What St. Paul Really Said: was Paul of Tarsus the real founder of Christianity?

Rating:
Summary: A perfect middle ground . . .
Review: N. T. Wright is a brilliant scholar and deserves to be read my Christians and skeptics alike. Wright has excellently stood in the middle ground of Christian scholarship--unlike Fundamentalists he does not see the need to take everything in Scripture completely literally and unlike Liberals he does not dismiss (or, as Liberals are fond of doing, "reinterpret") the large portions of the Pauline epistles. Instead Write views these letters as God's word to us, transmitted through the hand of one who was used by God in a mighty way. His scholarship is excellent, he writes extremely well, and he gives excellent responses to Liberal critical "scholars" like A. N. Wilson. Most importantly, Wright shows that it was Jesus Christ, not Paul who was the true founder of Christianity, and Paul faithfully preached the Gospel of Christ. Read this excellent book!

Rating:
Summary: A definitive statement
Review: Once again Tom Wright has demonstrated that he has the most definitive grasp of the New Testament of anyone in Church history. If you read anything on Paul, read this book!!

Rating:
Summary: Putting 1st Century History Back into the Study of Paul
Review: S. Wuest, Evangelical, BA in Classical Languages and Literature, MS

There has been almost a phobia of history, among conservative Christians, because of the bizarre interpretations of the New Testament by liberals (starting with Schweitzer). This book shows that Christians have nothing to fear from historical studies.

Wright is a 1st century historian, and an Anglican Christian. He refuses to prostitute his historical studies and evidence, to his theological beliefs. This is a breath of fresh air in modern Christian studies. Wright starts with the constraints of history that exist on all interpretational schemes for the New Testament, develops basic "vocabulary" in the sense of themes and meanings in 1st century culture and Judaism, then moves on to the development of theology which is fully integrated into this 1st century context. On fully historical and cultural grounds, Wright argues that the liberal conclusions on who Paul was, and where he got his theology, are implausible.

Wright goes on to what Paul's theology meant in 1st century Jewish language, and the result may as well be a commentary on basic Paul's major theological writing in the New Testament (especially Romans), and the major vocabulary used in that writing (grace, salvation, justification, gospel).

Wright has revolutionized the way that I read Paul.

...