The new perspective on Paul – Part 1

By Christian

---

Is it possible that 2000 years after Paul, we can still say something new about his teachings? For example, about our hope of salvation? In short, we know this:

• In the 1st century, the Jews, full of self-righteousness, believed that they could earn salvation through their works.
• Jesus condemned them for this and abolished the Mosaic Law.
• Paul also argued against their idea and explained that we are saved by faith and grace alone. Our works play no role at all.

Correct? What if all three statements would be wrong? That they are not in the New Testament, that Paul did not say them that way, but that they are interpretations of the Reformation and that some of the reasons have only emerged in the last 200 years? I wouldn’t be surprised if some people now shake their heads. „Is he just trying to show that greats like Calvin or Luther were wrong?“ Or perhaps your reaction is more like this:

At stake is nothing less than the gospel itself, the church’s proclamation of the good news of salvation in Christ. [ . . . ] The new perspective ultimately offers a different gospel than that to which the Reformation bore witness.

The current revision of the doctrine of justification as formulated by the advocates of the so-called New Perspective on Paul is nothing less than a fundamental repudiation not just of that Protestantism which seeks to stand within the creedal and doctrinal trajectories of the Reformation but also of virtually the entire Western tradition on justification from at least as far back as Augustine.

Rejection of the Reformation . . . is a big plank of the New Perspective.

Chapter 7

But there are also comments that say exactly the opposite:

The Reformation tradition’s approach to Paul is fundamentally wrong.

Chapter 7

Let’s take a closer look at what the text of the New Testament itself says, taking into account the context and not 2000 years of theological considerations. You may be surprised which of your beliefs may not come from Paul but rather from Luther and others.

This series is based on this very good overview of the state of scientific research on this topic in the three decades up to 2011: „The New Perspective on Paul – An Introduction“ by Prof. Kent L. Yinger.

Instead of polemic, my desire is that this book be a place where all who genuinely seek to better understand Paul’s thought, the central message of this Jewish apostle of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, can gather and reason together.

Chapter 1

The book is structured like this: When and how did the new perspective on Paul emerge? How did the discussion among scholars develop? What exegetical and theological concerns and objections are there to this new perspective? And finally, a chapter on the perspectives opened up by this new perspective.

For the impatient among us: in this part, we will first discuss what this new perspective of Paul is supposed to be. In the next part, I will explain what it changes. Only then will I go into more detail and the pros and cons.

Chapter 2: Where Did This All Begin?

The change began when scholars increasingly recognized a discrepancy between the established perspective on Judaism in the Second Temple period and more recent historical findings.

The established view of Judaism in the Second Temple period

The view, which was developed by scholars in the 19th and 20th centuries in particular, can be summarized as follows:

The Jew takes it for granted that this condition [for God’s acquitting decision] is keeping the Law, the accomplishing of “works” prescribed by the Law. In direct contrast to this view Paul’s thesis runs . . . “by, or from, faith.”.

Chapter 2

Yinger summarizes it like this:

It is not hard to see how the gospel was perceived to contrast at nearly every point with this religion.
• grace versus works
• the Spirit’s enablement versus the Law’s hard yoke
• joy versus toil
• confidence versus fear, and
• “God with us” versus a remote deity
Scholars even called the Judaism of this period “late Judaism,” meaning it was in serious decline and on its last legs.

Chapter 2

Turning Point 1977

Scholars increasingly contradicted this idea. The turning point came with the publication of E. P. Sanders‘ Paul and Palestinian Judaism in 1977.

Rather than earning divine favor by their works of obedience to his Law, Jews emphasized God’s free election of Israel. They were made members of the elect people of God by grace alone. Salvation was a gift, not something they had to first earn.

Rigorous obedience to the commandments was the expected response to God’s prior act of saving grace, not an attempt to earn it. Both the nation and individuals within the nation kept the commands not in order to be redeemed but because they had been redeemed or saved (think exodus from Egypt).

Chapter 2

Sanders coined the term covenantal nomism for this and summarized it in 8 points:

1. God has chosen Israel. [Thus, election, or grace, not meritorious works, is the fundamental datum for salvation in Judaism.]
2. And God has given the law. [Torah is a gift to Israel instructing her in the way of life with which God has already graced her; it is not a burden.]
3. The law implies both God’s promise to maintain the election and
4. the requirement to obey. [The maintaining of election does not depend solely on the efforts of Israel, but is enabled by God himself. Nevertheless, the importance of actual obedience may never be toned down.]
5. God rewards obedience and punishes transgression.
6. The law provides for means of atonement, and atonement results in
7. maintenance or re-establishment of the covenantal relationship. [Through repentance and the sacrificial system provisions are in place should Israel sin.]
8. All those who are maintained in the covenant by obedience, atonement and God’s mercy belong to the group which will be saved.

Since then, there has been agreement among scholars on at least these points:

• First-century Judaism was not the legalistic religion of past caricatures.
• Covenantal nomism is a fair description of Jewish soteriology of the period.

[Soteriology is the doctrine of the redemption of mankind in a Christian context.] And why did this make such a big splash?

„One of the central building blocks of Protestant soteriology is salvation by grace not by works. This discovery of the unmerited grace of God in Jesus Christ has been seen as one of the great advances of the Christian gospel over Judaism. The gospel of free grace has replaced Judaism’s hard yoke of keeping the Law, its supposed typical legalism.“

Let’s take just one statement from Paul: „“We know that a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ” (Gal 2:16). Traditionally, “justified by the works of the law” points to Jewish legalism. But if Judaism was not particularly legalistic, what in the world is Paul talking about?“

You may not have realized it yet, but this is not a small matter:

If, in fact, Jewish theology of the first century was not particularly legalistic, we’re going to have to re-read these and other central passages, and possibly re-envision the Christian understanding of salvation.

Chaptzer 2

And that’s what we’ll be doing in the next parts of the series.