Problems for the New Perspective
Over the last couple of weeks I've been reading Tom Wright's Paul in Fresh Perspective. Wright is a brilliant man and an excellent writer. He's challenging and thoughtful in his understanding of Paul's letters. And yet, I'm not convinced that he has it right (no pun intended).
Wright sees Judaism as primarily being a religion of grace, as opposed to legalistic. He believes that Luther misread Paul by reading the medieval Catholic church in as Paul's opponents. Thus, Luther wrongly believed that the Judaizers were teaching that you can earn your salvation by the works of the law.
Wright insists that the problem with 2nd temple Judaism was not Pelagian. Instead it was racial exclusivity. Thus, the works of the law need to be read as ethnic boundaries that the Judaizers were compelling the Gentiles to do before being accepted in as God's covenant people.
While Wright surely makes some good points about reading Paul (I'm pretty sure that he's correct in his understanding of "all Israel" in Romans 11), I'm not sure that he's completely right about Paul's critique of Judaism.
I don't think that the dilemma is an either/or situation. It might be a both/and deal. In other words, 2nd temple Judaism might have been both legalistic and racially exclusive. Here's a text that I have yet to see Wright deal with--Romans 4:4-5.
This text clearly indicates that the works Paul was arguing against were being done in order to gain God's approval. That means that the Judaizers must have somewhat viewed them as having merit. Notice the contrast between wages and a gift. That also points us in the direction that they were being done in order to earn God's favor.
So my working thesis is that Judaism viewed the works of the law not only as ethnic badges, but as merit badges (to put it in Wright's lingo).
Wright sees Judaism as primarily being a religion of grace, as opposed to legalistic. He believes that Luther misread Paul by reading the medieval Catholic church in as Paul's opponents. Thus, Luther wrongly believed that the Judaizers were teaching that you can earn your salvation by the works of the law.
Wright insists that the problem with 2nd temple Judaism was not Pelagian. Instead it was racial exclusivity. Thus, the works of the law need to be read as ethnic boundaries that the Judaizers were compelling the Gentiles to do before being accepted in as God's covenant people.
While Wright surely makes some good points about reading Paul (I'm pretty sure that he's correct in his understanding of "all Israel" in Romans 11), I'm not sure that he's completely right about Paul's critique of Judaism.
I don't think that the dilemma is an either/or situation. It might be a both/and deal. In other words, 2nd temple Judaism might have been both legalistic and racially exclusive. Here's a text that I have yet to see Wright deal with--Romans 4:4-5.
"Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness" (ESV).
This text clearly indicates that the works Paul was arguing against were being done in order to gain God's approval. That means that the Judaizers must have somewhat viewed them as having merit. Notice the contrast between wages and a gift. That also points us in the direction that they were being done in order to earn God's favor.
So my working thesis is that Judaism viewed the works of the law not only as ethnic badges, but as merit badges (to put it in Wright's lingo).
posted by Daniel | 9:57 AM
3 Comments:
Romans 4:4-5 are great verse, They turn the whole world upside down.
In other words, 2nd temple Judaism might have been both legalistic and racially exclusive.
This is a good statement. The grace of God is revealed in the person of Christ. Therefore, any religious system which tries to obtain justification apart from Christ could be classified as legalistic by default.
The entire Judaistic religious system had turned into a system of control. This is legalism at its worst and it is certainly not limited to 2nd temple Judaism.
Thanks for this post. I have not yet had the opportunity to examine the NPP so I found this informative.
I think the point of unity is exactly in the realisation that although the NPP is probably right in its view Judaism. That view of Judaism is still looking for salvation in themselves (in their national identity). Even if this is a different sin to the legalism Luther et al were combating, it is nevertheless humans being self-reliant as well. This is quite convicting as it shows how self-righteousness can infect the people of God in much more subtle ways than post-reformational caracatures suggested.
That's my 2p worth anyway.
BTW Thanks for the comment on my blog.
Post a Comment
<< Home