Today I received the plenary session recordings I had ordered from the recently concluded ETS conference. These are the sessions in which NT Wright defended and Thomas Schreiner and Frank Thielman attacked the NPP. Lord willing, I plan to listen to and comment on these sessions over the next several weeks. I’d like to say I’m looking forward to hearing Schreiner and Thielman take on Wright, but from the comments I’ve seen from around the internet, I don’t hold out a lot of hope the Schreiner and Theilman gave Wright the good old fashioned smack down he deserved.
Meanwhile, if you entertain any doubt that Wright’s a certified one hundred percent theological crank, flaming whack job, false brother, and damnable heretic, who has no business teaching so much as an afternoon Bible study let alone appearing as plenary speaker at ETS (and yes, I realize this is disrespectful, but Wright richly deserves every bit of it and more), the following quote should help put that to rest,
If we use the language of the law court, it makes no sense whatever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, bequeaths, conveys or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or a gas which can be passed across the courtroom. For the judge to be righteous does not mean that the court has found in his favour. For the plaintiff or defendant to be righteous does not mean that he or she has tried the case properly or impartially. To imagine the defendant some how receiving the judge’s righteousness is simply a category mistake. That is not how the language works. What Saint Paul Really Said, p.98
What NT Wright really says amounts to a direct assault on the Gospel of Jesus Christ, for Paul tells us that, “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.” And, among other things, according to the Scriptures means Christ’s righteousness is imputed to those who call on his name. Wright may find this a baffling “category mistake” or, as he says elsewhere, “a cold piece of business, almost a trick of thought performed by a God who is logical and correct but hardly one we would want to worship” (Wright like many contemporary heretics hates logic as much as he hates God), but while imputation leaves a bad taste in his mouth, it’s the way God justifies sinners, for as Isaiah writes, “by His stripes we are healed.” And that, Dr. Wright, is imputation, no matter how much you denigrate, dispute, downplay, deny or otherwise despise it.
More to follow.
Lux Lucet 
I am sure your authoritative blog makes poor N.T. Wright cry a little tear when he realizes he doesn’t have your approval.
It’s not my approval he should be worried about.
Wright is teaching an analytic justification. One way to avoid that is to see that regeneration is an immediate effect of justification and not its instrumental condition. Of course Piper and Schreiner don’t respond that way.
We can and should make a distinction between the atonement and the application of the atonement in justification. We must avoid the idea of eternal justification, in which faith is only finding out what has always been true. But we don’t have to be Arminians to teach an objective change of status before God.
Wright is not merely making a distinction between atonement and justification. He is making the Spirit’s work in us (the application) that which makes Christ’s death effective. In this, Wright is no different from most Arminian evangelicals who teach that Christ died for every sinner. The only difference is that Wright sees church water as that which begins to effect regeneration
I deconstruct the difference between being judged “according to works” and being judged “on the basis of works”. Schreiner and Piper might be happy with that revision, but it will not work. Those who are condemned are condemned both on the basis of works and according to works.
If the change in status (justification) is preceded by a change in condition (regeneration, sanctification), then justification is not of the ungodly, even if that change in status is not a result of the changed condition.
I deny that the righteousness is that done by the Spirit in us. The righteousness is Christ’s obedience to death. Righteousness causes regeneration; righteousness is not regeneration. Justification is the result of righteousness imputed.
I deny that the justified are in Christ by the Spirit. I deny that the Spirit puts the elect in Christ. Christ through the Spirit indwells those who are justified.
Is Wright still around today or has his influence died?