Some Recent Shifts in Pauline Studies
1. The "New
Perspective" on Paul
Perhaps the key to the
so called "new perspective" on Paul is a re-evaluation of both
Judaism and his thought in relation to Judaism.
We might first mention the two key insights of the most foundational
work of the new perspective: E. P. Sanders' Paul and Palestinian Judaism.
Sanders' Point 1: Judaism was a religion of grace.
The Jews would have
agreed with Paul that acceptance by God is a matter of His grace. They differed more on what God counted as a
basis for being on good terms with Him.
Sanders' Point 2: For
Jews, keeping the law was more about staying in than getting in.
Jews did not believe
keeping the law earned their way into God's favor. As God's children they had God's favor to
lose.
An even earlier player
in the new perspective was Krister Stendahl's famous article, "Paul and the Introspective
Conscience of the West." Here are
some key ideas from Stendahl's work (they are not in
any order of his):
Stendahl Point: While we might speak of
Paul's conversion from one Jewish sect to another (so James Dunn), Paul
never stopped viewing himself as an Israelite. He did not view Christianity as a new
religion but as nothing other than the religion of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob. Paul is not Paul's Christian name
but his Roman name. The
book of Acts calls Paul Saul over 10 years into his Christian life.
Stendahl Point: Paul probably did
not struggle much with a guilty conscience before he came to Christ.
Philippians 3 gives us
Paul's pre-Christian estimation of himself: "as far as the righteousness
according to the law, I was blameless."
Romans 7 is not Paul's present experience and may not even give us a
good feel for his past experience.
Stendahl Point: Paul's writings largely
address the question of how Gentiles can be incorporated into the people
of God.
When he says "all
have sinned," he is thinking "both Jew and Gentile--all have
sinned." Romans
9-11 is not a digression. It is
the heart of the issue: is God in fact righteous to allow Gentiles in without
making them keep the Jewish law.
Stendahl Point: Paul's comments on the
law are largely addressed to Gentile Christians.
It is not likely that
Paul taught Jews to stop keeping the Mosaic law.
2. The Righteousness of
God
Another shift that has
taken place in the last few years and partially independent of the new
perspective is a shift in how the phrase "the righteousness of God"
is taken, particularly in Romans 1:17.
Here are some steps along the way:
Old Roman Catholic View: The
"righteousness of God" is the iustitia
Dei, the "justice of God" that He distributes to all.
Luther's View: The
"righteousness of God" refers to the righteous status we receive from
God (cf. NIV) as a "legal fiction."
We are not actually righteous in any way, but God considers us righteous
on the basis of our faith in Christ.
Rudolph Bultmann: Mid-twentieth century advocate of the Lutheran
view, interpreting the phrase in the light of Philippians 3:9.
Ernst Käsemann: Argued on the basis of the Dead Sea Scrolls
that the phrase "the righteousness of God" does indeed refer to God's
righteousness. The majority of
interpreters agree this far. In
addition, Käsemann defined it as God's power in
action to make the world right and to defeat the cosmic powers that stand in
His way.
N. T. Wright: Emphasizes God's
faithfulness to His covenant with
I might mention that
parallels in Isaiah repeatedly pair God's righteousness with his salvation.
3. The Faith of Jesus
Christ
We cannot really speak
of a consensus on this issue, but a good number of American scholars, led by
Richard Hays of Duke, have strongly argued that the phrase usually translated
"faith in Jesus" in verses like Romans 3:22 and Galatians 2:16 should
really be translated "the faithfulness of Jesus." Hays and others argue that Paul's faith was
more theocentric than Christocentric. They make a strong case in the light of
verses like Romans 5:19 and Philippians 2:8.