviews so you can read more if you are interested.

Reviews of N. T. Wright’s New Book

Thoughts on the Endings of Kings and Chronicles

Justification