What do Piper and Wright Have in Common?

Reading the promotional material about John Piper’s The Future of Justification leads one to believe that there are many irreconcilable differences between he and N. T. Wright. Upon further reading, however, I want to propose that there are many similarities between the two:

Similarities about Christianity in General

Orthodox Beliefs: “I am thankful for his [Wright's] strong commitment to Scripture as his final authority, his defense and celebration of the resurrection of the Son of God, his vindication of the deity of Christ, his belief in the virgin birth of Jesus, his biblical disapproval of homosexual conduct, and the consistent way he presses us to see the big picture of God’s universal purpose for all peoples through the covenant with Abraham – and more.” (The Future of Justification, 15)

Tradition and Scripture: “We are agreed, however, that neither conformity to an old tradition nor conformity to a new system is the final arbiter of truth. Scripture is. And we both take courage from the fact that Scripture has the power to force its own color through any human lens.” (The Future of Justification, 17)

Penal Substitution: “There is nothing unclear about Wright’s commitment to penal substitution.” (The Future of Justification, 48)

The Scope of Salvation: “I rejoice with N. T. Wright in the cosmic scope of what the gospel has achieved.” (The Future of Justification, 88).

Similarities about Justification Specifically

Justification is Present. Despite Piper’s major thesis in Chapter Three, N. T. Wright repeatedly proclaims justification in the present. Consider these two quotes from his commentary on Romans: “Justification in the present is possible, Paul argues, because the grace of God deals with the sins of people through the death of Jesus. The people in question are, therefore, a forgiven family” (p. 466) and “This ‘justification’ takes place in the present time, rather than in the future as in 2:1-11″ (p. 471 commenting on Romans. 3:22).

Justification is Forensic: Wright and Piper both agree about the “law-court” imagery for justification (The Future of Justification, 44, 53)

Justification is Faithfulness/Vindication: Both agree that God’s righteousness has to do with God’s faithfulness/vindication. For Wright, it is to His covenant. For Piper, it is to His glory (The Future of Justification, Chapter 3)

Role of Works in the Believer’s Life: “I have no hesitancy in agreeing with Wright when he says, ‘The attempt to shore up justification by faith in saying that the life we now live will be irrelevant at the final judgment is unPauline, unpastoral and ultimately dishonouring to God himself.’ On that we agree.” (The Future of Justification, 116)

I think this reveals that there are many significant similarities between John Piper and N. T. Wright, even on the doctrine of justification. Certainly there are significant differences, but let’s not forget their striking unity.