least in terms of understanding Paul – and they have stayed there ever since.” In this way, the Church, according to Wright, has subsumed discussions surrounding the reconciliation of man to God under the label of justification, which has subsequently given the concept an emphasis quite absent from what he believes is found within the New Testament. This leads Wright to argue that this incorrect perception of justification has done violence to the text for hundreds of years and that the text itself should be the starting point in determining what Paul seeks to say about justification. Through his attempt of returning to the text to allow Paul to speak for himself as he suggests, Wright offers a definition of what he believes the apostle means by ‘justification,’ which is contrary to popular belief. In crafting said definition, the interpreter identifies three pieces, which he believes to be vital to this consideration: that justification is dependent upon covenant language, that it utilises law-court language, functioning within the covenantal setting as a strong explanatory metaphor of justification, and that it cannot be understood within a Pauline context as separate from eschatology. Through the inclusion of covenant language, justification alludes to the presence of sin and wickedness in the world and the way in which the covenant was instituted to bring about salvation. Within this context, the law-court metaphorical language acknowledges God's role as judge who is to put the world to rights, to deal with evil and to restore justice and order to the cosmos. Finally, Wright's definition of ‘justification’ within Paul's letters acknowledges that the term is not associated, as has commonly been perceived, with one's personal needs necessary to attain salvation, but instead with what marked someone as a member of God's people. Secular utopianism In 2008, Wright criticised "secular utopianism", accusing it of advocating "the right to kill unborn children and surplus old people". The Times columnist David Aaronovitch challenged Wright specifically to substantiate his claim that any secular group does indeed advocate the killing of elderly people, leading to an exchange in which Wright held to his main point. Historical Jesus Regarding the historical Jesus, Wright follows the "thoroughgoing eschatology" tradition of Albert Schweitzer against the "thoroughgoing scepticism" of William Wrede and the Jesus Seminar, whom he regards as Wrede's modern-day counterparts. Wright also argues for a 'very Jewish' Jesus who was nonetheless opposed to some high-profile