According to virtually any set of criteria, Jürgen Moltmann's first two programmatic books, Theology of Hope and The Crucified God, are strikingly different. The differences are due to his turn to a theology of the cross in the intervening years. Yet Moltmann, with the vast majority of scholars concurring, argues that the two works form a continuous argument. This article investigates the problems with the consensus judgement and calls for a revision of the relationship between the two works, based on the nature of the cross–resurrection dialectic inherent to his programme and also on both the necessity and timing of the turn.