Digital Logos Edition
In the time since the publication of E. P. Sanders’ seminal work Paul and Palestinian Judaism, numerous publications, reviews, monographs, and analyses of this “New Perspective on Paul” have emerged, exploring covenantal nomism—but, in the estimation of the editors of these two volumes, little new ground has been tread. Editors D. A. Carson, Mark Seifrid, and Peter O’Brien bring together over a dozen experts in these thick volumes to provide a fresh, new look at Paul with special awareness of the literature of Second Temple Judaism. Some of the specific areas treated include literary genre, Josephus, Philo, the Targumim, Rabbinic literature, the Pharisees, and the usage of ‘righteousness language’ in Early Judaism. Comprehensive and deep, the essays in these volumes make a strong case for a reconsideration of the “New Perspective on Paul” and a rare treatment of the ancient literature that influenced this early apostle. This first volume explores the literature of Second Temple Judaism, establishing a backdrop for the study of Pauline literature in volume 2.
“One of the criticisms raised against the category ‘covenantal nomism’ is that it is suspect precisely because it paints with such a broad brush, or (to change the metaphor) because it is such a powerful vortex that it sucks in diverse literary genres without much historical and literary sensitivity.” (Page v)
“In a related way, there has been a continuing debate as to whether it is proper to speak of the vocabulary of righteousness in the Hebrew Bible as generally bearing the sense of ‘accordance with a norm’ or, alternatively, ‘fidelity to a relationship.’” (Page 416)
“Overall, our findings are not fundamentally incompatible with those reached in E. P. Sanders’s famous study of 1977: Qumran manifests an eschatological faith in which salvation and atonement for sins are not humanly earned but divinely granted by predestined election and membership in the life of the observant covenant community. Here, too, we might wish to question the heuristic usefulness of his philosophically and psychologically infelicitous bifurcation between ‘getting in’ and ‘staying in’;112 but this is a query best addressed to his project as a whole, rather than to his treatment of Qumran in particular.” (Page 412)
“‘the closest approach to legalistic works-righteousness which can be found in the Jewish literature of the period.’47” (Page 517)
“God’s righteousness and his righteous acts, therefore, constitute the salvation and justification of the individual.” (Page 399)