N.P.P. (part 2)

(#1) Let’s first try to understand something about this “New Perspective on Paul”

The NPP on Paul has 3 main spokesmen today:
1. E.P. Sanders (1937-) Arts and Sciences Professor of Religion at Duke University
2. James D.G. Dunn (1939-) Professor of Divinity at the University of Durham, England. Dr. Dunn first coined this phrase (“the NPP”) in a 1982 lecture.
3. N.T. Wright (1948-) the Bishop of Durham, one of the highest ranking bishops in the Church of England.

N.T. Wright is the most popular proponent of NPP. He is the only one (of the 3 mentioned above) to consider himself an “evangelical.” Wright has said of himself, “I see myself as a deeply orthodox theologian.” On the back of his newest NPP book, “Paul: In Fresh Perspective” a writer from TIME magazine endorsed Wright’s book noting, “N.T. Wright is one of the most formidable of traditionalist Bible Scholars.”

Now it’s true, N.T. Wright has written a number of books that have been very helpful and well-researched. He is a very smart individual. Some of his NT scholarship has truly benefited the Church (such as his massive tome on the resurrection and his books that dealt with the historicity of the gospels). But when it comes to his “New Perspective on Paul”, sadly, Tom Wright is outside classic Evangelicalism.

-->So what do you need to know about the New Perspective?

A. They depart from the Grammatical-historical method of exegesis

In place, the NPP proponents utilize Historical Criticism. Dr. F David Farnell notes, “Essentially, the NPP’s central tenet accuses the Reformers of subjective bias, at the same time ignoring the extreme bias of their own approach that promotes subjectivity through historical criticism and the New Hermeneutic.” Historical criticism has an anti-supernatural bias. As a result they discount inspiration and often undermine the inerrancy of the original autographs. (For more detailed info check out my recent lecture on “hermeneutics” or read Evangelical Hermeneutics by Dr. Robert L Thomas).

B. They view the NT “church” through Covenantal lenses.

In other words, the New Perspective believes the church is the “covenant community” of God. They would view the Church as the “New Israel.” For this reason, the NPP has been more alluring to Presbyterians (those holding to Covenant theology) more than its really attracted Reformed Baptists and Dispensationalists.

C. New Perspective leaders believe the Reformed community has badly misunderstood second temple Judaism throughout church history.

The New Perspective essentially teaches that 2nd Temple Judaism was a religion of grace. Tom Wright makes this very clear on page 120 (from his book), “What St. Paul Really Said.” New Perspective leaders would have you believe that first century Judaism was not a works-righteousness system. If they are right here, then the traditional interpretation of Romans and Galatians (by scholars like Augustine, Luther, and Calvin) have been dead wrong. In short, the NP presents a “fresh” understanding of the ancient religion of Judaism.

D. The NPP asserts a firm belief in “covenantal nomism” as the way to understand 2nd temple Judaism.

E.P. Sanders describes covenantal nomism as “the view, that one’s place in God’s plan is established on the basis of the covenant and that covenant requires as the proper response of man his obedience to its commandments, while providing means of atonement for transgression.” In short, Judaism during Jesus’ and Paul’s day, was a religion of grace; but maintenance of that salvation was through covenant (by works). One professor summarizes Covenantal nomism this way, “Getting in by faith, staying in by obedience.” Understanding this distinction is very important!

E. N.T. Wright (and others) redefines classic Texts like Gal. 2:11-21 and Phil 3:1-11.

Tom Wright adds, “The (Gal. 2) passage works far better if we see the meaning of “justified” not as a statement about how someone becomes a Christian but as a statement about who belongs to the people of God, and how you can tell that in the present” (FROM-->Paul: In Fresh Perspective, page 112). According to the New Perspective, Protestants have simply read Luther into Paul’s writings (“What St. Paul Really Said” pg 117). Wright is really accusing the Reformed tradition of 500 years of serious exogesis!

F. More specifically, N.T. Wright redefines the classic Protestant understanding of the important Biblical phrase, “the works of the law” (from Gal 2:16, Rom 3:20, etc).

N.T. Wright and others limit this important theological phrase to circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, and dietary restrictions. They believe these works marked out the people of the covenant. NP teachers believe that, in context, this phrase is about ethnic and social identification NOT legalistic self-righteousness and justification.
Again this is a major departure from the traditional interpretation of this biblical phrase. (Check out Dr. Barrick's journal article on this for more detailed information).


G. The NPP redefines the classic Reformed understanding of “Justification.”

The NPP suggests that justification is more about ecclesiology (the doctrine of the church) than soteriology (the doctrines of salvation). From: What St. Paul Really Said, page 158. Wright translates “pistis Christou” not as human faith in Messiah but as the faithfulness of the Messiah. N.T. Wright also appears to question the historic Reformed teaching on imputation: In one of his recent books he writes, “If we use the language of the law court, it makes no sense whatever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, bequeaths, conveys or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or a gas which can be passed around the courtroom…To imagine the defendant somehow receiving the judge’s righteousness is simply a category mistake. That is not how the language works.” From: What St. Paul Really Said, page 98. This is quote is very troubling. Romans 3:22, Rom. 4:6, and 2 Cor. 5:21 are major texts that deal with this issue. Next week we will look at many different passages that discuss this issue. Suffice to say, The NPP redefines the classic Reformed understanding of “Justification.”

H. The NPP sounds more like Roman Catholic dogma than it does classic Protestant theology. Covenantal Nomism (which I described earlier) is very similar to Roman Catholic theology (in certain respects). Dr. Jack Hughes makes this important connection, “Roman Catholic theology teaches that infant baptism places one into the ‘covenant community’ and as long as that person continues to observe the sacraments, he will preserve himself and be saved.” This definition is simplified quite a bit but gets at the heart of the issue at hand. Roman Catholicism of course is a legalistic system which holds to salvation by faith and works.

E.P Sanders and James Dunn seem to believe that Christians today (in the covenant community) are under a “bilateral” covenant: They enter into this covenant by faith but remain in the covenant through works. (Note: What St. Paul Really Said, page 19). Friends do you see the eerie close similarities between Roman Catholic theology and the NPP?

I. And to top things off, The NPP offers a new understanding of the biblical Gospel.

According to N.T. Wright the gospel is “Jesus is the Lord and Messiah.” N.T. Wright redefines the doctrine of imputation and he redefines the concept of Christ’s righteousness…(Note What St. Paul Really Said, pages 41, 60-61, & 98). To Wright, the gospel is not the message of justification (like Augustine, Luther and Calvin believed). The good news is more about Romans 1:1-4 NOT Romans 1:16-17 or Romans 3:21-28. The gospel then is about the Person of Christ rather than the work of Christ. Of course I believe the Bible teaches the gospel is a both/and combination not an either/or concept as NT Wright and other New Perspective folks wrongly believe. But that is getting ahead of myself, so I’ll stop here.


To summarize then:

A) The New Perspective departs from the Grammatical-historical method of exegesis
B) The New Perspective views the NT “church” through “Covenantal” lenses.
C) It believes the Evangelical Church has badly misunderstood Judaism throughout church history.
D) The NPP asserts a firm belief in “covenantal nomism” as the way to understand 2nd Temple Judaism.
E) N.T. Wright (and others) redefines classic Texts like Gal. 2:11-21 and Phil 3 (among many key New Testament passages)
F) More specifically, N.T. Wright redefines the classic Protestant understanding of the important Biblical phrase, “the works of the law” (from Gal 2:16, Rom 3:20, etc).
G) The NPP redefines the classic reformed understanding of “Justification.”
H) In doing all this, the NPP sounds more like Roman Catholic dogma than it does classic Protestant theology.
I) Finally, The NPP offers a new understanding of the biblical “gospel.”