Richard B. Hays (1948–2025)

It had to be awkward. The good theologians at Wheaton College threw a Theology Conference based solely on the theology of N. T. Wright, and invited him to come and respond. Wright handled the situation with aplomb, though, challenging misunderstandings of his theology, agreeing where there was more work to be done, and even getting excited about new connections previously unseen.

This book is the result of that 2010 conference. Half is about Jesus, the other half about Paul. Each half show more contains papers written by various theologians, each one briefly responded to by Wright. Then, at the end of each major section, Wright wrote a new paper about the current state of Jesus and Pauline studies.

Any book with this many contributors is bound to be a mixed bag, and that's certainly the case here. Some contributors reminded me of that guy in the lecture that insisted on asking questions solely to demonstrate his own wisdom. So be it. Over all, the papers were stimulating, thoughtful, and readable—in the spirit of Wright's style of doing theology.

Perhaps the most exciting part of the book was the last paper by Wright on the state of Pauline studies. As you may know, Wright is in the process of writing book four in his Christian Origins and the Question of God series on Paul. By the sounds of it, he has chosen to start with Philemon and ecclesiology, topics usually found closer to the appendix of a Pauline theology.

These papers, by their nature, assume a basic understanding of Wright's theology. They are excellent reading for anyone who has studied N. T. Wright's work. show less

Hays convinced me if his model. In that regard, it’s a great book because if it’s solid treatment of the subject. The only aspect I will change is that of my treatment of scripture. Hays is skeptical of authorship and redaction methods for the gospels. That being said, he finds scripture authoritative while keeping an eye on speeches from Jesus that could have been influenced by the authors.

For me, it was my first in-depth read on Christian ethics and I appreciate his attention to show more rules, principles, paradigms, and symbolism in scripture. While he gives precedence to principles, I find all four to be authoritative (maybe giving more weight to paradigms). His interaction with Hauerwas, Barth, Yoder, and others is very helpful in comparing ethical systems. show less

What a disappointment! Do not waste your time on this book.

As I am finishing this fairly well written book published in the late 90's, I discover that the author has now, in 2024, changed his mind on homosexuality. Here is the summary.

Nearly 30 years ago, a revered New Testament professor at Duke Divinity School named Richard B. Hays published “The Moral Vision of the New Testament,” a sweeping 508-page meditation of Christian ethics in which Hays concluded that the Christian Bible show more condemns homosexual acts. Hays called homosexuality “one among many tragic signs that we are a broken people” and said that churches should not sanction or bless homosexual unions.

Now we learn that Hays has changed in position. “In a book scheduled to be released in September 2024, ‘The Widening of God’s Mercy: Sexuality Within the Biblical Story,’ written with his son, Christopher B. Hays, the elder Hays makes an about face.” Hays has changed his mind because a “dynamic and gracious God … is willing to change his mind.” Robert Gagnon, a professor of New Testament at Houston Baptist University, who used Hays’ book The Moral Vision of the New Testament in his book The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics, had this to say: “God hasn’t changed his mind. Hays and son have changed their minds.

I imagine he is probably changing his mind about anti-Semitism too. This is all the rage today on college campuses and I imagine Hays thinks God has changed his mind om this topic also. show less

An in-depth exploration of 1 Corinthians according to the Interpretation commentary format.

The author generally does well at explaining the text in its context, locating the Corinthian Christians in their Greco-Roman context. His reconstruction of a group of well-to-do and more "spiritual" group as those who are often critiqued by Paul is reasonable, and makes good sense of the text in man places (especially the last half of 1 Corinthians 11 and in 1 Corinthians 15). Many of his application show more points for preaching and teaching are apt.

At some points, though, the author strains credulity. His position on 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is not nearly as circumspect as most of his other positions. He at least tries to make sense of 1 Corinthians 11:3-16 in context, but has little by means of application.

Overall a good resource to consider when exploring 1 Corinthians. show less