I sympathize with Bishop Tom as he struggles to contradict Historic Evangelical theology as refined by the Protestant Church since Reformation. He simply is too caught up in his contextualization bias that slants his take on reading Paul. If only he could read Paul (and Jesus and John and Peter and Hebrews and Gospels and Luke's Acts and Old Testament) on a STAND ALONE basis without the baggage of 2nd Temple Judaism lenses colouring everything Bishop Tom reads.Understanding the context from which the text was produced is unecessary baggage?
(A review on Amazon of N.T. Wright's book Justification: God's Plan and Paul's vision)
But parroting 16th century reformers often incorrect understanding of the context of Paul is not?