New Perspective on Paul Its origins and beliefs. You decide if they are found weighed and wanting This presentation is a highlight of the material in Guy.

New Perspective on PaulNew Perspective on Paul

Its origins and beliefs.Its origins and beliefs.You decide if they are found You decide if they are found

weighed and wantingweighed and wanting

This presentation is a highlight of This presentation is a highlight of the material in Guy Prentiss Waters’ the material in Guy Prentiss Waters’ book book “Justification and the New “Justification and the New

Perspectives on Paul.” 2004Perspectives on Paul.” 2004

All expressions of Christianity are ultimatelyon the path to either Rome or Geneva.

Present day definitionPresent day definition A problem clearly defined is a problem half solved. So how A problem clearly defined is a problem half solved. So how

does one define NPP?does one define NPP?

NPP is a heretical soteriological doctrine that initial salvation NPP is a heretical soteriological doctrine that initial salvation is by grace, but maintaining salvation is by our works. This is by grace, but maintaining salvation is by our works. This being reminiscent of the papist error that prior sins are erased being reminiscent of the papist error that prior sins are erased by baptism, yet we must atone for all subsequent sins by our by baptism, yet we must atone for all subsequent sins by our own works. J. Ligon Duncan notes: “The law (own works. J. Ligon Duncan notes: “The law (nomosnomos) was not ) was not a means of getting saved but of staying saved. Keeping God's a means of getting saved but of staying saved. Keeping God's law was the appropriate response to God's covenant mercy.” law was the appropriate response to God's covenant mercy.” Some Thoughts on Covenant Theology and Justification. Some Thoughts on Covenant Theology and Justification.

Besides rejecting Divine preservation of the saints, the Besides rejecting Divine preservation of the saints, the

New Perspective also claims that the First Century A.D. New Perspective also claims that the First Century A.D. Jewish pharisaical system was a sola gratia religion ! In other Jewish pharisaical system was a sola gratia religion ! In other words the Judaism of Paul’s day was not a religion of self words the Judaism of Paul’s day was not a religion of self righteousness.righteousness.

An additional New Perspective teaching: Divine forgiveness is An additional New Perspective teaching: Divine forgiveness is primarily ethnic or corporate rather than personal.primarily ethnic or corporate rather than personal.

NPP’s OriginsNPP’s Origins

Biblical critics of 17Biblical critics of 17thth century Germany century Germany began to depart from the began to depart from the formal concernformal concern (Scripture Alone) of the Reformation.(Scripture Alone) of the Reformation.

This also led to a departure from the This also led to a departure from the material concernmaterial concern of the Reformation of the Reformation (Justification by Faith Alone).(Justification by Faith Alone).

The soteriology that Luther and Calvin The soteriology that Luther and Calvin rejected found its way into Lutheran rejected found its way into Lutheran Scholarship.Scholarship.

FC Baur and 19FC Baur and 19thth Century Century 1826 FC Baur begins 1826 FC Baur begins

to teach at Tubingen.to teach at Tubingen. Baur rejects some of Baur rejects some of

Paul’s epistles that do Paul’s epistles that do not deal with the not deal with the Jewish/Christian Jewish/Christian issues.issues.

European philosophy European philosophy embraces doubt.embraces doubt.

Exegesis assumes Exegesis assumes unprecedented unprecedented independence from independence from systematic theology. systematic theology.

F.C Baur

1919thth Century Summary Century Summary

Scholars by and large agree on the Scholars by and large agree on the two main points of Paul’s letters. two main points of Paul’s letters. They are:They are:

1) Justification by Faith Alone1) Justification by Faith Alone 2) Some sort of mystical/ethical line 2) Some sort of mystical/ethical line

of thought evidenced by his language of thought evidenced by his language of “the spirit” and “union in Christ”.of “the spirit” and “union in Christ”.

Their conclusion was that for Paul the Their conclusion was that for Paul the mystical was more important than mystical was more important than Justification by faith alone. Justification by faith alone.

Rudolph Bultman and W.D. DaviesRudolph Bultman and W.D. Davies Rudolph Bultmann saw faith as the Rudolph Bultmann saw faith as the

renunciation of such striving and more renunciation of such striving and more as dependence on God.as dependence on God.

William David Davies in his 1948 book William David Davies in his 1948 book ““Paul and Rabbinic JudaismPaul and Rabbinic Judaism” was the ” was the first to look at Paul and contemporary first to look at Paul and contemporary Judaism sympathetically.Judaism sympathetically.

Bultmann viewed Paul and Judaism Bultmann viewed Paul and Judaism antithetically.antithetically.

For Davies, Christology was more For Davies, Christology was more important than Justification by faith important than Justification by faith alone. alone.

J. Ligon Duncan gives a modern example J. Ligon Duncan gives a modern example of this. Duncan notes “Wright's of this. Duncan notes “Wright's definition of the Gospel makes the definition of the Gospel makes the Gospel wholly about the person of Christ Gospel wholly about the person of Christ and not about his work ("the Gospel is and not about his work ("the Gospel is 'Jesus is Lord and Messiah' not 'Jesus 'Jesus is Lord and Messiah' not 'Jesus died for your sins'")… Notice this died for your sins'")… Notice this definition of the Gospel moves back definition of the Gospel moves back from the work of Christ to the person of from the work of Christ to the person of Christ. Though Wright doesn't deny the Christ. Though Wright doesn't deny the importance of the work of Christ, he importance of the work of Christ, he rarely, if ever, attempts to articulate rarely, if ever, attempts to articulate clearly just what that work is and how it clearly just what that work is and how it functions.” functions.” Attractions of the New Attractions of the New Perspective on Paul.Perspective on Paul.

Rudolph Bultmann

W.D. Davies

Krister StendahlKrister Stendahl Served as prof of New Test. Served as prof of New Test.

at Harvard Div. from 1954-at Harvard Div. from 1954-1984.1984.

He argued Luther and He argued Luther and Calvin’s conversion Calvin’s conversion experiences affected the experiences affected the West’s reading of Paul.West’s reading of Paul.

Role of Jews and Gentiles in Role of Jews and Gentiles in God’s plan was more God’s plan was more important than Justification important than Justification by faith alone. Paul was by faith alone. Paul was read by Luther “in the read by Luther “in the framework of late medieval framework of late medieval piety.” piety.” The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West. P. 86 Is Stendahl claiming his interpretationof the Scriptures on Paul and Justification is correct and the Reformed Confessions wrong? It sure seems that way. Both cannot be correct.

Stendahl thought the Reformation ledto those “who find themselves more or lessdogmatically bound by the Confessions.” IBID p. 87

Galatians 3:24-26 ESVGalatians 3:24-26 ESV

So then, the law was So then, the law was ourour guardian until Christ guardian until Christ came, in order that came, in order that wewe might be justified by might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, faith. But now that faith has come, wewe are no are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus youyou are all sons of God, through faith. are all sons of God, through faith.

Stendahl says “we/our means ‘me Paul with my Stendahl says “we/our means ‘me Paul with my Jewish compatriots and nothing else. It is Jewish compatriots and nothing else. It is totally wrong to apply that ‘our’ to us Gentiles.”totally wrong to apply that ‘our’ to us Gentiles.”

Paul Among Jews and Gentiles p. 23Paul Among Jews and Gentiles p. 23

E.P. SandersE.P. Sanders

Magnum opus was Magnum opus was Paul and Paul and Palestinian Palestinian Judaism.Judaism.

Second major work Second major work Paul the Law and Paul the Law and the Jewish People.the Jewish People.

Third work Third work Judaism: Judaism: Practice and Practice and Belief.Belief.

E.P. Sanders 8 pointsE.P. Sanders 8 points1.1. God has chosen Israel.God has chosen Israel.2.2. God has given the law.God has given the law.3.3. God’s promise to maintain the electionGod’s promise to maintain the election4.4. The requirement to obey.The requirement to obey.5.5. God rewards obedience and punishes God rewards obedience and punishes

transgression.transgression.6.6. The law provides for means of atonement.The law provides for means of atonement.7.7. The law helps to maintain or reestablish the The law helps to maintain or reestablish the

covenant.covenant.8.8. All those who are maintained in the covenant by All those who are maintained in the covenant by

obedience, atonement and God’s mercy belong obedience, atonement and God’s mercy belong to the group that will be saved.to the group that will be saved.Regarding man’s nature it is interesting to note what Sandersbelieves. “It is a matter of observation that all men sin. Men

have, apparently, the inborn drive towards rebellion and disobedience.But that is not the same as being born in a state of sinfulness from whichliberation is necessary. Sin only comes when man actually disobeys; if he

were to not disobey, he would not be a sinner.” Paul and Palestinian Judaismp. 114-115

Conclusion on SandersConclusion on Sanders Guy Prentiss Waters summarizes Sanders Guy Prentiss Waters summarizes Sanders

analysis of Judaism at the time of Paul. He analysis of Judaism at the time of Paul. He notes:notes:

Sanders has not established that Judaism at Sanders has not established that Judaism at the time of Paul was a religion of grace. The the time of Paul was a religion of grace. The Rabbi’s did not believe that grace had to Rabbi’s did not believe that grace had to overcome or over power the will. Rather, overcome or over power the will. Rather, God’s grace helped to make up the God’s grace helped to make up the deficiencies of one’s obedience.deficiencies of one’s obedience.

Sanders downplays the Rabbi’s who believed Sanders downplays the Rabbi’s who believed that God chose Israel based on their that God chose Israel based on their foreseen obedience. Sanders views this as foreseen obedience. Sanders views this as peripheral to the fact that God chose Israel.peripheral to the fact that God chose Israel.

Waters rightly concludes, “Any system of theology thatconceives God as electing a person on the grounds of hisor her foreseen choice or actual deeds is not gracious in

the Biblical sense.” P. 56.

Covenantal NomismCovenantal Nomism One enters the covenant by baptism.One enters the covenant by baptism. Once one enters the covenant the Once one enters the covenant the

membership provides salvation.membership provides salvation. Obedience to a specific set of Obedience to a specific set of

commandments keeps one in the commandments keeps one in the covenant. covenant.

Sanders basically believes that Paul’s discontent with Judaism does not come from the inability to keep the commandments but from a logical consequence of his two

fundamental convictions which Sanders identifies in Paul the Law and the Jewish People. Concerning Paul, Sanders notes, “As far as I can determine, inability and self

righteousness do not figure at all in his statements about the law (except for the extremestatement of inability in Romans 7:14-25). When he criticizes Judaism, he does

so in a sweeping manner and the criticism has two focuses: the lack of faith in Christ and the lack of equality for the Gentiles.” p. 154-155

Conclusion on SandersConclusion on Sanders

Paul never disagreed with Judaism on Paul never disagreed with Judaism on soteriological grounds. He never believed soteriological grounds. He never believed Judaism was faulty in its capacity to provide Judaism was faulty in its capacity to provide salvation.salvation.

Waters sums up Sanders by noting, “Christ’s Waters sums up Sanders by noting, “Christ’s death was fundamentally not expiatory to death was fundamentally not expiatory to Paul, but entailed the believer’s deliverance Paul, but entailed the believer’s deliverance from the power of sin by participation in his from the power of sin by participation in his death.” p. 89death.” p. 89

Paul’s meaning of justification was more Paul’s meaning of justification was more participatory than a forensic, judicial participatory than a forensic, judicial righteousness. righteousness.

Post SandersPost Sanders

Heikki RaisanenProfessor of New Testament Exegesis at the University of Helsinki.

James D.G. Dunn N.T. WrightAnglican Bishopof Durham

Lightfoot Professor of Divinityat Univ. of Durham. Responsiblefor the coining the term “New Perspective” in 1982.

Raisanen summarized Raisanen summarized Raisanen believes Paul’s writings were filled with

“invalid premises.” Paul and the Law p.11-12. So much for inerrancy!

Romans 7:14-25 was “not intended by Paul as a description of the Christian,” but “man’s existence under the law.” IBID. p. 13. This is wrong as a cursory reading of Romans 7 shows that Paul is writing AFTER his conversion. The grammar is present tense.

Paul deliberately misrepresents Judaism to teach the law is a means of righteousness due to his “conflict with the Judaizers.” IBID. p. 256

Paul’s “actual attitude towards the Torah… amounts to its abrogation.” IBID. p. 220

Dunn summarized 1Dunn summarized 1 Differs from Sanders and Differs from Sanders and Raisanen in that as Paul is more

coherent and consistent. Dunn is more difficult to refute. Dunn hailed Sanders work as a response to “the typically

Lutheran emphasis on Justification by faith.” New Perspective on Paul, p. 299

For Dunn the word “nomos” (Greek “law”) in Paul is to be translated “Torah”. “Works of the law are not good works in general or any attempt by the individual to amass or merit for himself, but…that pattern of obedience by which the righteous maintain their status within the people of the covenant, as evidenced not least by their dedication on such sensitive test issues as Sabbath and food laws.” Theology of the Apostle Paul 1:42

Dunn Summarized 2Dunn Summarized 2 Righteousness must be understood as a Hebraic concept Righteousness must be understood as a Hebraic concept

and not a Greek concept.and not a Greek concept. Greek concept has righteousness meaning “an idea or ideal Greek concept has righteousness meaning “an idea or ideal

against which the individual and individual action can be against which the individual and individual action can be measured.” Hebraic denotes a “more relational concept, measured.” Hebraic denotes a “more relational concept, the meeting of obligations laid upon the individual by the the meeting of obligations laid upon the individual by the relationship of which he or she is apart.” No forensic or relationship of which he or she is apart.” No forensic or transformative use of the term is allowed. transformative use of the term is allowed. Theology of Theology of the Apostle Paul p. 52the Apostle Paul p. 52

The righteousness of God for Dunn is “God’s fulfillment of The righteousness of God for Dunn is “God’s fulfillment of the obligations He took upon Himself in creating humankind the obligations He took upon Himself in creating humankind and particularly in the calling of Abraham and the choosing and particularly in the calling of Abraham and the choosing of Israel to be His people.” In other words it is “God’s of Israel to be His people.” In other words it is “God’s faithfulness to His people.” faithfulness to His people.” IBID. p. 342IBID. p. 342

The goal of Romans is to “explain and vindicate the The goal of Romans is to “explain and vindicate the faithfulness of God.” faithfulness of God.” IBID. p. 344IBID. p. 344

Wright SummarizedWright Summarized Reading Romans regarding imputation and the Reading Romans regarding imputation and the

righteousness of God Wright has a different righteousness of God Wright has a different understanding than the historic creeds and understanding than the historic creeds and confessions.confessions.

For example, Wright notes, “If we use the language of For example, Wright notes, “If we use the language of the law court, it makes no sense whatever to say that the law court, it makes no sense whatever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, or bequeaths, conveys or the judge imputes, imparts, or bequeaths, conveys or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or gas which can be passed across object, a substance or gas which can be passed across the courtroom…..To imagine the defendant somehow the courtroom…..To imagine the defendant somehow receiving the judge’s righteousness is simply a receiving the judge’s righteousness is simply a category mistake. That is not how the language category mistake. That is not how the language works.” works.” What Saint Paul Really Said, p. 98.What Saint Paul Really Said, p. 98.

CriticismCriticism Even though there is a divergence of opinion, Even though there is a divergence of opinion,

there is enough similarity to label NPP a “school there is enough similarity to label NPP a “school of thought”. It is found weighed and wanting for of thought”. It is found weighed and wanting for three main reasons.three main reasons.

1 NPP fails hermeneutically as its basic principles 1 NPP fails hermeneutically as its basic principles for interpreting Scripture are flawed.for interpreting Scripture are flawed.

2 First century Judaism does have some concept 2 First century Judaism does have some concept of the grace of God and it was not solely based on of the grace of God and it was not solely based on works. Granted one could argue it was semi-works. Granted one could argue it was semi-Pelagian. Pelagian.

3 The exegesis of the Reformers and their heirs is 3 The exegesis of the Reformers and their heirs is faithful to Paul in contrast to the revisionist faithful to Paul in contrast to the revisionist eisegesis of Dunn, Wright and Sanders. Paul eisegesis of Dunn, Wright and Sanders. Paul always interpreted “the history of salvation always interpreted “the history of salvation through the lens of Christ, not the reverse.”through the lens of Christ, not the reverse.”

Justification/ImputationJustification/ImputationYou decide who’s right.You decide who’s right.

'Justification is an act of God's free grace in 'Justification is an act of God's free grace in which he pardons all our sins and accepts us as which he pardons all our sins and accepts us as righteous in his sight for the sake of the righteous in his sight for the sake of the righteousness of Christ alone, which is credited righteousness of Christ alone, which is credited to us and received by faith alone'to us and received by faith alone' ( (Shorter Shorter Catechism, 33).Catechism, 33).

Philippians 3:8-9 NASB “More than that, I Philippians 3:8-9 NASB “More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, 9 and may be found in Him, gain Christ, 9 and may be found in Him, not not having a righteousness of my own derived having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law,from the Law, but that which is through faith in but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,”on the basis of faith,”

Challenge: find a lexicon which defines the Challenge: find a lexicon which defines the Greek word Greek word dikaiosunedikaiosune ("righteousness") as ("righteousness") as "membership within a group" or "membership within a group" or dikaioodikaioo ("justify") as "to make or declare the member of ("justify") as "to make or declare the member of a group." [It's not even down under definition a group." [It's not even down under definition number 14d!] number 14d!] Charles E. HillCharles E. Hill

Stendahl asks, "does [Paul] ever intimate that he is aware of Stendahl asks, "does [Paul] ever intimate that he is aware of any sins of his own which would trouble his conscience? any sins of his own which would trouble his conscience? Far from being "simultaneously a sinner and a saint" (simul Far from being "simultaneously a sinner and a saint" (simul iustus et peccator), Paul testifies of his clear conscience: iustus et peccator), Paul testifies of his clear conscience: "Indeed, this is our boast, the testimony of our conscience: "Indeed, this is our boast, the testimony of our conscience: we have behaved in the world with frankness and godly we have behaved in the world with frankness and godly sincerity" (2 Cor. 1:12a). He was aware that he had not yet sincerity" (2 Cor. 1:12a). He was aware that he had not yet "arrived" …He looked forward to a day when "all of us "arrived" …He looked forward to a day when "all of us must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may receive recompense for what has been done in the may receive recompense for what has been done in the body, whether good or evil" (2 Cor. 5:10), and he body, whether good or evil" (2 Cor. 5:10), and he anticipated a favorable verdict (v. 11). He acknowledged anticipated a favorable verdict (v. 11). He acknowledged that his clear conscience did not necessarily ensure this that his clear conscience did not necessarily ensure this verdict (1 Cor. 4:4), but he was confident nevertheless. verdict (1 Cor. 4:4), but he was confident nevertheless. These are hardly the convictions of a man who intends to These are hardly the convictions of a man who intends to rest entirely on the merits of an alien righteousness imputed rest entirely on the merits of an alien righteousness imputed

to his account.“to his account.“Mark M. Mattison Auburn UnivMark M. Mattison Auburn Univ N.T. Wright’s translation of Philippians 3:8: "Paul is N.T. Wright’s translation of Philippians 3:8: "Paul is

saying, in effect, 'I, though possessing covenant saying, in effect, 'I, though possessing covenant membership according to the flesh, did not regard that membership according to the flesh, did not regard that covenant membership as something to exploit. I emptied covenant membership as something to exploit. I emptied myself, sharing the death of the Messiah, wherefore God myself, sharing the death of the Messiah, wherefore God has given me the membership that really counts in which I has given me the membership that really counts in which I too will share the glory of Christ.'" too will share the glory of Christ.'" What Saint Paul What Saint Paul Really Said, p. 124. Really Said, p. 124.

That is a very significant shift. "Righteousness" is translated as "covenant membership." That's what righteousness is, being declared by God to be a member of the righteous covenant community, it is not receiving or being credited with the righteousness of Christ. No, Wright would say Christ's righteousness is non-transferable.

Are you part of the problem or Are you part of the problem or solution?solution?

In our day and age the doctrine In our day and age the doctrine of justification by free grace is of justification by free grace is all but forgotten. The majority all but forgotten. The majority of large denominations, of large denominations, although they may have it set although they may have it set forth in their official creeds, as forth in their official creeds, as a matter of fact no longer a matter of fact no longer believe it or preach it in any believe it or preach it in any pointed or consistent way. In pointed or consistent way. In many cases the Protestant many cases the Protestant church which claim to hold it church which claim to hold it yet show but little zeal or yet show but little zeal or enthusiasm for preaching it. It enthusiasm for preaching it. It is not an exaggeration to say is not an exaggeration to say that the average Protestant that the average Protestant church member knows little or church member knows little or nothing of it. nothing of it. The The Westminster Larger Westminster Larger Catechism: A Commentary Catechism: A Commentary by Johannes G. Vos, edited by Johannes G. Vos, edited by G.I. Williamson.by G.I. Williamson.

ReformedTheology

EvangelicalChristians

X

X marks the overlap The big picture is supposedto be truth and evangelizing, the misled, underfed and lost.

X here refers to the point of overlap where Reformed Theology is the minor point in today’s church world.

X

EvangelicalChristians

ReformedTheology