 | Summaries and Customer Reviews are supplied by Amazon.com | For years Christians have been asking, "If you died tonight, do you know where you would go?" It turns out that many believers have been giving the wrong answer. It is not heaven. Award-winning author N. T. Wright outlines the present confusion about a Christian's future hope and shows how it is deeply intertwined with how we live today. Wright, who is one of today's premier Bible scholars, asserts that Christianity's most distinctive idea is bodily resurrection. He provides a magisterial defense for a literal resurrection of Jesus and shows how this became the cornerstone for the Christian community's hope in the bodily resurrection of all people at the end of the age. Wright then explores our expectation of "new heavens and a new earth," revealing what happens to the dead until then and what will happen with the "second coming" of Jesus. For many, including many Christians, all this will come as a great surprise. Wright convincingly argues that what we believe about life after death directly affects what we believe about life before death. For if God intends to renew the whole creation—and if this has already begun in Jesus's resurrection—the church cannot stop at "saving souls" but must anticipate the eventual renewal by working for God's kingdom in the wider world, bringing healing and hope in the present life. Lively and accessible, this book will surprise and excite all who are interested in the meaning of life, not only after death but before it. |
Average Customer Rating:   "...because my hope is in the resurrection of the dead!" To be honest, I have shied away from N.T. Wright for some time, having heard talk of tension and controversy. But browsing in my local library, I decided to take the plunge. Once again, I am happy I did! N.T. Wright does exactly what he intends: stand the hope of bodily resurrection and the new creation before his readers and ask where that hope leads us. Though Wright seems to think he will be met with controversy for this statement of hope, I found myself in general agreement, almost amazed that his view needed defending within the church!
Surprised By Hope is written as a corrective against "popular" Christian thought on heaven, the "afterlife", our mission and our place in the world. Wright shows with great clarity that our hope for the future is not in a distant heaven, but in a new creation. He declares again and again the goodness of God's creation, which though marred, he intends to restore and remake. He calls us to a life of action, that sees every Christlike deed as an act of building for the kingdom, something that will last, and not be wasted. Thus, rather than being highly cerebral, Wright tries at every turn to remind the reader that what he is saying has implications for the here and now.
Heaven and paradise, hell, purgatory - all are covered in his attempt to elucidate eschatology for the reader. Purgatory is rejected powerfully. Hell is handled with some kid gloves. And heaven and paradise are described in depth as the temporary residence on the road to resurrection for those who are part of the new creation. Some within his own tradition may find his handling of these three startling. I did not. However, I know there are many in my own local body who would be much more taken aback. In the end, the new creation, the merger of heaven and earth once sin and death are once and for all dealt with in full (Christ's resurrection a precursor to this) provide the backdrop for this and the rest of the book.
This is not about just reshaping Christian teaching so that it can match up better, so that our eulogies and funerary practices are more in line with scripture. It is about responding to the new creation initiated within us by the bodily resurrection of Jesus himself. While we will not remake the world into some idyllic Garden by our own action, we will bring God no glory, and will have quite missed God's point, if we get caught up in a "ticket to heaven" mentality and fail to live and grow as his new creation. Thus he will likely alienate those on both sides of the theological and political spectrum. The book is a call to be about more than just what is "spiritual", while not drifting away into a social gospel that is detached from the power of a risen savior:
"...the task of the church between ascension and parousia is therefore set free both from self-driven energy that imagines it has to build God's kingdom all by itself and from the despair that supposes it can't do anything until Jesus comes again. We do not "build the kingdom" all by ourselves, but we do build for the kingdom. Al that we do in faith, hope, and love in the present, in obedience to our ascended Lord and in the power of his Spirit, will be enhanced and transformed at his appearing (p. 143)..."
Wright makes many attempts at lightening the mood through humor (e.g. p. 207),and though not always accomplishing his objective, the intent is appreciated. In general, I found the tone of the entire book to be patient, allowing for questions as they might arise, yet unyielding and definitive when it came to the gospel. While coming from an entirely different tradition than my own, I felt like I was hearing a message from a long-time friend, one who felt comfortable pointing out misdirection knowing it would be received in love. Wright comes across as an authority, grasping the biblical data and able to handle it with great dexterity, and not just a scholar with an axe to grind. There is some disjointedness and repetition, due to the fact that this book is the collection and reworking of a number of lectures given by the author. But I did not find this a major distraction.
While there is much I agree with Wright in this book, there were a number of things that left me in a mood for quibbling. On page 216 (and then scattered, deliberately placed references throughout) he describes his intent to record his "conviction that [Third World debt remission] is the number one moral issue of our day." While it is his book, and he can freely record his conviction in whatever he sees fit, I know not nearly enough about the subject to either support or argue with him on the matter. I expect he intends it as an example of where our understanding of the new creation already begun should have real actionable results in the now, but without more discussion of why this example is fitting, I would have to say it is a failure to get his point across. It instead invites argument and debate.
Where he discusses the sacraments, especially the Eucharist in pages 273-276, I was unimpressed by the vague wording used. Though I see him aiming at redirecting us from understanding Communion as symbol-only, towards an actual, though "new creation", partaking of Christ, I don't think this was necessary or beneficial to the overall flow of the text. Once again, though it is related to the topic, his own particular view on the matter may cause more friction in getting the major theme of the book across since it is clearly much harder to swallow and not foundational to the topic (my opinion, of course).
I find myself in disagreement with Wright that, "during his earthly ministry Jesus said nothing about his return." (p. 125). While he does raise some interesting points, I am simply not convinced by his argument. His point is not to question the truth of the Christian claim of Jesus' return (as he makes very clear), but the idea that Jesus himself taught that he would. To be fair, his argument (p. 128) attempts to put Jesus' own statement regarding the "Son of Man" in the "proper" context of Daniel 7 and messianic expectation, and should be given some careful consideration before moving on. As well, his comments on parousia and royal presence are helpful to the overall flow of the book even if one does disagree with his original contention about Jesus' own teaching.
In discussing the destiny of those who are not a part of the "new creation" (pp. 182-183), discussing hell, he is by his own admission rather speculative. I'd have to say his speculations didn't help clarify anything for me. But such is the way with speculations, and his approach was certainly not combative in this instance.
A final point of interest, which at first I found a tedious stretch, was his noting that Jesus is mistaken for a gardener at the tomb. To Wright, this takes on nuance and meaning as Christ is the new Adam, the tender of God's creation (p. 210). And while I slightly rolled my eyes when I first read this comment (which was not the only mention of the idea), and am still rather guarded about putting much faith or credence in it, it is interesting. Wouldn't it be just like God - one more time to try to get his message across.
The book was very enjoyable to read, and its subject matter is essential for a proper view of our mission and God's purposes. It was handled by Wright in a slightly defensive way, but the defense is artfully as well as passionately given. A good book This was my first NT wright book and it was good. It puts forth a very biblical idea of heaven and the like. It touches on the resurrection far more than I have every heard and which should be heard in many of out churches today. Lively Theology, Deadly Economics Praise
Right now somebody I know is having their body grossly manipulated by chemotherapy. In thinking about their suffering I remembered someone once telling me that, as Christians, we can look forward to a new body, one free of the disease and injury that we accumulate on earth. What comfort that is. However, I can't seem to remember hearing much about our "new" bodies in recent years. So, I set about looking for some edification on this matter. Wright's book provides just that. For whatever reasons, many Christians have forgotten the most hopeful and exciting expectation in our faith, that of a bodily resurrection similar to Christ's. In Parts I and II of his book Wright examines Scripture and early Church thoughts on the resurrection of the believer and leaves very little doubt as to the orthodoxy of the idea.
Criticism
The implications of bodily resurrection are profound and complicated. Wright deals with these implications in Part III. I chose not to finish reading Part III because I found myself is such disagreement with Wright's discussion of economic phenomena early on in Part III. I recommend this book, so please do not let my following critique dissuade anybody from reading the book.
A few quotes from Wright:
"As far as I can see, the major task that faces us in our generation, corresponding to the issue of slavery two centuries ago, is that of the massive economic imbalance of the world... (pp 216)"
"Whatever it takes, we must change this situation or stand condemned by subsequent history alongside those who supported the Nazis seventy years ago. It's that serious. (pp 217)"
"...reading the collected works of F.A. Hayek in a comfortable chair in North America doesn't address the moral questions of the twenty first century. (pp 218-219)"
Early in the book Wright notes that late 19th century memes like The Enlightenment and evolution were unable to prevent of the atrocities of WW1, the Gulag, and Auschwitz. All this scientific progress and personal liberation and we still managed to create hell on earth. I agree with him. I do wish he'd focused more on the Gulag, Maoist China and Pol Pot's Cambodia; that is, more focus on communist atrocities.
It has been estimated that communist governments have killed more people in the 20th century than were killed in all wars during this period. Both communist Russia and China may be responsible for over 40 million deaths each. (See [...])
One of the sentiments of communism is an appeal to end the "economic imbalance of the world" by "whatever it takes." Thus far it has taken close to 100 million human lives.
His discussion of economics is void of the care he uses in his theological logic. Sometimes, his insinuations are odd and inaccurate. For example, he decries third world debt as the worst symptom of the world's "economic imbalance" and then anticipates his opponents appealing to F.A. Hayek to justify this evil capitalistic situation. Well, Hayek would not justify third world debt, as he would see it as capital confiscated by taxation which was then lent by one government to another government. Third world debt is not a phenomenon of free markets; it is a product of statist socialism.
I do wish Wright would reconsider what he thinks are the most pressing political problems of the day, thus the mission of the church. He is guilty of attacking caricatures of free markets, just like his atheist opponents attack caricatures of Christianity. He is also remotely sympathetic to sentiments which were, in large part, responsible for the preventable deaths of millions.
Finally an intelligible non-sensational exposition of the end times Surprised by Hope brings to the table various issues ignored by the radical and often sensational end times crowd. In Wright you will read a compelling end- times scenario that is not tied up with the latest news stories and therefore, won't embarrass you.
New creation and the ressurection are front and center in this particular book, as well as their implications for living the Christian life responsibly, anticipating the hope of God's new world and what it means to be human in it.
You are going to want to disagree with Wright on some points (such as his insistance that Christ never foretold his coming again [i.e. the so-called Second Coming]; however, most of the book is sane and can be used as discipleship tool to keep new converts away from the harmful rhethoric of dualists and dispensationalists. a life changing read. N.T. Wright is not free of controversy. He truly makes you think and he has introduced here thoughts that have changed some of the way that I look at the future. I had hope before but the picture of that hope is a lot clearer and stronger. No wonder I've given the book away again and again as a gift. |  |
Select button not working? 
