Paul and the Faithfulness of God: Wrapping Up Volume 1, Part 1

FaithfulnessofGodWe are considering N. T. Wright’s newly released Paul and the Faithfulness of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God) — a massive and masterful consideration of Paul’s theology.

The book is written in four parts, with two parts apiece in separate volumes. I’ve just finished reading Parts 1 and 2, that is, Volume 1. And Volume 1 is 570 pages, not counting the bibliography.

Vol. 2 is another nearly 1,000 pages, for a total of 1,519 pages (not counting the index, bibliography, and other tables)!

Parts 1 and 2 address “Paul and His World” and “The Mindset of the Apostle.” In particular, Wright lays a very thorough foundation for Paul’s theology (which is Part 3) to resolve many of the disagreements among scholars about how to read Paul.

Part 1 is largely a historical study of First Century Jewish and Roman thought. Until recently, New Testament studies ignored the Jewish background of “Second Temple Judaism,” that is, the history the Jews between the testaments — particularly how the Jews were interpreting the Old Testament.

It turns out that we actually have a substantial volume of writings from the Jews during this period. It’s just that these writings are non-canonical and so typically ignored by theologians. That is, theologians tend to assume that the New Testament can be read and interpreted without any awareness of the mindset of the authors and original readers.

This attitude derives from several sources, one of which is anti-Jewish bigotry. It’s a sad thing, of course, but the Jews have been a persecuted people going back to the Bar Kochba rebellion in the Second Century. And when the Christians rose to power in Rome, they often followed suite, continuing the pagan persecution.

Martin Luther was outspoken in his contempt for the Jews, and his attitudes heavily influenced much of Europe for centuries. The murder of millions of Jews by the Nazis in the mid-20th Century was the culmination of nearly 2,000 years of pagan and Christian persecution.

JesusHeartAnd, of course, among Protestants, Germany was the center of New Testament studies in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. It’s no surprise that New Testament studies routinely sought to de-Judaize Christianity — resulting in a Jesus, Paul, and New Testament entirely disconnected from the Old Testament and the uninspired intertestamental sources. Jesus was re-created in the image of Western Europe.

It’s sad how many Bibles sold today with cross-references fail to cross-reference the Old Testament sources of New Testament passages.

For example, Acts 3:21, in which Peter mentions the “the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago,” generates not a single Old Testament cross-reference in any of the NIV, NASB, or ESV cross-reference tables — even though the fact that Peter is referring to Old Testament passages could not be more plain.

Following the seminal work of E. P. Sanders, Wright seeks to correct this error by laying out a thorough understanding of the “worldview” of Second Temple Judaism, to be used to help interpret the New Testament.

“Worldview” refers to the narratives and symbols that are second nature to a group of people, so much so that these things need not be spoken to be understood. That is, Paul’s worldview would not necessarily be explicitly stated in his writings, but would be assumed. Hence, digging out his worldview requires looking not only at his writings but also the history of Second Temple Judaism.

For example, the First Century Jews looked back nostalgically at their national independence resulting from the Maccabean revolt. When Jesus rode into Jerusalem, he was greeted with the waving of palm branches — symbolic of the time when Israel was independent under the Maccabees. It would be similar to Americans waving Revolutionary War flags with “Don’t Tread on Me” written on them — or, perhaps better yet, Southern Americans waving Confederate flags. The palm branches symbolized a desire to be independent of Rome — even though the Gospel writers do not say this. It would have been obvious to a First Century reader.

Wright insists, for good reason, I think, that Paul’s worldview must be considered at three levels —

* God and the individual

* God and Israel/the church

* God and the creation

When we overly focus on God and the individual, as we so often do, we miss some key understandings. For example, election or chosenness is about God’s choice of Israel (or the church) rather than God’s choice of certain individuals. It’s about where the Gentiles and the church fit into God’s story — not Calvinism.

Just so, when we overly focus on God and the individual or Israel, we overlook Paul’s teachings on the renewal of the creation, and as a result, we fail to understand what he’s saying will happen to the creation when Jesus returns. In fact, we sometimes conclude that the creation is no concern of ours, since God will burn it up, even though the creation was made good and will be redeemed from the corruption it suffers because of sin.

When we keep all three layers in mind, we see much better how Paul builds his case on the Law and the Prophets. It just fits together much better.

About Jay F Guin

My name is Jay Guin, and I’m a retired elder. I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace about 18 years ago. I’ve spoken at the Pepperdine, Lipscomb, ACU, Harding, and Tulsa lectureships and at ElderLink. My wife’s name is Denise, and I have four sons, Chris, Jonathan, Tyler, and Philip. I have two grandchildren. And I practice law.
This entry was posted in Paul and the Faithfulness of God, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Paul and the Faithfulness of God: Wrapping Up Volume 1, Part 1

  1. Price says:

    I wonder how much of this is PAUL building HIS case, versus GOD building HIS case THROUGH Paul ? I do find it interesting that God uses the personalities of the various authors but surely the message is specific and intentional…??

  2. I appreciate your statement about how few cross references the NT scriptures have to the OT, even when it is evident that the writer or speaker was referencing the OT. I did a brief check on acts 3:21 in an NIV Study Bible. The results were, to say the least, discouraging.i was sent to Luke 1:70, Zechariah’s prayer of praise after his tongue was loosed following his son’s birth. There I did find a reference to 1 Messianic passage in Jeremiah 23:5, which linked to several other passages.

    Other references in Acts 3:21 other references include to Acts 1:11 (the ascension into heaven, no OT references), Matt 17:11 (Jesus and the three disciples coming down the mountain of transfiguration talking of the coming of Elijah with a reference to Malachi 4), and Acts 1:6 (the disciples asking him if he would now restore the kingdom to Israel again with no OT cross references, but with several to the preaching of John and Jesus – almost as if the kingdom is a NT idea with no roots in the OT).

    Sadly, too many classes and sermons also have such a paucity of linkage of the two testaments. As when was in an elder’s class slogging through Leviticus chapter by chapter. The Sunday I visited, they were in chap 16 on the day of atonement. He gave a good presentation of the rituals of the day with no reference to Jesus. I kept wondering when he would make the point until it became obvious he would not. I raised my hand and preached the gospel for 3-5 minutes from my seat. What really amazed me was the number of people, including the elder who was teaching the class, who came to me and said they had never heard anything like that before, but thanked me profusely for what I had said.

    Thank you, Jay, for bringing this important work on the background of the NT to the attention of your readers! Ir is sorely needed!

  3. Jay Guin says:

    Price,

    Certainly not intending to impugn Paul’s inspiration. On the other hand, as you note, each author brings his own slant to the Bible. Just as John the Baptist ties his baptism to the crossing of the Jordan River (by his choice of location), Paul ties baptism to the Red Sea. Neither is wrong — it’s just two ways of communicating of God’s message.

  4. Price says:

    Jay, didn’t intend at all to suggest that you were inappropriately crediting Paul for anything.. Was really focused on the author of the book you are reviewing… and perhaps all of us who from time to time want to quote Peter as if it’s Peter’s idea. Or, Paul as if it’s his theology…I get caught up in that myself but I need to remember it is God doing the talking… Through me it would have sounded like the vernacular more closely associated with the Duck Dynasty fellows and yet it would have been Him speaking through me… my apologies for not expressing myself better earlier, and from here on out..:)

  5. John Podgorney says:

    As a Catholic I don’t have any problem with Wright’s work, in fact, I uphold him. I learned more about the Bible, Jesus , and Paul from him than I learned in any Bible classes. Our Bible study class is always surprised when I bring out some of Wright’s work to the fore. The class is amazed at what they have never heard. So am I, so am I. I look forward to reading this two volume set which I just ordered today. God bless all of you!

  6. Jay Guin says:

    John Podgorney,

    Glad to have you as a reader. You might enjoy this old post: /2009/07/the-new-perspective-justification-and-pope-benedict-xvi/. It discusses Pope Benedict’s doctrine of grace, faith and works and finds it very similar to the teachings of N. T. Wright — whose teaching is widely accepted among non-Calvinistic Protestant churches.

Comments are closed.