Justification According to NT Wright: Part Two

First Foundation

            Wright does not claim to deny the content of the classic doctrine of justification by faith alone, as he affirms many aspects of it. What he does claim is that this doctrine is not what the words usually translated as “justify” are talking about in the New Testament.¹Justification according to N. T. Wright seems to me to boil down to three essential foundations, although these are not entirely separate and other aspects could also be considered foundation. These foundations are seeing justification as forensic, keeping the focus upon the covenant and viewing justification as past, present, and future.

            The first major foundation for Wright is that justification for Paul is based on a forensic background, especially in the Second Temple Jewish law court.  This law court had three parties: the judge, the plaintiff and the defendant. The righteous of the judge is quite different from the righteousness of the latter two. The judge is righteous when the case is handled in a correct and impartial manner. The plaintiff or the defendant, on the other hand, is righteous in a different sense. Their righteousness does not refer to their moral standing, but to the “status as a result of the decision of the court”.²

Login to add comments