New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul? 1. Brief Preliminary History

For an excellent review of the history of By Gerhard H. Visscher the whole debate, one should consult the first chapter of Frank Thielman’s book.3 All that Our intention is to take a look at some of the works of can really be done here is touch on some of E. P. Sanders and James D.G. Dunn and to evaluate the figures in this whole discussion. the so-called “New Perspective on Paul”; the bearing of this discussion upon the task of ministers and the life Anyone who has read much of the of the churches will also be discussed. exegetical works of John Calvin or Martin Luther will be familiar with the fact that The subject that I am pleased to speak to Luther and Calvin are often quick to put an you about is one that has been called nothing equation mark between the Roman Catholics less than “the revolution that has rocked NT of their day and the Jews or the Judaizers of studies.”1 Anyone who reads scholarly works the earlier New Testament era. It was a on Paul especially will encounter the effects hermeneutical tool which allowed them to of this “revolution” frequently. It will impact condemn the excesses of their opponents with our reading, our preaching, and much of our a considerable degree of authority. approach towards the New Testament. It is In his tractate On the Jews and Their Lies today at the forefront of many a debate in the (1543), for example, Luther assumes that the whole field of NT studies. The so-called Jews always believed that the act of “New Perspective on Paul” surfaces time and circumcision itself would save them. Like again. The effects of these scholarly debates “the papists,” says Luther, they divorce an even seem to have surfaced in an “Open outward ritual from God’s Word and so Letter” published in the midst of our churches believe that their own effort will make them in southern BC last week.2 For sometime pleasing to God. The law drives them, like now, I have had my own suspicions about the “the barefoot friars,” not to the feet of God to matter, but one of the benefits of teaching for beg for his mercy but to point boastfully to a while at the seminary is that I have been their own holiness and to claim that they able to spend some time delving into the possess such an excess of it “that they can use matter. At the same time, I should mention it to help others to get to heaven, and still that there has been a tremendous amount retain a rich and abundant supply to sell.”4 written on this subject and I certainly do not Many other examples can be given. The Jews consider this presentation to be exhaustive. 3 Paul and the Law (IVP, 1994) 14 - 47. A briefer 1 Thomas R. Schreiner, "Reading Romans survey is found in Thomas R. Schreiner's The Law Theologically: A Review Article" JETS 41/4 644. and Its Fulfillment: A Pauline Theology of Law (Baker, 1993) 13 - 31. For a more detailed review of 2 I am referring here to comments made in "On Being the various positions, S. Westerholm's Israel's Law Reformed: An Open letter" in Information: A and the Church Faith: Paul and his Recent Newspaper for the Reformed Home 7/3 (Nov 28, Interpreters (Eerdmans, 1988) is recommended; this 1998) where the charge has been made that "an significant work is in the process of being revised attitude of 'exclusivism' toward other Christians." and updated. From the response of Dr. J. Visscher to this charge 4 ("Responding to an Open Letter IV" Information 7/6 See Frank Thielman, Paul and the Law: A (February 5, 1999), it is apparent that the writings of Contextual Approach, 23. The references in Luther's J.D.G. Dunn are behind this viewpoint to some Works are to LW 47:172; cf. 47:159-76. degree. New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

of Paul’s day and the Papists of Luther’s day Theology on the Basis of the Talmud and are often considered one and the same. Related Writings. Herein he summarized and While John Calvin is considerably more systematized many passages from rabbinic careful, he often makes the same writings; in doing so, he portrayed a stern hermeneutical shift. For example, in God who appeared as a bookkeeper whose commenting on Paul’s statement in business it was to keep account of all one’s Philippians 3:5 that he was “according to the merits and demerits. According to Weber, law, a Pharisee,” Calvin claims that Paul uses rabbinic Judaism also knew of a "treasury of the term law to refer to the corrupt religion of excess merits that could be shared with those his day which is very much as it is “at this day who did not have enough", and here too it was in the Papacy.”5 When referring later to often "impossible to know just where one Paul’s willingness to consider his own stood with God."8 Weber’s work has not righteousness “loss” and “refuse,” Calvin been without influence. It has been used calls the Roman Catholics of his own time extensively by W. Sanday and A. Headlam in “those Pharisees of the present day.”6 their ICC Commentary on Romans,9 as well According to many, this kind of approach as in some of the works of R. Bultmann. has become all too common among In any case, this approach generally Protestants. Says Thielman: continued until around the beginning of this It was frequently assumed…that at least twentieth century. Significant criticisms were launched by the Jewish Reformer C. G. from the period of the restoration of the 10 Jews to Israel under Ezra, the history of Montefiore as well as a man who was Judaism was a story of spiralling neither a Jew nor a NT scholar, George Foot degeneracy into legalism, hypocrisy and Moore.11 I refer you again to the summary of lack of compassion. Similarly, when Thielman for details regarding their Protestant scholars discussed rabbinic arguments. These men pointed to what has Judaism they tended to assume that Paul’s been called a “hermeneutical error” made polemic against Judaism, interpreted already by the Reformers. They pleaded with through the lens of Luther’s reaction against scholars to read the Jewish writings on their Roman Catholicism, provided a sound basis own merit rather than through the glasses of for systematizing the religion of the

Mishnah, Talmud and related Jewish 8 writings of a later era.7 Paul and the Law, 25. Probably one of the most extreme 9 Thielman makes the remark that "Sanday and examples of this kind of approach is found Headlam considered Weber's book so authoritative with a man named Ferdinand Weber. In 1880 that they cited his summaries, complete with parenthetical references to the German in order not Weber published a book called Jewish to lose the correct nuance of Weber's words, as proof of what the rabbis believed." Paul and the Law, 25 5 Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. 10 In "Rabbinic Judaism and the Epistles of St. Paul" Translated by John Pringle. (Baker, 1977) 92. Jewish Quarterly Review 13 (1900-1901) 161-217 and Judaism and St Paul: Two Essays (M.Goschen, 6 Ibid., 96. These examples from Luther and Calvin 1914). are supplied by Thielman in Paul and the Law, 23- 24. 11 His three volume work, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: the Age of Tannaim 7 F. Thielman, "Law," Dictionary of Paul and his has recently been reprinted (Hendrickson, 1997) and Letters. Edited by G. F. Hawthorne, R. P. Martin. is still a valuable guide to Tannaitic Judaism (50 BC (InterVarsity Press, 1993) 530. to 200 A.D.).

- 2 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

Roman Catholic theology. Regrettably, it was while providing means of atonement for a plea that largely fell on deaf ears. transgression.”12 As Thielman summarizes Sanders for us: 2. E. P. Sanders God’s choice to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel is, in all of this It was really not until 1977, when E.P. literature, a free act of God’s grace, and the Sanders wrote his most significant work Paul salvation that membership in that covenant and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of implies is also by God’s grace. Getting into Patterns of Religion (Fortress), that the covenant people of God, then, was a scholarship really started paying attention. matter of God’s grace. It is true that The aftermath of the Second World War as maintaining one’s place in the covenant well as living in an age that is not receptive to involved obedience, but God had provided any kind of racial bias may have had means of atonement and opportunity for repentance as ways of dealing with the something to do with it. In any case, Sanders transgression of his people. Thus ‘election made his way through the most influential and ultimately salvation are considered to works of modern New Testament scholarship be by God’s mercy rather than human in order to show how they inappropriately achievement.'’ Judaism from Ben Sira discredited Judaism. He then embarks on a (about 200 B.C.) to the Mishna (about AD. long journey through the Jewish Tannaitic 200), therefore, was, despite all its diversity, literature (50 BC to 200 AD), the Qumran a religion of grace that kept works on the material, and the apocryphal and “staying in” side of the religious pattern and did not allow them to intrude on questions pseudepigraphal literature. 13 As the subtitle of his book suggests, of “getting in.” Sanders’s purpose was to compare the pattern According to Sanders then, the law was of religion in Paul’s letters with the pattern of obeyed as a response to God’s gracious and religion in Jewish literature between 200 B.C. redeeming work. God graciously saved his and A.D. 200. By “pattern of religion” he people, and they should respond to his grace means the way the followers of a particular in grateful and humble obedience. All the religion understand “getting in” and “staying detailed regulations found in the Mishnah in” their religion. How do you “get in”? How assume this covenantal context. do you “stay in?” Comparing two religions in Seldom in the history of New Testament this way is better than comparing their scholarship has a single book drawn as much “essences” or something like that, Sanders attention and caused such debate as this book argues, because reducing an entire religion to of Sanders. The pleas of Montefiore and such an essence as “legalism” or “grace” Moore were receiving attention as never results in oversimplification of complex before. matters. The “pattern of religion” he found in Judaism, Sanders called “covenantal nomism”

Covenantal nomism, he says, is “the view 12 Paul and Palestinian Judaism, (Fortress, 1977) 75. that one’s place in God’s plan is established In response to criticisms, Sanders later wrote: Paul, on the basis of the covenant and that the the Law and the Jewish People (Fortress, 1983). covenant requires as the proper response of Other works in which his views are defended are man his obedience to its commandments, Jewish Law from Jesus to the Mishnah: Five Studies (SCM/Trinity, 1990); Paul: Past Master (Oxford, 1991).

13 Paul and the Law, 31.

- 3 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

The problem that all of this presents of was not an issue. As he says at the end of course, is: if this is true of Judaism, what are Paul, the Law and the Jewish People, “the we to make of the kind of Judaism that is supposed objection to self-righteousness is as encountered in the writing of the apostle absent from Paul’s letters as self- Paul? And, if the Reformers and others were righteousness is from Jewish literature.”16 not careful enough in their interpretation of Some examples of Sanders exegetical Paul, has our vision of Paul also been blurred arguments can be given. In Galatians 2 and 3, because we have been looking through anti- Paul’s argument is not dependent on the view Roman glasses? that the keeping the law is impossible or that The answer that Sanders has presented to attempting to keep the law leads to sinful this problem was that Paul repeatedly pride, but “on the conviction that if reasoned backwards from the solution of faith righteousness came through the law, then in Christ to the human plight that this solution Christ died in vain (2:21; compare 3:21).”17 demanded.14 The point is that whereas Luther, Similarly, Paul’s argument in 2 Corinthians for example, was ever so aware of his plight 3:7-18 is not that the old dispensation is faulty (his desperate need for salvation) before or lacks all glory; it’s glory is simply arriving at the solution of a God who justifies surpassed by the present more glorious the ungodly, Sanders is convinced that Paul dispensation!18 Likewise, Philippians 3:6-9 did not wander about in Judaism aware of does not criticize the law as such but simply some such burdensome plight. The plight says that Paul rejected all these when he really came to light, so to speak, only when found Christ.19 Even Romans, according to the solution was provided in Christ. Sanders, is not busy with a critique of the law Sanders suggests that even if Paul or the old dispensation; he only argues against sometimes appears to argue from plight to the law because if salvation could come by solution (as in Romans), these passages do means of the law, it would (1) exclude not mean his personal experience was of this Gentiles and (2) make Christ’s death vain. sort. Unlike Luther, Paul considered himself “Paul’s negative statements about works of blameless with respect to the law prior to his the law therefore form one way among many conversion (Phil 3:6). Sanders says: others of saying that humanity can be saved 20 Paul’s logic seems to run like this: in Christ only through Christ.” God has acted to save the world; therefore The cleverness of this argument is that it, if the world is in need of salvation; but God it is true, we do not need to presume that Saul also gave the law; if Christ is given for was dissatisfied with the law in his pre- salvation, it must follow that the law could Christian state, nor does Paul as a Christian not have been; is the law then against the purpose of God which has been revealed in Christ? No, it has the function of 16 Paul, the Law and the Jewish People, 156; cf. 35. consigning everyone to sin so that everyone could be saved by God’s grace in Christ.15 17 As Thielman summarizes Sanders in Paul and the Law, 35 (cf Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, But at the same time, it is important to note 482-84, 492-3). that according to Sanders, Paul is not arguing against attempts at self-righteousness. This 18 Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 484-5.

19 Ibid. 14 Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 429-556. 20 Thielman, Paul and the Law, 35 ( cf. Paul and 15 Ibid., 475. Palestinian Judaism, 485-90, 509-10).

- 4 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

need to maintain that Judaism is legalistic! It "works of the law," Dunn believes that Paul is allows him to maintain that really, on this referring especially to three matters as a result point, Judaism and Christianity are not that of controversy with Jewish Christians, different. As a matter of fact, it allows him to namely, circumcision, Sabbath keeping, and draw the conclusion that “In short, this is dietary observance. Paul’s concern then is what Paul finds wrong in Judaism: it is not not about the possibility that some promote Christianity.”21 salvation by doing good works but it has to do with the fact that some defend a much too 3. James D. G. Dunn "exclusive" approach to Christianity. In the words of Dunn: James D. G. Dunn, another significant It is the law understood in terms of works, scholar on the writings of Paul, agrees with as a Jewish prerogative and national Sanders’ perspective on Paul, is actually the monopoly, to which he [Paul] takes one who coined the term “New Perspective on exception….Paul here is not disparaging 22 Paul,” and is one of its most enthusiastic works in general or pressing a dichotomy promoters. At the same time however he between outward ritual done in the flesh and advocates a major criticism or alteration to inward grace operative in the spirit. …It is “covenant nomism.” works which betoken racial prerogative to Dunn believes that Sanders has erred which he objects, acts done in the flesh somewhat in not emphasizing adequately because faith in Christ is reckoned insufficient as the badge of covenant what he calls the “social function” of the law membership which he denounces. Over in the New Testament era. At this time, the against Peter and the other Jewish Jews saw the law as a sign of the position Christians Paul insists that God's verdict in God graciously gave them and hence it served favour of believers comes to realization as a "badge" of their privileged position or, as through faith, from start to finish, and in no Dunn likes to call it, a "boundary marker" way depends on observing the works of law between them and all others. which hitherto had characterized and Dunn likes to emphasize what Paul often distinguished the Jews as God's people. 24 refers to as "works of the law" and he Thus the issue for Paul never is and never considers this another way of saying was merit-based righteousness but it was 'covenant nomism' because these works 23 racial exclusiveness. And for that matter, any characterize 'being in' the covenant. By kind of boundary-marker other than faith in

21 Christ itself. Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 552. This reading of Paul, says Dunn, has 22 See J.D.G. Dunn, "The New Perspective on Paul," numerous advantages. It acknowledges the Jesus, Paul and the Law: Studies in Mark and legitimacy of Sanders’s complaint against the Galatians (Westminster/John Knox Press, 1990) Lutheran paradigm for understanding 183-214. Cf. in the same book "Works of the Law Judaism, but at the same time it gives a and the Curse of the Law (Gal.3:10-14) where Dunn picture of Paul much more firmly rooted says "'works of the law' is, then, another way of saying 'covenantal nomism' - that which within first-century Judaism. "Sanders," says characterizes 'being in' the covenant and not simply Dunn, "in effect freed Pauline exegesis from 'getting into' the covenant (as Sanders himself put its sixteenth-century blinkers, but he has still it)" 220.

23 "Works of the Law and the Curse of the Law

(Gal.3:10-14), Jesus, Paul and the Law: Studies in 24 Mark and Galatians 220. Ibid., 200.

- 5 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

left us with a Paul who could have made little atonement is possible. Among good deeds, sense to his fellow Jews…"25 two are singled out which atone for So these then are two modern approaches transgression. They are honouring one’s to Paul. Another person who, if time father and giving alms.” Sanders quotes the permitted, would merit some attention would relevant texts from Sirach 3:3: “Whoever be Heikki Räisänen.26 This Finnish scholar honors his father atones for sins…” and 3:30: agrees with Sanders' viewpoint but then “Water extinguishes a blazing fire: so maintains that Paul has shifted his perspective almsgiving atones for sin.” But a number of times, and ultimately is astonishingly, says Silva, “ inconsistent. It is discouraging to note that Sanders offers no explanation for—indeed, this is where we end up with such approaches; shows no awareness of—what looks like a the positive view on Judaism is taken as a fairly blatant view of self-salvation. Of given and then one seems to engage in all course, it would be unfair to focus on these kinds of exegetical gymnastics to make Paul two verses at the expense of ignoring the fit that picture. genuine piety that characterizes so much of Ecclesiasticus. Yet the notion that one’s 4. Analysis good deeds have efficacy over against one’s sins…does lie at the very root of legalism.28 What should our position be regarding the This is of course only one small indication views of Sanders and Dunn? There are a of the fact that despite his claim to be against number of criticisms that can be brought bias,29 he appears to have read the evidence forward at this point.. with a particular agenda in mind. A much more detailed evaluation can be a) The Evidence: No Legalism? found in chapter eight of D. A. Carson’s, Divine Sovereignty and Human One of the first concerns is the question Responsibility: Biblical Perspectives in whether Sanders has been entirely fair in his Tension.30 In his survey, Carson concludes presentation of the evidence. While to that while Sanders is generous in his critique Sanders on this point is a momentous task because of the sheer volume of rabbinic 28 Ibid., 349. documents, in a very significant article,27 Moisés Silva has suggested that he has not 29 See the comments of N.T. Wright where he says that been sufficiently careful. Sanders refers to E. P. Sanders is not "a sworn enemy of Christian Ecclesiasticus and mentions in passing that truth or faith" but a man who is against all prejudice (see S. Neill and N.T. Wright, Interpretation of the “Ben Sirach shared the general belief that New Testament, (Oxford University Press, 1988) 391-2). Elsewhere, Sanders says: "I have been 25 Ibid., 201. engaged for some years in the effort to free history and exegesis from the control of theology; that is, 26 Räisänen view are discussed by S. Westerholm in from being obligated to come to certain conclusions Israel's Law and the Church's Faith, 93-102. which are predetermined by theological Readers will also be interested in the dissertation commitment"(Jesus and Judaism (SCM Press, 1985) written under Dr. J. van Bruggen by T. E. van 333-4). Spanje, Inconsistentie bij Paulus? Een confrontatie met het werk van Heikki Räisänen (Kok, 1996). 30 (Baker, 1994) 84-109. References to other reviews of Sanders' approach can be found in Schreiner (The 27"The Law and Christianity: Dunn's New Synthesis" Law and its Fulfillment 114-21) and Eskola Westminster Theological Journal Volume 53. 1991. (Theodicy and Predestination in Pauline Soteriology 339-353. (Mohr Siebeck, 1998) 52n1).

- 6 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

evaluation of the Tannaitic period, he is they had the wisdom and virtue to embrace substantially correct; however Carson notes it.”32 Carson remarks: and shows from the evidence that while some Again and again [Sanders] observes that merit theology is present in the Tannaitic human decision stands side by side with period, there is a drift towards much more of divine ‘grace’; but he never remarks that this merit theology in the later rabbinic ‘grace’ is undergoing a major semantic material. While God’s sovereignty is shift. He draws attention to passages on emphasized, there is also ironically a election, but minimises the evidence which tendency to “magnify the man”31; the result is transforms ‘election’ almost into reward.”33 that one cannot be generous anymore about Sanders tries to defend this in all kinds of the later rabbinic writings. The sovereign God ways, but the fact is that Paul would have is no longer sovereign over the area of most emphatically rejected any and all such salvation. argumentation. Much more work needs to be done in this There is, secondly, the sheer mass of regard but it is likely that Sanders’ rabbinic material. The fact is, that “the sheer presentation of Judaism will increasingly be number and detail of laws which are codified found wanting and one-sided. The fact that in the Mishnah betray the presence of there is such a mass of material here and so legalism.” Just as the vast tangle of today’s much variety in the writings suggests that it is legal system brings about the need for the possible that one who wants to find elements ordinary citizen to hire a lawyer in order to of grace in rabbinic writings will be able to interpret and assist him through the legal find them, but those who seek legalistic jungle, so it goes here.34 elements will be able to uncover those as While Sanders may respond that the Jews well. saw the law as a blessing from God rather At the same time, however, one might ask than an onerous duty, the question whether there is not more than one way to test for legalism. Sanders seeks to Nonetheless, the vast quantity of laws in the ward it off with his references to “getting in” Mishnah and the minutiae contained therein enshrine legalism. When people begin to and “staying in.” But there are other stress complex and detailed prescriptions indications of legalism. for obedience, then the primacy of grace is There is, first, the question about the basis threatened, even if the specific laws are of election. Both Schreiner and Carson viewed as a divine gift.35 perceptively note here another indication of legalism. On the topic of God’s election of There is, thirdly, a failure to stress God’s Israel, according to Sanders, the rabbis role. Sanders says at one point: “Very seldom believed that while the covenant was offered is God’s role in the covenant directly to all nations only Israel accepted it, and God discussed. It is assumed so thoroughly that it need not be mentioned.”36 chose Israel, Sanders says, because of the While willing to merit of the fathers. These two points, 32 Schreiner, The Law and its Fulfillment, 117. responds Schreiner, “betray a legalistic mindset.” “The decisive issue in salvation, 33 Carson, Divine Sovereignty, 121. then, was the decision of Israel to accept the covenant, and thus the Jews could boast that 34 Schreiner, The Law and its Fulfillment, 116.

35 Schreiner, The Law and its Fulfillment, 116 31 Carson, Divine Sovereignty, 106, 109. See the striking example re Abraham on p. 107. 36 Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 82.

- 7 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

grant this to a degree, Schreiner points out property of Judaism or medieval that when there is a failure to mention grace Christianity. On the contrary, it belongs to and the covenant but at the same time no the heart of sin in its universality; indeed failure to mention prescriptions of the law, legalism is but the human cry for personal “one has a recipe for legalism.”37 Any autonomy. Doing things our way as distinct from trusting God’s power is illustrated just theology that claims to stress God’s grace but as clearly in modern evangelicalism as it is rarely mentions it and that elaborates human in the narrative of the wilderness responsibility in detail inevitably becomes wanderings. The inclination toward self- legalistic in practice, if not theory. This righteousness is thus not a unique Jewish principle applies to rabbinic Judaism and to problem: it is endemic to the human Christian churches. A church outwardly condition, and even the most deeply lauding grace as primary and fundamental sanctified believer is vulnerable to its 41 may practice the most virulent legalism.38 power. And fourthly, is there not the possibility of so stressing the law within the covenant (i.e., b) Variations in Judaism? in the area of “staying in”) that one is legalistic as well? This seems to be the Another criticism launched by Silva, is the criticism of the Finnish scholar Timo Eskola. fact that Sanders seems to make no allowance He points out that since in Sanders's for the possibility that in early, medieval or presentation keeping the law affects modern Judaism, there may indeed have been eschatological salvation, "covenant nomism is lay people or others who perceived salvation legalistic by definition"; thus Sanders has along legalistic lines. Silva quotes from Ellis only succeeded in giving legalism a new Rivkin (a modern scholar who has made a status.39 In fact, says Eskola, it may be better 40 significant contribution to the question who to refer to it as "synergistic nomism." the Pharisees were); Rivkin refers to his On a related note, perhaps more allowance earlier life in terms quite similar to Luther’s would be made for the presence of legalism in description of his own “plight”. Judaism if it would be realized that a tendency towards legalism is part of the fallen On the unerring scales of God’s justice, human condition. In a perceptive paragraph, would my righteousness offset my sinfulness and tip the scales to eternal life, Silva points out: or would the heavy weight of this or that It is essential to note, however, that this sin, alone or in combination, bring the kind of legalism is hardly the exclusive scales down on the side of eternal punishment? I oscillated between the ecstasy of the Law fulfilled and the agony 37 Schreiner, The Law and its Fulfillment, 116. lest, frail, finite, and impulse-ridden, I would fall short of what the Law demanded 38 Ibid., 117. of me.42

39 Theodicy and Predestination in Pauline Soteriology That raises the larger question: is Judaism (Mohr Siebeck, 1998) 56. Eskola actually writes that necessarily as monolithic as modern scholars Sanders has given "nomism…a new status but from the context it is evident that he is suggesting that "covenant nomism" gives legalism a new status. 41 "The Law and Christianity: Dunn's New Synthesis," That is quite a charge, but by email correspondence I 349. have confirmed that this is what Eskola's position. 42 A Hidden Revolution: the Pharisees' Search for the 40 Ibid, 57. Kingdom Within (Nashville: Abingdon (1978) 22.

- 8 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

seem to make it appear? From much of the pluralization” of Judaism.47 In a book that he literature one gets the impression that either authored together with Jacob Neusner, it is all of Judaism -- as it is presented in the argued that there was not one Judaism in and Jewish writings, and represented anywhere in before the New Testament era but many, the New Testament—is legalistic or none of it Christianity being one of them, “the is. “Either the Pharisees were hypocritical Mishnah’s Judaism” being another.48 legalists who consciously sought to bribe God It seems to me that this is a move in the with their self-righteousness or they were not right direction. There are few movements in affected by legalism in any significant which everyone is consistently the same way.”43 But that is clearly a false dilemma.44 everywhere. (Canadian Reformed Churches, Is it not possible that there were various for example?!). While tendencies towards shades of legalism, even within Pharisaism? legalism (and exclusivism?) reside in the Must we presume that Pharisees were always hearts of all, by the grace of God, some will alike—whether they are found in Jerusalem or be spared from this blindness more than in Galilee? Is the Lord Jesus, for instance, not others. more sympathetic to Nicodemus (John 3) than Obviously then, despite the flurry of to those whom he opposes in Matthew 23? excitement and discussion that Sanders has Similarly with the writings of the apostle caused, and the fact that much of this Paul, must we suppose that his opponents discussion has been helpful, there is much were either all legalistic or not legalistic at all, that must be rejected. The use of works by without any possibility of shades in advocates of this "New Perspective" will need between?45 to be read very critically.49 In this regard, it is noteworthy that the issues that Dunn raises are, more often than c) "Works of the Law" not, also presented as a dilemma. If we, for argument’s sake, might be willing later to What about the ideas of James Dunn, then? Is allow that there is something to Dunn’s view, it true that there is no indication of seeking does it have to be either-or here? Why is it salvation in a legalistic fashion anywhere in always presented as if Paul is either opposing 46 legalism or he is opposing exclusivism? 47 In Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (IVP, 1992), Are these necessarily mutually exclusive? 400f. A welcome voice in this regard is being 48 raised by Bruce Chilton. In his article on Judaism in the New Testament: Practices and Beliefs “Judaism,” he speaks about a “radical (Routledge, 1995) 31. Timo Eskola makes similar suggestions in Theodicy and Predestination, 56. That this is becoming a more standard view is also 43 "The Law and Christianity: Dunn's New Synthesis," evident from the article on "Judaism" by J. Andrew 350-1. Overman and William Scott Green in the Anchor Bible Dictionary III (Doubleday, 1992) 1037-54. 44 Ibid, 351.. 49 It should be noted as well that despite my 45 Of interest here is the discussion about the possibility considerable appreciation for the works of N. T. of "soft" and "hard legaism"; for some of the Wright (especially The New Testament and the discussion on this point, see S. Westerholm, Israel's People of God and Jesus and the Victory of God in Law and the Church's Faith, 132-4. the Fortress series called Christian Origins and the Question of God), Wright is also an adherent of the 46 Silva notes one occasion where Dunn is more New Perspective, as is apparent from the quotations careful, but rightly maintains that this is exceptional cited by S. Westerholm in Israel's Law and the (Silva, 351). Church's Faith., 145n8.

- 9 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

Paul? Just boundary markers instead? the term as its used in the OT (Ex. 35:21,24; Weighing through all the writings of Dunn Josh. 22:27, and shows that already here, and working out an extensive critique is while it is often a reference to an act of obviously a bigger task than you or I have service in the tabernacle or temple, it is by no time for today, but a number of critical means limited to this nor is it limited just to comments can be made. some social function. Work (hdbd[) and It will be apparent that Dunn wants to Torah are related, with hdbd[ referring to restrict the phrase “works of Law” (e[rgwn "the fulfilling of the precepts of the law of novmou) to a kind of technical term used 54 50 Moses." The same expression found in the specifically to these identity markers. It is Apocryphal55 and Pseudepigraphal56 writings doubtful however whether that can be is not limited either. The same is true of sustained. Qumran writings; although the use of the Some of the strongest criticisms in this expression "works of the law" in the Qumran regard have come very recently from the pen document 4QMMT is worthy of a study on its of Timo Eskola. Eskola points out that Dunn own, Eskola is convinced that here it is a got the idea about "identity markers" from reference to a more general temple service some of the writings of E. Lohmeyer51 and 52 and torah obedience. Says Eskola: "it is easy J.B. Tyson who wrote about "the connection to see that the 'works of the law' were not between the cultic practices of the Old merely 'identity markers' for devout Jews."57 Testament and the important term 'works of 53 Both D. J. Moo and S. Westerholm have the law'" Eskola then goes on to examine also argued very persuasively that the expression “works” (e[rga) in Paul refers to 50 In his commentary on Romans, e.g., Dunn argues “deeds that are performed,” and thus “works that "works of the law" are not the same as doing the of Law” signifies the “deeds” or “actions” law or fulfilling the law but rather they "clearly refer demanded by the Mosaic Law. They find to the actions and conduct required by the law if one proof in Romans 3-4 where “works of Law” is to be fully recognized and retain one's status as a member of the people of God" Word Biblical and “works” cannot be distinguished; Commentary: Romans 1-8. Volume 38A. (Word, especially in Romans 4:1-5 where Paul says 1988) 158-9. In his The Theology of Paul the that Abraham was not justified by his “works” Apostle (Eerdmans, 1998), Dunn complains that he (Rom 4:2) nor by “working” (Rom 4:4-5), has repeatedly been misunderstood as saying that "'works of the law' denote only circumcision, food laws, and Sabbath" (358n97). While this comment 54 Eskola, Theodicy and Predestination, 213. Dunn should be noted, it is apparent from the references took the opposite view in “Works of the Law and the above and elsewhere that Dunn does defend the Curse of the Law," 220 and in “4QMMT and notion that "works of the law" refer only to those Galatians” New Testament Studies 43/7 (1997) 147- works that can serve as "boundary markers." 153. Settling the issue is obviously not easily done, but it should be noted that one might expect the 51 Probleme paulinischer Theologie (Kohlhammer, phrase to have more of a boundary-marker function n.d.). Dunn refers to Lohmmeyer and Tyson in since 4QMMT is believed to be a letter written by "Works of the Law and Curse of the Law (Gal.3:10- the Essenes to their opponents in Jerusalem 14)," Jesus, Paul and the Law (Westminster/John regarding their distinctives. Knox Press, 1990) 220. 55 Wisd. 6:3-4; cf. 12:4,19; Sirach 10:6; 11:20-21; 52 JBL 92 (1973) 424-425. It was especially Tyson who 15:19. identified the works of the law to such things as circumcision and dietary laws. 56 TLev 19:1,2; TBenj.5:2,3.

53 Eskola, Theodicy and Predestination, 212. 57 Theodicy and Predestination, 217.

- 10 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

these can hardly be limited to “identity circumcision, etc.), then have we not come markers” since Abraham lived before the again full circle? Then is Paul not opposing arrival of the Mosaic Law.58 legalism, even if it is a legalism about some Other weaknesses in Dunn's theory are specific matters? Then is Judaism (or at least apparent as well. His work "Works of the Law this part of it) not legalistic after all? Then and the Curse of the Law (Gal.3:10-14)"59 is Sanders and Dunn are undone, and the an article he wrote in response to critics as a Reformation writers and others are exonerated crucial test-case.60 But one of the reasons he after all. The same seems to happen at times fails to be convincing is because he entirely in his Galatians commentary; when he writes seems to overlook the fact that, while the on the phrase “all who rely on the works of quotation from Deut.27 is central to the the law” in Galatians 3:10, he says: passage, the works to which Deut. 27 refers, the sins that bring down the curse of the Paul meant those who, in his judgement, covenant, are not limited to circumcision, were putting too much weight on the sabbath, etc., but there are references to idols distinctiveness of Jews from Gentiles, and on (15), dishonoring father or mother (16), lieing the special laws which formed the boundary with one's father’s wife (20) or slaying one's markers between them, those who rested their confidence in Israel’s ‘favoured nation’ neighbor in secret (24). status, those who invested their identity too Furthermore, while Westerholm refers to far in the presumption that Israel was set Roman 3:20, 28 as "positively fatal to Dunn's 62 61 apart from ‘the nations’… proposal" , Dunn does try to read also this passage in accordance with his theory (as he When one reads this, one wonders: even if the does with all of Paul!). But it struck me as I issue is exclusivism, is it not at one and the read this section of his commentary, if one same time legalism? Dunn might respond: does that (i.e., if one reads this passage so as yes, but these are not Jews but Christians to say that Paul's opponents were attempting whom Paul is opposing. But to that, we to be justified by works of the law such as would need to respond: yes, but the influence in this regard surely is from Judaism. And at 58 D.J. Moo," 'Law', 'Works of the Law,' and Legalism bottom, it is still legalism that is at issue. in Paul," Westminster Theological Journal 45 1983 One more argument that should be 73-100; S. Westerholm, Israel's Law, 117-119, 141- considered for the position that Paul was 44 indeed arguing against legalism has to do with 59 Jesus, Paul and the Law: Studies in Mark and the frequent references in Paul's writings to Galatians 215-41. boasting (Rom.3:27-28; 4:1-5). Those references make little sense if they are 60 The point that Dunn tries to make is that “the curse nothing more than a matter of nationalism (or which was removed by Christ’s death was the curse dietary laws, or sabbath observance), but if which had previously prevented that blessing from they have to do with pride in one's reaching the Gentiles, the curse of a wrong understanding of the law” (229). performance -- something tempting to every human being -- Paul's major point has great 61 Israel's Law and the Church's Faith, 119. significance: glory and praise needs to be Westerholm also offers other objections to Dunn's heaped upon the one and only God alone! theories in "Sinai as Viewed from Damascus: Paul's Reevaluation of the Mosaic Law" The Road to Damascus: the Impact of Paul's Conversion on His Life, Thought, and Ministry. Edited by R. N. 62 The Epistle to the Galatians. Black’s New Testament Longenecker. (Eerdmans, 1997) 147-165. Commentary. (Hendrickson, 1993) 172.

- 11 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

One last concern, before we move on, is a The problem in much of this is the major one. When Dunn speaks about the sweeping positions Sanders and Dunn seem to contemporary significance of what he adopt. In the time available to me, I have not believes to be Paul's battle against managed to exegete all the passages that come exclusivism, he makes a number of very up for discussion here, but I am willing to sweeping statements. At one point he grant that it is possible that sometimes we are compares "the role of the sacraments (baptism seeing legalism where we shouldn’t or that and the Lord's Supper)" today to the role of sometimes we should be seeing exclusivism "circumcision, table regulation and sabbath" when we don’t. We can learn from the voices in Paul's day.63 At another point he writes: of Sanders and Dunn as we consider them. Equivalent defining issues within the But the problem is that for Sanders and Dunn history of Christianity have included it is never legalism that Paul is up against, and believers' baptism, speaking in tongues, or the problem with Dunn specifically is that it is apartheid. Today we might think of issues always exlusivism that Paul is opposing. like abortion, women priests, scriptural inerrancy, or papal infallibility.64 Here we see the practical consequences of d) What about Luther and Calvin? following Dunn's exegesis. Just as Paul fought against all boundaries and exclusivism, so the The question that persists as we come full Christian church must oppose any and every circle is to what degree Luther and Calvin are boundary!65 Whether they are boundaries still trustworthy guides to Paul. given by God's command does not matter Now, to me there is no doubt that Sanders (circumcision was too!); Paul, and thus God, has issued a commendable warning. The is against any notion of exclusivity. Those rabbinic sources need to be read on their own who have opposed one hermeneutical jump merit. If we are going to read Luther and are now making another! Calvin, we will do well to be aware of this To conclude also this section then, hermeneutical jump which they frequently obviously I believe that Dunn's approach is make. But let there be no doubt that Luther (simply put) wrong. Many of the "works of and Calvin have much to teach us. the law" may very well have had a delimiting It is particularly Stephen Westerholm who function, but to suggest that Paul is not saying answers quite unequivocally about Luther's more than that necessitates a rereading of Paul helpfulness. In his usual style, Westerholm which will have to resort to eisegesis again writes: and again. How else can one interpret Eph. Students who want to know how a rabbinic 2:8-10 or Jew perceived humanity's place in God's Titus 3:4-7, and so many more of the apostle's world will read Paul with caution and words? Luther not at all. On the other hand, students who want to understand Paul but feel they have nothing to learn from a 63 "The New Perspective on Paul," Jesus, Paul and the Martin Luther should consider a career in Law 193. metallurgy. Exegesis is learned from the masters.66 64 The Theology of Paul the Apostle 358. Especially this exercise in reading some 65 This approach gets worked out to some degree in modern authors reinforces the thought that to Dunn's Christian Liberty: A New Testament Perspective (Eerdmans, 1993). 66 Israel's Law and the Church's Faith, 173.

- 12 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

really understand Paul on this and other imposed upon the Jews. To read them points, we continue to do well to learn from today with the presupposition that they the masters of the Reformation era. were all legalists is inappropriate. Westerholm himself advocates reading Paul Rabbinical writings need to be with some aid from Luther. He argues as a allowed to speak for themselves. result that in the Old Testament, and thus in 2. Sanders has shown that the principles Jewish "soteriology" works do play some of grace were often alive in Judaism. role. For support, he refers to passages in The service of the Lord and the study which Israel is promised "life" if they will do of Scripture was also a joy and delight the commandments of the law (Lev. 18:5; for many Jews in and before the New Deut 4:1; 5:33; 6:24-25, etc.67 Overagainst Testament period. this view, he suggests, Paul, as Luther saw it, insisted that human activity played no role in 3. It has been shown however (M. Silva, salvation at all. D.A. Carson) that Sanders has often Frank Thielman68 and Timo Eskola69seem attempted to put the rabbinic writings to steer us in a direction more similar to that in the best possible light, frequently of Calvin. Clearly, this master will teach us overlooking aspects wherein a more than many a modern. The church has theology of merit is present. He does really not been that far off the mark. not adequately emphasize either that this merit theology, present at times in Tannaitic writings (50 BC - 200 AD), 5. Some Conclusions re "The New becomes increasingly predominant in Perspective on Paul" later Amoraic writings (220 - 500 AD). 1. E. P. Sanders has rightly sounded a 4. It should not be overlooked that the warning concerning the practice of sheer volume and vast number of some (e.g. F. Weber) to read the details and laws in the Mishnah and rabbinical writings, the Scriptures, and subsequent Talmuds tend towards other writings of that time in such a legalism. way that the issues involved in the 5. In this whole discussion, it should not debates of the Reformation about be forgotten that legalism is not the justification by grace/works are exclusive property of any Jewish or Christian group. An inclination towards legalism is part of the fallen 67 See Israel's Law and the Church's Faith, 146-7. human condition. 68 See the comments Thielman makes in Paul and the 6. In this debate too, false dilemmas need Law: A Contextual Approach 243-5. He suggests to be avoided. The choice is not: either that "Perhaps the present work can stand as a modest correction to Westerholm's fine achievement" (245). all of Judaism was legalistic or none Another work worthy of note is I. John Hesselink's of it was. There is the possibility that revised dissertation Calvin's Concept of the Law some individuals/groups/areas were (Pickwick Publications, 1992). more legalistic than others. Likewise,

69 there is not a single Judaism behind all Eskola suggests the these texts that Westerholm quotes re life above are not speaking about the documents, nor should we “eschatological salvation” but about life today presume that the opponents of the Theodicy and Predestination, 54. Lord Jesus were necessarily the same

- 13 - New Perspective: Is there a need to Reinterpret Paul?

as the opponents of Paul on this point faith through grace alone or that Paul’s opponents were always (Westerholm, Thielman). of the same mindset. c) Dunn’s conclusion that 7. It is to be regretted that Sanders and Christianity must similarly others have made this “new look” re a oppose all exclusivism (re non-legalistic Judaism decisive and Lord’s Supper practices, normative. Whenever the Scriptures believer’s baptism etc) is seem to present a contrary picture, it is unScriptural and dangerous for the Scriptures rather than the “new the life of the churches. look” on Judaism that must be 70 9. While it is important to be mindful adjusted. This is leading to a “New regarding the point mentioned in #1 Perspective on Paul” in which the above, the writings of the Reformers writings of Paul are being remain very significant tools for the reinterpreted in a way which, more understanding of the apostle Paul often than not, is regrettable and (Westerholm, Thielman). wrong. “Traditional Reformed theology can 8. The subsequent shift of the New 10. Perspective by James D. G. Dunn re learn and appropriate a great deal from “works of the law” is particularly recent Pauline research, but it need not lamentable. fear the dissolution of one of its central tenets, sola fide” (Silva). a) His reinterpretation of “works of the law” in Romans and For Further Reading Galatians as “boundary E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: markers” of Judaism which A Comparison of Patterns of Religion. Paul rejects is contrary to the Fortress Press, 1977. significance that this phrase James D.G. Dunn, “The New Perspective on has had in the OT, in Qumran Paul” Jesus, Paul, and the Law: writings, and must necessarily Studies in Mark and Galatians have in Paul (Timo Eskola). Westminster/John Know Press, 1990. b) The implication that Paul is D. J. Moo, “Law, Works of the Law , and opposing exclusivism in every Legalism in Paul” Westminster instance rather than legalism Theological Journal (1983) 73-100. must necessarily involve a Frank Thielman, Paul and the Law: A further reinterpretation of Paul Contextual Approach IVP. 1994 which jeopardizes the Thomas R. Schreiner The Law and its principles of justification by Fulfillment: a Pauline Theology of Law Baker, 1993. Moisés Silva, “The Law and Christianity:

70 Dunn’s New Synthesis” Westminster On a related point, it is important to view recent Theological Journal (1991) 339-353. discussion about the relationship between the Lord Jesus and the Pharisees in the light of these new S. Westerholm, Israel’s Law and the views on Judaism and the law. To downplay the Church’s Faith: Paul and his Recent conflict is inappropriate as the Gospels and Paul are Interpreters Eerdmans, 1988. reliable sources of what transpired in the first century.

- 14 -