The Day the Revolution Began audiobook

I intended to read The Day the Revolution Began for Lent this year, to help me stay focused on Jesus’s crucifixion and resurrection, and to learn more, reflecting on hard questions. And I did read it during Lent . . . but, I’m embarrassed to say, I didn’t finish it, and I eventually took a pause and set it aside for a while (which turned into months). The reason I didn’t finish it on the first go is that even though I find N. T. Wright’s ideas and teaching to be brilliant, I also found the writing style of the book to be extremely repetitive and a bit twisty in its structure—that is, for every step forward (“Here’s what I’m saying . . . ”) there are several steps that feel backward (“But first, here are the three things I’m not saying . . . ”). For me, it was sometimes really difficult to keep hold of where we were, what he was responding to; I even had a hard time coming up with a one-sentence description of what the book is about, when people asked me what I was reading. So I went on to other books, which was good. But this week was the time to return and finish. I’m glad I did, because after that break, I loved getting back into it for the final few chapters.Wright’s main point in this book is to unpack Paul’s phrase from 1 Corinthians 15:3, “Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures.” Knowing that “the scriptures” at that time referred to what we now call the Old Testament, in what way did these new believers see Jesus’s death and resurrection as “according to the scriptures”? And did this event mean something other (more, even) than “saving me from my sins so that I’ll go to heaven when I die”?In answering this question, Wright connects Jesus’s death and resurrection to the whole story of the Bible, showing what it was that the Jews of that time were expecting as part of salvation and the Messiah. One point that particularly struck me, and helped refine my views on the connections between the Old and New Testaments, is that God in the New Testament is continuing his covenant with Abraham. Too often we contemporary Western Christians tend to look at the Abrahamic covenant as perhaps a good idea originally, but obviously it never worked as God had hoped, so by the time of the New Testament he sort of left it by the side of the road like a junky car and moved on to a plan that he knew would work. That’s putting it crassly, but isn’t that how we see it sometimes? Instead, Wright affirms that in order to be righteous and faithful, God cannot simply discard a previous promise in favor of something new. No, this new act in the crucifixion is God making good on his promise in a radical, unexpected way—but a way that is fully in line with his character as faithful and true. If the original covenant was all about restoring humanity to their intended role in the world as image-bearers of God, then the crucifixion is the way God fulfills that covenant and opens the way for us to take up that vocation.God’s purpose was not simply that we would change our behavior—that the crucifixion would empower us all to act better, to be more righteous. Rather, we should see the behavior as a symptom of the true problem: our idolatry. We have “exchanged the glory of the immortal God” for worship of the created world. The true problem of humanity is not that we behave badly (though we do, and though that is certainly a problem), but that we worship everything (money, sex, power) except the God who is truly worthy. When we put away our idolatry and turn our adoration to God, that’s when we can take up our true vocation in this world. And that is one of Wright’s most important points, reiterated all throughout this book. The crucifixion allows us to be cleansed, to turn back to God, and to be truly human, as it was intended to be. That’s what started the revolution, and what continues to be revolutionary today:According to that original revolution, rescued humans are set free to be what they were made to be. . . . Sin matters, and forgiveness of sins matters, but they matter because sin, flowing from idolatry, corrupts, distorts, and disables the image-bearing vocation, which is much more than simply “getting ready for heaven.” (363)In the final sections of the book especially, Wright connects this to real life in our world, discussing the ways that living as “in-between people” will necessarily involve suffering (as promised in the Bible). I like how he explains the unusual structure of the story of the world: that the final victory comes in the middle of the story, not at the end, and that the second part of the story is when we realize the victory by steadily bringing about the kind of life and humanity that God intended all along.Critics sometimes point out, of course, that if Jesus really was “all that,” then why is the world still so bleak and painful and hopeless? Shouldn’t everything be better now? But that’s just it—the victory is won, but the work continues forward even as it constantly looks back to that victory. And Wright points out what we too easily forget: that this new way of being human which was secured through the cross really is changing the world. The Bible gives slaves rights, which was a radical change from the Roman culture, and then slavery was ended and slaves were set free. That happened in painfully small, slow steps, but it happened. Likewise, the Bible affirms that women are not mere possessions, that they are not impure or corrupting influences on men, but that they are holy in God’s sight, of equal value as men. That’s an idea that was a total revolution within its Roman context, and it has continued to steadily work in the world, enabling the progress that has been made in gender equality and fair treatment (and it will continue to work to heal the remaining problems). And on it goes—the revolution that started at the cross continues to echo throughout all history.My summary here is pretty pathetic, because the book itself is thorough and complex. I just wanted to jot down some of the main points that I’ll want to remember from this reading. And even though it took me a while to finish it this time, I actually do look forward to working through it again. Following Jesus should always involve some strenuous exercise of the thought process and challenges to think in new ways. N. T. Wright has provided that kind of gym for me with this book, and I recommend it to other believers (and even non-believers who want a nuanced, thoughtful discussion of what it is that’s at the heart of what we Christians believe).

Wright has a unique talent for making complex theological perspectives easily accessible for people who don’t have a Ph.D. in Theology. One of the things I appreciated about this book, from an aesthetic standpoint, is that it was well-paced and engaging. Wright works through the theme of revolution from start to finish, and it gives the book a very compelling, driven feel. I read this in the middle of a six week intensive class, and even though I was busy with assigned reading, I had a hard time putting it down.There are a number of things to complement in the book, and while I don’t intend to write an in-depth, point-by-point review, I will make a few brief observations. First, in Chapter 4, which is entitled “The Covenant of Vocation,” Wright wrestle with Romans 5:17: “For if, by the trespass of the one, death reigned through that one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace, and the gift of covenant membership, of ‘being in the right,’ reign in life through the one man Jesus the Messiah.”Wright notes that the “gift” described in the passage is not salvation, in the sense that we might go to heaven when we die, but more specifically, it calls us back to our human vocation of being image-bearers (and image-bearing is worship). Wright notes that “What Paul is saying is that the gospel, through which people received the divine gift, reconstitutes them as genuine humans, as those who share in the ‘reign’ of the Messiah.”Sin, then, is “the human failure of vocation.”What follows this is a discussion of sin in Romans 1-2, in which Wright notes (and which is very plainly stated in Romans 1) that the traditional list of sins found at the end of Romans 1 is not so much a comprehensive list of the way people sin, but the consequences of what follows the sin of idolatry. “The primary human failure,” says Wright,” is a failure to worship.” This works its way out in the verses that follow Romans 1:21; and God’s “giving humanity over” to brokenness is, in a sense, God stepping out of the way of human decision, and allowing us to experience the consequences of our idolatry.Later, Wright frames the need for salvation (which is described in terms of the Kingdom of God rather than merely an after-death reality of heaven) in terms of the need for a return from exile, invoking the language of Israel’s history to describe the work of Jesus. Jesus’ death, then, marks the end of exile, as sin is forgiven and humanity is restored to God.Framing his argument in the context of God’s covenant through Abraham with Israel, and Israel’s sin and exile, Wright insists that the death of Jesus is substitutionary (he will describe his substitutionary atonement theory as “representative atonement”), but carefully delineates the substitutionary atonement theory that he advocates from penal substitution.Wright’s concluding chapters describe what all of this means in practical terms. Wright reminds us of the call to “take up our cross,” recognizing that victory today still comes in the way it came for Jesus – through self-denial and self-sacrificial love.I received an advanced review copy of this book in exchange for this review.

NT Wright has done more than any other writer to shape how I understand the New Testament and the mission of Jesus. Prior to reading Wright I had a very basic understanding that Jesus had lived and died and if we believed in him then we'd die and be with God in heaven. My mind was blown by his work Jesus and the Victory of God and since then I've read every book of his I could find. One primary lesson from Wright is the importance of understanding Jesus in his own context - when he spoke of a king returning, for example, this was not of any sort of "second coming" but rather was God returning to become king right then and there in the person of Jesus.Wright spoke of the crucifixion in Jesus and the Victory of God before writing an entire book (Resurrection of the Son of God) on the resurrection. He's also written thousands of pages on Paul. This book centers in on Jesus' death on the cross, looking at both the Gospel writers and Paul. One of my favorite things about Wright is how he fits the Gospels and Paul's work together. It is too easy to see the gospels as just biographies of Jesus' life with Paul (and others) left to fill in the meaning. Wright has helped see how the two complement.Here Wright's primary attack is on the idea that Jesus died so we can go to heaven when we die. Of course, he tackled that in Surprised by Hope. So really his primary attack is on penal substitutionary atonement, which he sees as leading into going to heaven when we die. Wright goes back to the beginning to tell the story of the Jewish scriptures, emphasizing as he always does that God created the world and humans (nature) and declared it good. To see the end goal then as floating off into space in some ethereal heaven ignores the creation as good. For Wright, penal substitution too quickly skips from Genesis 3 to Romans 3, ignoring the story of Israel. Wright seeks to fit Jesus - his mission and death - within that story. For Wright, it is not that substitution is wrong, Jesus still acts as a substitute in his death for Israel (and us). It is that penal substitution as a theology asked, and asks, the wrong questions.Jesus fights the battle on the cross, defeating the powers and freeing us from them, so we can get back on track with joining alongside of God in the mission to restore the world. As best as I can recall (I finished the book two weeks ago) that is what the cross is for Wright. In theological terms, you could say he favors Christus Victor over substitutionary atonement (though I'd love to hear Wright's thoughts on someone like Rene Girard).Overall, this is a great book. It suffers from Wright's wordiness, he could be more concise. At times it seems that he does not just come out and say what he needs to say. There is so much here that some may walk away being inspired by what he said, but still asking "why the cross?" The answer would be historical context, I suppose, and that the cross was how Jesus showed the true way of God in the world; the true way God would accomplish the work of new creation.

The Revolution began on the cross, a Friday some two thousand years back. It was on that day that "the Kingdoms of this world have become the Kingdoms of our God." (Revelation 11:5, also Handel's Messiah) This is the major premise for Wright's work. What How God Became King did for the gospels and the life of Christ, Revolution does for atonement theology and the death of Christ. As usual, Wright does an excellent job with this connecting the whole of scripture into one narrative to show what the cross means for us today.Wright points out early on how early Reformed theologians (Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, et al) were in a sense "finding the right answers to the wrong questions". In their attempt to correct many of the errors within the RCC of the time, they ended up creating a "works contract" atonement theology that "Platonized eschatology, moralized anthropology, and paganized soteriology" (he uses this phrase at least a half dozen times over the course of the book and I don't blame him. It is brilliant.By "platonized eschatology" he means that the atonement came to mean Jesus died on the cross so we can one day go to heaven. While not incorrect, it is definitely incomplete. By "moralized anthropology" he means, because of the cross, we are now supposed to live a good life out of gratitude (rather than recognizing that we are now a royal priesthood and representatives of God's kingdom on earth). Again, not incorrect but incomplete. By "paganized soteriology" Wright means:We often tell the story of the cross as “how to keep the gods from being angry”. Not enough has been taught about the full covenant justice and love surrounding the events of the crucifixion. With the beauty of a proper view of Jesus’s crucifixion we find God Himself doing what only He can do: be the atoning sacrifice for the world.As with any book outside the Bible, I don't agree with everything said. The biggest bone I have to pick here is that Wright is that he often presents his views as "fresh" or "new" and that everyone else for the past x years (or centuries) has been getting it all wrong. That's just not true. His ideas might be expressed in a unique way but they are not in themselves unique. The biggest danger I see in this is that many simpler minds might cling to this and accuse him of being too liberal, radical, or even a heretic when NT Wright is certainly none of these things. Wright is simply a brilliant theologian who writes profound works in a simple way. I am blessed by everything I have read by him and this is certainly one of his best books.

This book deserves 6 stars. It is by far his best popular level book, with only one other that might wrestle away the greatness, his also thick "Surprised by Hope." The only difference between the two is that this one is more readable, a little bit longer and is so addictive that it took me merely 5 days what took me two weeks with SBH. His take on "propitiation" and the exegesis he does on Paul's letters are worth the entire book, as well as the considerable attention to Israel's scriptures - as well as the attention to Jesus' own idea of what his sacrifice meant (something you do NOT find in other New Testament authors who have written on the subject of atonement) - causes you to run with him and at a brisk but rewarding pace. I believe that this book not only has the power to transform our understanding of the cross but also to heal the divide between those who advocate penal substitution as the primary emphasis and those of us who have been strong the Christus Victor view. Wright cuts through the debate and say that substitution is there, breathing the air of God's victory over sin, death and decay in the bloody body of His Son, who reveals how God becomes King.

2nd reading: my husband and I read the hard copy of this book together, discussing a chapter a week. Honestly, it felt really long. The content is amazing, but the reading of it feels like studying for college at times. I’m so glad we read this book, but it’s a lot. Get your mindset right. Essentially, N. T. Wright is saying that Jesus’ death on the cross wasn’t an act of an angry God. It wasn’t just so I personally could escape hell. It was the moment when heaven met earth, and humanity was restored to being eligible to fulfill our position as the image-bearers of God to the rest of the world. Only he sounds a lot smarter when he says it. 🧐1st reading: I finished this book on audio. It was utterly intriguing, so I’m reading it in hard copy with my husband now. I need his thoughts and input on this highly intellectual material about the meaning and impact of the crucifixion of Christ.

For several years, I’ve pondered why Christ needed to atone for sin. That may seem pretty straightforward. But why couldn’t the most powerful being in the universe simply forgive sin without all the complexity of the atonement?Many have tried to answer this question by backward engineering and proof-texting various atonement theories (e.g. ransom, penal substitution, satisfaction, moral, creditor-debtor, etc). While each theory has its merits, I find myself wanting more.After further studying and counseling with others far wiser, I’ve stopped looking for a single unified theory of the atonement. Instead, I find the atonement is better understood through its uniquely tailored impact on each life it touches (which is all of creation). Each book of scripture, each prophet, and each person experiences the atonement in a unique way. Theory can get in the way of seeing the beautiful and individual ways God interacts with his children.Is it possible we could adopt false views of the atonement by accepting these unique lived experiences rather than adopting a more unified scholarly approach? Perhaps. But as we seek discernment through the spirit, we can gain a more holistic and expansive understanding. I do not believe I will ever fully understand the atonement. But I’ve become increasingly grateful for it. Sometimes, the atonement is meaningful to me because of its promise of forgiveness of sin. Sometimes, it is meaningful to me because it helps me feel that God understands me and can bare a burden that is too heavy for me to carry. And sometimes it is meaningful to me because of its promise of resurrection. And over time, I’m sure it will mean more things to me. Something happened 2000 years ago that changed the world. More importantly, something happened 2000 years ago that can change me. And I have made more progress understanding the atonement when I’ve changed my question from “why do we need a savior?” to “why do I need a savior?”So how does this book add to that perspective? It’s just another perspective. It calls into question various theories and instead focuses on how the atonement allows mankind to again bare the image of God and help bring the kingdom of God into the world. I loved it (though Wright could use a good editor and make this book half as long). I’m not sure it’s for everyone. But it adds an additional perspective as I continue my lifetime pursuit of understanding what the atonement means for me.

What a challenging book. This is the first NT Wright book I’ve ever read and boy did I enjoy him. I now want to read every book he’s written. I found him incredibly thorough and methodical (Piper-esque) in building a clear, compelling case from Scripture. Such an original and clear-minded thinker, I have no problem taking his over-the-top dichotomies with a grain of salt (e.g.- you must either believe in penal substitutionary atonement OR Jesus Victor).Wright helped me understand some key Biblical themes, expecially: exile as THE primary punishment for sin in the OT. Reading through the OT as I read Wright, I had this thought: I feel like I’m beginning to understand the Bible (a funny thing to think, having read the Bible for 25 years!).One of his chief goals is answering this not-at-all-as-simple-as-it-sounds question: When the early Christians summarized their “good news” by saying that “the Messiah died for our sins in accordance with the Bible,” what precisely did they mean?What was God hoping to achieve by Jesus’s death, and why was that the appropriate method of achieving it?One of his answers: "I am suggesting that in the Bible humans are created in order to live as worshipping stewards within God’s heaven-and-earth reality, rather than as beings who, by moral perfection, qualify to leave “earth” and go to “heaven” instead.”I think Wright MIGHT just be correct in saying that sharing the gospel as “punch your ticket to heaven” is responsible for much of what is wrong with the American Church.

Simply N.T. Wright.Michael Horton offers a good review here:https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/ar...

N.T. Wright has quickly become one of my most trusted theologians. His work on soteriology and eschatology has answered questions which I held deep inside and only in doubting moments confronted (due to some type of western charismatic indoctrination i suppose). Here's what he does so well: he makes the beautiful story beautiful again. In the post-enlightenment, Christianity has become either intellectually convoluted (I'm looking at many Calvinist theologians and the subsequent responding Arminian's) or overly simplistic (much of my tradition has offered little theology to explain how the whole thing works, "but trust us - it does or you go to hell"). I've fallen into both these traps for much of my life, swinging from one to the other depending on my season of life. But then comes N.T. Wright, whose work has, for me, framed the whole Christian narrative, and my part in it, in a historical and ever evolving story. The "invitation" into this story strikes me as so profoundly beautiful and meaningful and fulfilling, and is the antidote to the simplistic "invitation" offered at alter-calls I've spent my life around. So, while I still think this books leaves some of the "how" to be desired and can get repetitive, I'm very, very grateful for it.

This was my first N.T. Wright book. I appreciated all his major points. And I will be reading more of his works. My criticism is minor: his writing could certainly be improved with less repetition, and a taming of the rhetoric of “I’m just about the only one in Christianity saying this.” But, that aside, I’m glad I finally began reading his contributions.

“The Day The Revolution Began” presents some very big ideas concerning the death of Jesus, which naturally have incredibly deep and wide-spread implications for theology. And as others have mentioned, whilst it may not be Wright’s clearest and best articulated work, it is likely among his most important. An example of this seeming lack of clarity can be found in his assessment of the sacrificial language within some atonement theories as being pagan in nature. The issue being that when he does mention scriptures which do use sacrificial language, he does not always explicitly map out the alternative way to understand them.Furthermore, Wright spends much time writing in his charismatic and conversational form, crafting lofty theological ideas into a flowing and accessible style. Which although it is inviting, can also create a circular and repetitive feel, which can confuse and exhaust the reader. .Comments on style aside, Wright does well to include overviews of theological terms, as well as brief accounts of the relevant histories of their reception. The following are some of the key terms that he shapes and employs across his arguments: .“Works Contract” = the atonement theologies which inaccurately interpret Jesus’ work on the cross as having removed humanity’s moral failures and then imputing Jesus’ own morality back to humanity. I.E. a transaction of good deeds/works. Along with this Wright also has to clarify how “sin” should be understood within the ancient world - not as moral deficiency, or demerits that result in being punished with death. Rather he claims that sin is missing the target, specifically of the vocation to be fully human, and this off-course trajectory leads to the consequence of death. .“Covenant Vocation” = that humanity was made to be image bearers within creation and to steward it on behalf of God, participating in his rescue mission to bring creation back to himself. Thus being fully human and successfully performing the vocation that we were created for. .“Representative substitution” = Jesus taking the consequence of Sin (death) upon himself only to defeat it, and break its hold over humanity. (perhaps it could be considered of as “Consequential atonement”?) This continues with the thought that death is not the punishment for moral failure (works contract), but rather the consequence of the failure to be properly human (covenant vocation). This is further shaped by Wright’s argument that there is no biblical, historical, or anthropological support to say that ancient Jews or Christians thought of atonement along the pagan lines of killing an animal to bear the penalty or punishment of the moral failure of the sacrificer..Whilst the differences above may seem slight, the implications are quite large, particularly affecting whether we see God as (1) an angry father wanting to punish moral deficiency, and thus pleased to brutalise his own son as part of a transactional payment, or (2) as a benevolent king who is trying to save his people from the consequences of their failure to be properly human, which is leading them off a cliff to their deaths. .Moving forward, one of the more helpful aspects of Wright’s unpacking of atonement is that he strives to create a wholistic approach which recognises the importance of including eschatology as an integral part of this study. (I have often been confused as to why some theological movements have had such strong views on atonement theories and yet comparatively deficient views concerning eschatology.)Wright’s model does makes sense that atonement would be shaped for the ancient communities by both, their understanding of covenant, as well as their eschatological expectations. .Lastly, as is the norm with Wright’s popular books, the final section is directed toward application - or as he is often fond of putting it, the big “so what?!” of it all. Here he is at his most inspirational, and through the recalling of modern history and vivid analogies, he is able to bring the previous chapters into practical forms for the reader. He is able to bring his theory to life, even to the point of naming the “new gods” - who are simply just old gods (Sex, Money, and Power) with a makeover - that we have given over our authority and vocation to. This notion of worshiping Aphrodite through our smart phones, and Mammon through our use of capital, etc... is an inspired application - à la Gaiman’s ‘American Gods’ - that reveals our modern problems to be shiny remixes of ancient ones; ones which require an ancient crucifix-shaped solution. .I highly recommend this book, even though it can be quite tedious in places. In closing here are some final thoughts from Wright:“if we see the human vocation simply as the “works contract,” then we are likely to regard moral failures as merely the breaking of particular rules. They are much more than that. They are a refusal to follow the script for the great new drama in which we have been given our parts to learn. A sinning Christian is like someone walking on stage and reciting the lines that belonged in yesterday’s play... And part of that vocation is precisely to celebrate Jesus as Lord on the territory where other gods have been worshipped. When it comes to Mammon, we need to know how to use money, particularly how to give it away. When it comes to Aphrodite, we need to know how to celebrate and sustain marriage, how to celebrate and sustain celibacy, and how to counsel and comfort those who, in either state, find themselves overwhelmed with conflicting and contrary desires.” (397).“when the New Testament tells us the meaning of the cross, it gives us not a system, but a story; not a theory, but a meal and an act of humble service; not a celestial mechanism for punishing sin and taking people to heaven, but an earthly story of a human Messiah who embodies and incarnates Israel’s God and who unveils his glory in bringing his kingdom to earth as in heaven.”(415)

It may only be mid-July, but this book is an early contender for the best book I'll read all year. N.T. Wright has important words to say how we consider what Jesus' death means for us, how the early church interpreted it, and how that changes how we are to live our lives today. He writes clearly and beautifully, and deconstructs the Platonized ideologies that the church has blindly embraced. I have nothing more to say than- read this book.

Incredible, refreshing, revolutionary take indeed on the crucifixion. I was so delighted to discover a truly novel understanding of the gospel that got me excited! What an amazing story we have! And yet, as much as I appreciated Wright's insight, I found this book a little tortuous to work though; it's long and wordy and follows many side trails. So content, five stars. I just wish it could be written in a more easily-readable format.

N.T Wright’s historical and biblical analysis of what the crucifixion of Jesus meant is the best I’ve ever read/heard. This book and his book on the resurrection “surprised by hope” are two books I wish everyone could/would read, especially those in a ministry role.

Another great book from Wright. Many of his thoughts are repetitive from past books but plenty of new material for the Wright follower.

** spoiler alert ** 1A) Read this book1B) Read this book in tandem with “Paul Among Jews and Gentiles” by Krister Stendahl.