The Day the Revolution Began

Short Review: I am not going to summarize this. I need to read it again to fully evaluate the book.

One of the reasons that many get irritated with Wright is that is keeps presenting his ideas as either new, or the first return to ‘correct' understanding in hundreds of years. If you are irritated about that, you will be irritated here. Wright's strength is connecting the broad narrative sweep of scripture and the 1st century era culture. I think if he started working with a historical theologian that helped him connect his ideas explicitly to the historical theological work of theologians after the first century, it would help tone down that irritating tic and help readers connect his thought to its historical roots.

Wright wants to help people think clearly about how their theology connects to their daily life. I think that is one of his strengths. But part of what the church today needs is a connection of its theology to the historical church. But his description of his work as either new, or a rediscovery of what is lost, minimizes the connection to the historical teaching of the church. This is particularly true for low church fans of his that do not already have a strong connection to the traditional church. Maybe this is a blind spot that Wright has because of his British Anglican setting. Wright himself has a strong sense of both history, and the world wide range of the church, but many of his readers (and biggest fans) do not. (My reading of Thomas Oden in particular has convinced me of the importance viewing the theology of the church as a continuum with historical teaching and not new.)

I do think the broad focus of the book, that the work of the cross, while about individual sin, if only about individual sin minimizes the work that was actually done there, is important. Wright makes a real contribution here. Maybe as big of a contribution to the church as his Surprised by Hope.

My full review is on my blog at http://bookwi.se/day-the-revolution-began/

(but like I said. I need to read this again)