• Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 899 other followers

  • Follow on WordPress.com
  • RSS

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

Two New IVP Books on Paul

Last month IVP Academic released two new books on Pauline soteriology, and since this is one of my perennial favorite topics, I couldn’t wait to dig into both. I’ve just started them, but I wanted to highlight them now especially for those looking for winter break reading and/or last-minute Christmas gifts. This description is overly simplistic and not entirely true, but these two books are in some ways foils of each other, and I wonder if they were intentionally released in close proximity for this reason. No matter where you stand on Paul, it’s good to periodically read and engage with arguments and insights from the other camp. As such, both of the following books are good reading regardless of your perspective on Paul (pun intended).

Michael Allen and Jonathan A. Linebaugh, ed. Reformation Readings of Paul: Explorations in History and Exegesis. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2015. 280 pp. $28.00

RefPaulFrom the title and editor names alone, the Reformed/Lutheran persuasion of the book jumps out immediately. But while many of the contributing authors belong to these theological camps and several teach at their flagship seminaries, there are also surprises (such as the presence of John Barclay) that indicate at once that Reformation Readings of Paul is not a polemic for the “old perspective.” Instead, it’s an attempt to invite the Reformers into the discussion on their exegesis and theology of Paul. While the enduring question of the past 40 or so years in Pauline studies has been whether the Reformers read Paul correctly (although the question seems settled in the academy with the prevailing view a resounding “no”), this book challenges us to see whether we’ve read the Reformers correctly. As editor Linenbaugh writes in the introduction,

While contemporary writing on Paul is littered with references to the “Lutheran Paul” or the Paul of the Reformation,” what is equally conspicuous is the absence of detailed engagement with the exegesis and theology of the Reformers.

(p. 13)

Reformation Readings of Paul pairs together historical theologians and Pauline scholars to examine how certain Reformers treated certain parts of the Pauline corpus: David Fink and John Barclay on Luther/Galatians, Robert Kolb and Mark Seifrid on Melanchthon/Romans, Brian Lugioyo and Wesley Hill on Bucer/Ephesians, Michael Allen and Dane Ortland on Calvin/Corinthians, and Ashley Null and Jonathan Linebaugh on Cranmer and the corpus Paulinum. The first essay in each pair is descriptive and tends to set up the historical context and provide background to the Reformer as an exegete. It also gives a glimpse of how the Reformer exegeted the text – his tools and interlocutors, his structuring of the epistle and its argument, as well as his broad theological conclusions.  The second essay is evaluative and builds on the first. The Pauline scholar curates a conversation between the Pauline text(s) and their interpretation, interacting with the reading of the Reformers. Problems and questions are noted and recent challenges to the Reformer’s reading are addressed, both what he got right and what he got wrong.

Gerald Bray’s concluding essay paints a picture of the factors that shaped the Reformers, from the Patristic tradition to the Renaissance to the medieval university to the theological crisis of the Reformation. Bray draws many connections between the developed medieval system and Second Temple Judaism, noting that while premodern Christians knew nothing about it, the medieval church came remarkably close to replicating it. “Advocates of the ‘new perspective’ on Paul who criticize Luther for failing to understand the spiritual nature of Second Temple Judaism do not show that they realize this, and so they fail to grasp just how much Luther’s background resembled that of Saul the Pharisee” (272).

Thanks to IVP Academic for the review copy!

Purchase: Amazon


A. Chadwick Thornhill. The Chosen People: Election, Paul and Second Temple Judaism. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2015. 288 pp. $35.00

chosenIt’s immediately apparent that this book is from an alternate viewpoint than the first, and this is confirmed just a few pages into the book in the first chapter. Thornhill notes that while he has some critiques of Sanders’s view, he is largely in agreement with Sanders’s covenantal nomism as a correction of the traditional view of how one “got saved” in early Judaism. The lack of attention paid to election in the NPP is part of what prompted Thornhill’s study in The Chosen People, which explores “how Jewish authors spoke of election and how this background knowledge relates to Paul” (16).

The Chosen People had its genesis in Dr. Thornhill’s PhD dissertation at Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary under Dr. Leo Percer, with Dr. Gary Yates and Dr. Michael Heiser as readers. With social, historical, and literary sensitivity, Thornhill examines relevant Qumran, apocryphal, and pseudepigraphal texts to elucidate the thought world of late Second Temple Judaism in relation to election. Thornhill finds that election in both late Second Temple literature and Paul was largely a collective reality; in the rare instances in which individuals were in view, soteriological standing was not in view, but rather, their character or representation of the group. Election in both groups of texts was also corporate, conditional, and remnant-oriented. Furthermore, both simultaneously emphasize divine initiative and human responsibility. Probably most controversial will be Thornhill’s re-reading of Romans 8:26-11:36, a pillar text for the traditional Reformed understanding of election. Rather than predestination of the individual believer to salvation, for him Romans 9 is about Gentile inclusion in the people of Israel.

Among Jews of the period, the concept of election came to signify the “true Israel” or “remnant,” meaning those Israelites who remained faithful to the covenant. For Paul the terminology takes on quite the same meaning. In referring to those who have trusted in Jesus as “elect” or “chosen” or “called,” Paul claims that it is those who have been united with God’s Messiah who are actually in right standing with God. Torah-faithfulness apart from obedience to the good news of God expressed through Jesus has become useless. For Paul, obedience to God comes only through identification with Jesus. Thus Jesus’ own faithfulness both grounds the faithfulness of the believer and brings God’s declaration of “rightness” to them.

(p. 257)

 

For more detail on this book, check out Ben Witherington’s interview with the author (Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).

Thanks to IVP Academic for the review copy!

Purchase: Amazon

Advertisements
Leave a comment

15 Comments

  1. Hi. First, thanks for two great reviews. I would like to ask you about the most remarkable strengths you found on Thornhill’s book. Thanks

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    • Hi Ruben, I just started these books and haven’t read enough to be able to comment in detail about strengths of Thornhill’s books. This post was more of a book notice/highlight and not a review since I haven’t finished the books. I might do another post on Thornhill’s book as I read more, but if not, I will comment here to answer your question. God bless!

      Like

      Reply
      • Oh, I am sorry about the confusion. I thought that initially when I saw the two books on the same post. Looking forward to read the review. Merry Christmas to you

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply
      • Hi Jennifer. I read the post where you share how you use logos in you studies of exegesis. I have the free version of logos on my iPad and only have installed free books that logos releases every month. A friend of mine has it on his laptop and he loves it. I recently received BibleWorks 10 and found it to be an amazing software for exegetical purposes. My question for you is, are you familiar with BibleWorks? If so, what is you opinion of BibleWorks compared to logos.

        Thanks

        Like

        Reply
        • Hi Ruben, I’m sorry but I haven’t used Bibleworks so I can’t make comparisons 😦

          Like

          Reply
          • Jennifer, thank you for answering my question. I can’t compare them neither because I only have BibleWorks. By the way, is that Twitter account yours? @JenniferGuoFreeBookOfTheDay
            I was reading a blog this morning and they published an entry where they include that Twitter account in a list of 23 Biblical Studies Twitter accounts NOT to follow. The name sound familiar to me and now that I sow you answer I recognized it.

            Like

          • haha, I just reblogged that post. Yes, that’s a reference to me! It’s a humorous/satirical post and the Twitter handles are fake.

            Like

          • hahahahahah, I cannot stop laughing. I think that is not common reading hilarious posts here. In addition to that, I have been blogging for seven months or so and I don’t know people well enough to see sarcastic comments. Sorry about that. I just thought it would be disgusting being included on that list. hahahahah

            Liked by 1 person

          • Hi Jennifer. I read you are hosting the carnival. Thank you for doing so. I don’t if you could please include a link of a review I wrote recently. The review is on a book from a less well know publisher but from a great scholar (Dr. Christopher Cone). Here is the link. Thank you for your hard work and have a blessed new year. https://ayudaministerial.wordpress.com/2015/12/25/527/

            Liked by 1 person

          • Ruben, don’t worry about not catching the humor. I appreciate you being concerned about someone possibly being maligned!

            Thank you for bringing the review to my attention. I will include it in the carnival! Blessings to you as well.

            Like

  2. jamesbradfordpate

     /  December 23, 2015

    Reblogged this on James' Ramblings and commented:
    “While the enduring question of the past 40 or so years in Pauline studies has been whether the Reformers read Paul correctly (although the question seems settled in the academy with the prevailing view a resounding “no”), this book challenges us to see whether we’ve read the Reformers correctly.”

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  3. Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging and commented:
    Thanks for your review Jennifer, you’re appreciated! Have a blessed and Merry Christmas!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  4. Nathanael Johnston

     /  December 24, 2015

    Interestingly, one of the editors of the first book you reviewed, Jonathan A. Linebaugh, wrote his, now published, dissertation comparing Paul’s theology of grace with the theology of grace found in the Wisdom of Solomon. In the conclusion he writes, “Wisdom’s definition of grace as an emphatically unearned (i.e. non-contractual, voluntary) though necessarily explainable (i.e. congruous) divine benefit gifted to a fitting human beneficiary is both an instance of contextual commonsense—it reflects the social patterns of Greco-Roman gift-exchange—and theological consistency—because God is good his acts of grace are necessarily comprehended within and consistent with the operations of divine justice Wisdom’s definition of grace as an emphatically unearned (i.e. non-contractual, voluntary) though necessarily explainable (i.e. congruous) divine benefit gifted to a fitting human beneficiary is both an instance of contextual commonsense—it reflects the social patterns of Greco-Roman gift-exchange—and theological consistency—because God is good his acts of grace are necessarily comprehended within and consistent with the operations of divine justice.” –p. 233

    I seems to me that Linebaugh’s summary of Wisdom’s theology of grace seems to me to fit very well with the theology of grace found in the late-medieval via moderna theology of grace found in theologians like Gabriel Biel, supporting Bray’s contention. Perhaps not coincidently, one of the major works of Robert Holkot, one of the major sources for the via moderna in Luther and Calvin’s day, was a commentary on the Wisdom of Solomon. Given that the book of Wisdom was canonical in the Middle Ages perhaps Bray’s assertion that the late-medieval theologians knew nothing about 2nd Temple Judaism should be tempered a bit.

    http://www.amazon.com/Righteousness-Wisdom-Solomon-Letter-Romans/dp/9004252940/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1445728395&sr=1-2&keywords=jonathan+linebaugh

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    • Thanks, Nathaniel! I hadn’t heard of Linebaugh prior to this book, so I’m glad you pointed out his dissertation because it’s right up my alley! Good point about Bray’s assertion about late-medieval theologians knowing nothing about 2TJ.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: