Subtitle: Complete Eighteen-Volume Set: 20th Anniversary Edition with Study Guide
Author: N. T. Wright, former Bishop in the Church of England (Anglican) and now the Chair of New Testament and Early Christianity at the University of St. Andrews. He previously taught at Cambridge, McGill, and Oxford Universities. Wright is a prolific author and host of the podcast Ask NT Wright Anything.
Why I chose it:
I was looking for specific details about the people and places in the New Testament to provide context and setting for my next novel, where I show women in the early church as priests, evangelists and church planters as they travel to various cities, some of which are named in the New Testament.
I had heard N. T. Wright speak on podcasts and was aware of Wright's knowledge of the Bible and ancient times. He is a widely respected theologian and a widely published author. I trusted that patriarchal viewpoints did not bias him, since he has said the question of women in ministry was settled many years ago for Christians in his home country of Britain. Wright has stated publicly that he has long believed that the New Testament clearly supports women in ministry. He explains that history verifies that women had authority in the church and society in the ancient world. He states that the passages that appear to limit women in ministry need to be seen in the light of John 20 (where the risen Jesus appears first to Mary Magdalene and commissions her to tell the men), and Romans 16 (where Paul commends many women as co-workers, patrons, and apostles).
Publisher: Westminster John Knox Press, October 3, 2023, 4659 pages
Genre: non-fiction, New Testament Commentaries, New Testament Criticism & Interpretation, Christian Commentaries.
Pros
passage excerpts precede discussions
easy-to-read, relatable stories, similar to a devotional
Cons
gives opinions and editorial more than analysis or facts
gives insight into simple ideas but lacks insight into complex ideas.
hard to find his main points amidst the lengthy personal anecdotes
lacks the detail and meat of a reference text
Romans
I heard N. T. Wright interviewed about his recent book: Into the Heart of Romans. In the interview, Tom Wright says that Paul's theology is more about love than about laws and rules of behaviour. However, in this Commentary, Wright seems to focus on rules of behaviour.
Wright says he began studying this letter intensively thirty years ago and comes from a tradition that has made Paul a "great hero and main guide" in Christianity (over the Gospels of Jesus). Wright notes that he has mapped out much of Romans, but "parts remain a mystery, especially about the coming together of Jews and Gentiles".
For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and is generous to all who call on him. Romans 10:12 NRSVUE
It is possible that Wright now sees no distinction between male and female, but this commentary continues to promote the idea that women must hold on to distinct identities as women. The commentary does not acknowledge the inconsistency of limiting womens' freedoms due to their gender while at the same time noting how Paul honoured women as co-workers. Perhaps it was hard for a well-educated white man, a citizen of a colonial power, and an elder and advisor of elite institutions for the upper class, to imagine how to relinquish these distinct privileges and accept others as equals, regardless of education, citizenship, class, or gender. Perhaps it was too much effort to update his 2023 Commentary to reflect his current thinking. Perhaps it was too much to expect that his Commentary would provide multiple views from various scholars. This Commentary, read by itself, leads readers to support hierarchy in marriage and women in support roles.
7 So you are no longer a slave but a child, and if a child then also an heir through God. Galatians 4:7 NRSVUE
"... it is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs: heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if we in fact suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him." Romans 8:16-17 NRSVUE
Wright spends some time explaining the simple concept of debt. He says that we are in God's debt and should live accordingly, following rules of behaviour. Our debt to God obligates us to change the world. In Romans 8:17, Wright says we are heirs if we use God's gifts for the purpose of working to transform the world. I read this as a woman and feel obligated to work without limitations to transform the world for God.
Wright skims over the complex and revolutionary idea of all believers being heirs with the rights of sons, co-heirs with Jesus. Perhaps it is not striking to him because he has always felt confident in his rights as a son of God. To me, being equal co-heirs is key to understanding how there is no more distinction between Jew and Gentile, male and female. For me as a woman, being a co-heir is a shocking symbol of equality; God gives women the rights of sons.
"We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose." Romans 8:28 NRSVUE
In a recent interview about Romans, Wright says Romans 8:28 is not a promise about God making everything good. It's about God working with those who allow the Spirit to lead us to do good works. It's about humans groaning and labouring with the Spirit to give birth to our new life. It's about us choosing to follow God's prompting and growing in the image of Jesus.
In his Commentary, however, Wright says Romans 8:28 is a promise that God is in charge, bringing good out of whatever happens. It does not appear that Wright updated the 2nd edition of his Commentary to include insights he gained when writing his new book on Romans. Wright says it's about God choosing us, not us choosing to follow God, and not us allowing the Spirit to lead us. A few pages earlier, he said God saves the whole world, yet here he says God chose only certain people. He does not acknowledge that some Christians don't hold to the doctrine of predestination, that some Christians believe God foreknows without fore-determining. Instead, God asks us to follow and yet gives us the choice.
In Romans 16, Wright suggests that Paul's purpose in naming so many people of different genders, households, classes, and ethnicities is to embrace them all with a sense of mutual partnership in ministry. Paul's list of women co-workers gives no indication they hold positions secondary to men. Wright notes that Paul calls Junia an apostle, with the same status as Paul himself.
Galatians
I looked up Galatians 2 in order to place Paul's reproof of Peter in the timeline of Acts for my novel. For this passage, Wright tells a lengthy story about a famous walk where you can't stray to the left or to the right without falling to explain the simple concept of balancing viewpoints. Wright compares this to Paul walking between honouring the church leaders and following his own path. He does not address the complex concept of how we might balance honouring church leaders with following God's call on our own lives.
"But when I saw that they were not acting consistently with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas [Peter] before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the gentiles to live like Jews?” Galatians 2:14 NRSVUE
Next, Wright tells a lengthy story about how actors use theatre makeup to explain the simple concept of acting like something you're not. He explains that readers today don't remember being prohibited from sharing a table with someone due to racial or gender differences. I know people who remember being seated separately due to race. I myself have been prevented from sitting at certain tables for men only. We know the simple concepts of segregation and hypocrisy.
Wright does not address the complex issues of why Paul does not reprimand Peter privately, why Peter changed from integrating with Gentiles to separating himself, and when they had this dispute in Antioch. Wright simply concludes that Paul's message is a warning to all of us not to put on a mask of respectability. He says the main point of the confrontation in Antioch is: "All those in Christ must be who they truly are." However, Wright himself excludes some people when they reveal who they truly are or what they truly believe. I also find this commentary on the dispute disappointing because it misses the main point about how Christians can forget their outward differences, relate to each other, teach and admonish one another in love.
"... and it was in Antioch that the disciples were first called “Christians.” Acts 11:26 NRSVUE
Wright explains that the word Christian means "Messiah people". He doesn't explain that the word Christ or Christos is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word "Messiah". In English, it means the anointed one or promised deliverer. Wright notes that Syrian Antioch was one of the great centres of early Christianity.
Wright misses explaining that Syrian Antioch was a very multi-cultural centre, a crossroads of trade, populated by a wide mix of religions and ethnicities. Calling followers of Jesus "Christians" was a Greek word play on "Cretin". A Cretin was a stupid or vulgar person and being called a Cretin was an insult and a type of persecution. However, early Christians wore it as a badge of honour.
Philemon
I wanted to study Philemon because my novel will show female evangelists travelling to Colossae, a city that Paul never personally visited, and meeting the residents named in the text.
Wright tells a long anecdote about the simple concept of praising someone and reminding them of their friendship in order to secure a yes for a request. Wright says the key to the letter is that Paul and Philemon are partners in sharing the gospel, making it productive, and living it. Wright effectively shows that Philemon may be the laughing stock of their society if he forgives his escaped slave. But it will be a powerful way to demonstrate the God's grace to each of us. It would demonstrate that in Christ we are all equal.
"...To our beloved coworker Philemon, to our sister Apphia, to our fellow soldier Archippus, and to the church in your house" Philemon 1:1-2
Wright states that Philemon's wife is Apphia and their son is Archippus. He does not acknowledge that is only one interpretation. Paul greets the church that meets "in your house". According to the footnotes of the NRSVUE Bible, the Greek word "your" is singular. "Your house" does not refer to a husband-and-wife family, but to an individual, likely Philemon. This is not a personal letter from Paul to Philemon and his family. It is addressed to the whole church. Unlike when Paul mentions married couples, in this letter, Paul describes each person individually. Apphia is called "our sister", a title that Paul also gives to his patron, Phoebe, the deacon in Cenchrae. It's very similar to the title "our brother" that Paul gives to another church leader, Timothy. Wright does not discuss the possibility that Apphia is named in this letter because she is a church leader who can influence Philemon to do the right thing in front of the whole community. Wright misses this opportunity to show the male and female co-leadership of the early church.
Colossians
Wright typically does not start his discussion about each letter by saying who wrote it or where, when, or why. There are no sub-titles leading us to the bottom line. Instead, we begin with a story about a garden and how a new plant is growing. Eventually, Wright connects this to Paul planting God's word in the people of Colossae.
This letter has some similarities to Ephesians and closes with almost the same words to describe the letter carrier, Tychicus. He may have delivered Ephesians, Philemon, and Colossians on the same journey. Most scholars see the letters of Ephesians, Philemon, and Colossians written about the same time.
"Tychicus will tell you all the news about me; he is a beloved brother, a faithful minister, and a fellow servant in the Lord. 8 I have sent him to you for this very purpose, so that you may know how we are and that he may encourage your hearts; he is coming with Onesimus, the faithful and beloved brother, who is one of you. They will tell you about everything here." Colossians 4:7-9
"So that you also may know how I am and what I am doing, Tychicus will tell you everything. He is a dear brother and a faithful minister in the Lord. 22 I am sending him to you for this very purpose, to let you know how we are and to encourage your hearts." Ephesians 6:21
Wright typically makes a statement without acknowledging that it is one interpretation. He states that Paul is likely in prison in Ephesus without providing his reasons. He does not mention that large number of scholars place it much later in Paul's life when he was in prison in Rome.
In Colossians 3:5-17, Wright tells a detailed story to explain the concept of changing clothes and putting on snow gear for skiing. This is to build on Paul's illustration of Christians taking off old ways and putting on new patterns of behaviour. Wright says sexual misbehaviour includes both actions and thoughts, meaning that it is a sin to dream of intercourse outside marriage. Sexual fantasies are a form of greed and idolatry. He explains that it is about how immoral behaviour or harmful speech can hurt the community. Do away with old divisions. In Christ, there are no more differences, and Paul gives examples such as Greek or Jews, barbarian or citizen, slave or free. Wright does not mention how this verse (Colossians 3:11) is almost identical to Galatians 3:28, in which Paul says that in Christ there is no more difference in privileges between male and female.
Wright suggests that if we live in freedom, we will certainly live in the "old clothes" of sexual immorality, lust, greed, anger and slander. Wright says "freedom of choice is one of the idols of our time". He suggests exercising our freedom will ultimately lead to broken relationships and dead ends.
He reinforces Jesus as our Lord, holding together our new clothes: compassion, kindness, patience, forgiveness, and love. Wright explains that our different gifts are needed in the community to draw out the meaning of God's word and apply it to church life. He doesn't point out that Paul authorizes both men and women to teach, warn, reprimand, or correct one another. That is mutual submission.
"Let the word of Christ[h] dwell in you richly; teach and admonish one another in all wisdom; and with gratitude in your hearts sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs to God." Colossians 3:16 NRSVUE
In Colossians 3:18-4:1, Wright mocks the idea of a society without rules. How could it function if a driver doesn't stay on the correct side of the road? The point of his story is that society cannot function unless wives stay in a submissive or subordinate role. Wright says that rules for households are as needed as rules for how we drive on a highway. The "command to wives" to submit and obey is acceptable because it's tempered by the "corresponding duties" of a husband. He says the corresponding instructions to husbands and slavemasters are as revolutionary as what people wish Paul said. I think what Paul said is revolutionary and promotes equality. Wright notes that Paul's co-workers included women, and some of them were 'people in their own right' rather than a shadowy figure behind her husband. Wright acknowledges a husband and wife should be mutually respectful but insists they have different freedoms and responsibilities determined by gender, not identical roles.
"Paul is quite clear that, in the mutuality of respect and love that makes a marriage what it should be, the roles are reciprocal, not identical", page 3614 on Colossians 3
Does "reciprocal" mean equal and mutual? Or does it mean "Complementaray" roles defined by gender? Does "corresponding duties" mean duties determined by gender? Wright suggests that Paul supports the hierarchal household code. Wright states that a woman submitting is not making her a downtrodden victim. Wright calls these guidelines for marriage today.
An egalitarian would see these instructions as overturning the pagan Greco-Roman household codes and removing the positions of privilege. One egalitarian view of this passage is that Paul revolutionizes pagan household structures so Christian households operate without positions of power. Another egalitarian view is that Paul points to the pagan household codes to explain to men the unfamiliar concept of submitting to one another: like wives to husbands. Ancient wifely submission is a model for Christians to submit to one another.
"Give my greetings to the brothers and sisters in Laodicea and to Nympha and the church in her house" (Colossians 4:15 NRSVUE)
Wright supposes that Nympha was one of the leaders a "little church in Colossae", minimizing her leadership by saying the congregation likely had less than a dozen members. He does not allow that while Philemon and Apphia are co-leaders at the church in Colossae, Nympha likely leads her own church in Laodicea. He does not address how a woman can lead a congregation of men and women and yet must follow pagan hierarchal household codes that make her secondary.
Ephesians
Without sub-titles, it took some digging, but in the section on Ephesians, Wright hypothesizes that the letter labelled "Ephesians" is not to Ephesians but from Paul in Ephesus to churches in the surrounding areas. It is difficult to find whether Wright gives a specific timeline of Paul's letters, or his views on why and where the letters were written.
Wright opens his discussion of this letter by discussing how men feel discriminated against, without model fathers, and they feel like boys are disrespected. Wright seems to connect female models as teachers and girls' academic excellence with the reason boys end up in gangs. Wright notes that since Aristotle, men have regarded women as inferior, and now, Wright says, men are being pushed to apologize for being male.
I disagree with Wright's assessment. If boys become thieves or addicts, it's not because girls did well in school and became teachers. As a feminist, I don't want men to apologize or stop being men. I want men and women to have the same rights and freedoms.
Wright is fascinated with the idea that Jesus leaves his home to come to earth in search of a bride. However, Wright does not suggest that this passage is describing the foreign concept of Christ being united with the church, his bride. Wright takes the traditional view that Ephesians 5:21-33 gives instructions for Christian marriage. I disagree. Paul himself says this whole discussion is to use the familiar Greco-Roman marriage structure to explain the great mystery of how Jesus is united as one with his bride, the church.
"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a great mystery, but I am speaking about Christ and the church. Ephesians 5:31-32
Wright explains that Paul has a counter-cultural way of addressing gender roles. He says a husband should model himself after Jesus, not after a bossy, authoritarian male. Jesus did not take his bride, the church, by force, but by giving himself for her with sacrificial love. Wright sees a husband as "bringing the wife into full purity" by taking care of her and showing her she is loved, not by bossing her around. However, this line of thought seems to place husbands in the role of Jesus, who made us pure when he went to the cross.
"Paul sees the actions of Jesus- and by the parallel he has set up, the actions of the husband - as taking the responsibility to bring the wife into full purity." Page 3493 on Ephesians 5.
Of course, Wright may note in other places that Jesus' death purified his people from their sins. But this section only mentions a husband's role in bringing his wife to full purification. I am worried that people may buy this book and think that Wright continues to believe and promote this idolatry of husbands.
While Wright has publicly stated that he believes both women and men can be ministers and pastors, this Commentary upholds a patriarchal model for marriage. In this Commentary, Wright says that men's and women's roles must be mutually complementary, not identical. Wright assumes he has the authority to say what level of equality may belong to women. He offers women equality in voting, employment opportunities, and equal pay but says that should not be taken to imply equality in identity. He calls himself an egalitarian supporting women in ministry, but this chapter shows he would not offer women full equality. It seems to indicate our identity as women is above our identity in Christ.
"relations and roles must therefore be mutually complementary, rather than identical. Equality in voting rights... should not be taken to imply such identity. And within marriage, the guideline is clear. The husband is to take the lead - though he is to do so Mindful of the self-sacrificial model..." page 3494 re Ephesians 5
To back his statement that the Bible endorses male leadership in marriage, Wright refers to the high divorce rates of the Western world, inferring equality is a secular concept that leads to divorce. He does not cite any statistics. A 2014 Baylor University report found that evangelical Protestants have higher divorce rates than families with no religion. It is disappointing for a Bible Commentary to falsely claim that a hierarchal marriage results in fewer divorces. I am extremely disappointed that such a renowned theologian published a 2023 text promoting hierarchal marriage as biblical, without any reference to alternative views. I regret that this author's books continue to be distributed as required reading among theological students.
Conclusion
My initial reaction was that this commentary might be suitable for a light read in an armchair, but unsuitable as a reference text. As a reference text, it has a lot of verbiage for the amount of facts, and its lack of subtitles makes it hard to research specific concepts. The 4659-page ebook is too large to open on my phone's Kindle app, so I read it not in my armchair but at my desk on my laptop browser when I am in research mode.
I understand that this Commentary is for amateur theologians and therefore aims to avoid technical topics. Wright tells detailed anecdotes to explain simple concepts while skimping on details for complex concepts. He tends to state strong opinions on technical and controversial topics without noting any other viewpoints. His detailed anecdotes and his stature as an academic may lead readers to agree and accept the Commentary without questioning the morals he draws from his stories.
Even as an amateur theologian, I noticed inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and misleading statements. Wright often makes personal statements as if they were facts, and does not cite his rationale. He neglects to differentiate between what is in the text and what is his interpretation, making it difficult to know which ideas need to be cross-checked. He rarely mentions alternative scholar's views or schools of thought.
Unfortunately, I can no longer trust N. T. Wright or his Bible Commentary. His Commentary revealed that he either was not transparent in his online interviews, or he did not put his current views into this 2023 release. This Commentary promotes prejudice by supporting separate privileges based on gender or class. I bought this complete set in ebook format (regularly C$370) for under C$10 and I'm not sure it was worth it.
Elaine Ricker Kelly Author is empowering women with historical fiction about women in the Bible and early church and Christian blogs about women in leadership, church history and doctrine. Her books include:
Forgotten Followers from Broken to Bold, Book 1 (2022)
The Sword A Fun Way to Engage in Healthy Debate on What the Bible Says About a Woman's Role (2023)
Because She Was Called: from Broken to Bold, Book 2, A Novel of the Early Church, imagines Mary Magdalene's trip to testify before the emperor (2024)
Walk with Mara on Her Healing Journey: 21 Steps to Emotional Resilience (2024)
Comments