Four Views of the Role of Works at the Final Judgment

This book, edited by Alan Stanley, is another nice entry in this very solid series. The four views are all relatively well defended (I found Wilkin's case for works playing no role to be rather feeble). Many Christians (and especially evangelical protestants) will be surprised at the similarities between the views expressed by Schreiner, Dunn, and Barber (a conservative calvinist, a progressive evangelical, and a catholic): they agree that Christians will stand before God at the final judgment and that our works will matter. They do disagree on how those works will be understood (fruit/evidence, necessary condition, meritorious), but the unanimity on that basic point will probably surprise many. Paul is the primary focus in a number of the essays and responses, but the whole New Testament is kept in view. The book could have benefited from a Lutheran perspective, I think, given Luther's watershed role in the formation of protestantism and the role of works in that key moment, and also given the centrality of justification in Lutheran thought. Criticism aside, I think this book is a very worthwhile read. It is nicely positioned to be easily understood by nonspecialists, but is still solid scholarship. In the end, I think Dunn is right when he writes, "It is hard to avoid the conclusion, then, that as Paul insisted on the need for faith, so he was equally insistent that his converts should demonstrate their faith by the quality of lives they lived" (130). God is gracious, and salvation is in and through Christ, but believers remain responsible before God for their doings. We may not be able to fully piece together how this is so (as Dunn affirms), but we clearly see both streams firmly present in the New Testament. There's lots to ponder here. Enjoy.

Ajith Fernando, Reclaiming Love

In Reclaiming Love, distinguished Christian leader and scholar Ajith Fernando engages one of the most profound and familiar (maybe too familiar) passages in the New Testament, the "love" chapter, 1 Corinthians 13. He moves systematically through the chapter, particularly focusing on verses 1 through 7, in a series of reflections. These focus on the various aspects of love Paul describes, often taking on only one word or idea. There is no doubt that the theology here is deep and rich, and that it is moreover theology that begs to be lived, even if it isn't easy to do so. Fernando often does a good job of teasing out practical implications of what this type of love actually looks like in practice. He often draws on his own experience. This is a book I really wanted to like, but I continuously found it tough going. There is no doubt that Fernando brings great wisdom to bear in many of the discussions, and the book contains many helpful and at-times profound reflections. But I just didn't catch a strong stream or progression tying them together, or tying them to Paul's original situation. It seemed like there were sometimes opportunities lost to either make a profound connection (say to love as integral to the trinitarian being of God) or a challenging application (on exercising love that costs us something) that just didn't get made. One example will suffice. In the final chapter, where he is bringing the arguments home and summarizing the final six verses of the chapter (they don't really get discussed in more than a cursory way, another omission), he talks about how love brings "joyous brightness." The example of this transformative love is a story of when the wife of a well-known pastor who tripped while bringing dinner out from the kitchen. The food splattered everywhere, and the pastor was immediately concerned for his wife, instead of mad about the mess she made. While I agree that such loving concern is admirable, the example seems so shallow as to border on mere courtesy that would be afforded to anyone, wife or stranger. Many other examples are better suited to their tasks, but this one certainly could have been improved. As I've said, there is much wisdom here, but the whole was lacking in a compelling thread that binds it all together. The good easily outweights the less good, but it could have been so much better. Thanks to the publisher, Zondervan, and the BookSneeze program for the review copy of this book.

Timothy Keller, Galatians for You

In this mini-commentary, well-known pastor Timothy Keller seeks to illuminate the text of Galatians in a way that any Christian can better understand the message in the text and be challenged to know God more deeply. Galatians is divided into thirteen units, and each unit is then subdivided into two parts. For each part, Keller discusses the major themes in the text, always paying quite close attention to what the text actually says without necessarily commenting on every phrase or verse. Each section concludes with a few questions for reflection. Keller is a clear writer, and this book showcases that well. He is also a perceptive reader of Scripture, and it is here that this book shines. It is not a commentary, and certainly doesn't engage every important academic debate, but at the same time Keller is able to bring to bear a lot of learning about the text in an unassuming way.

The book is meant for three different purposes. First, it is meant for reading, and for that purpose, it is quite adequate as a guide to understanding Galatians better. Second, it is meant for study and devotions, and the division into similarly sized units and questions for reflection can help take learning deeper. Third, it is meant as a leadership resource, to help group leaders prepare studies or pastors prepare sermons. I think it will work fine in all three contexts. Because there are only three reflection questions at the end of each unit, study leaders will have to plan on either using it alongside another study guide or writing a number of their own questions to supplement and help group members get into the text and cover some of the themes, tough the questions he does have are often useful for digesting the message and importance of Galatians and how it can be applied. Keller deftly balances commentary with perceptive interpretation and application in a way that makes this a useful guide for people at all levels of familiarity with Scripture. I will certainly draw on it when I prepare lessons on Galatians.

Thanks to the publisher and Cross-Focused Reviews for the review copy.

Nicholas Wolterstorff, The Mighty and the Almighty

This book engages the important question of how God's authority is related to the authority of the state (2). It is a extended reflection in political theology, that is, thinking in a Christian way about the nature and authority of the state. The book comes out of lectures given by Wolterstorff in 1998, but, interestingly, he says he wasn't happy with the lectures in the form he delivered them (vi), so he set the material aside and returned to it occasionally over the intervening fourteen years, in the course of his other work, arriving at the product produced in this book. The book still retains much of the lecture "feel," in its direct tone and light annotation, but this isn't a deficit, and in fact makes what may otherwise have been overly technical accessible to the interested reader.

Wolterstorff's reflections are built on the character of Polycarp, one of Christianity's early martyrs, who exhibited an almost paradoxical allegiance to Jesus Christ and a recognition of the state. Out of Polycarp's situation, Wolterstorff recognizes two key dualities: "the duality of the authority of the state mediating the authority of God, and the duality of Christians being under the authority of both church and state." It is the exploration of these dualities that occupies the remainder of the book.


After looking at two possible objections to his framing of the situation (one from Yoder and one based on the "two-cities" understanding), he goes on to explore the nature of authority, of government, and of the specific authority to govern. These provide the reader with helpful summaries of what are obviously complex issues, laying important groundwork for the exposition to come. And after investigating Calvin's understanding of the relationship of God's authority and that of the state, he moves on to look at Romans 13, one of the key texts for Christian reflection on the stage.


The chapter on Paul really forms the heart of the book, both because of the historical prominence of this chapter in past Christian thought and because of the fruitfulness of his rereading of the passage. Without going into the details, two key points go together. This first is that most interpreters have looked at the passage and seen the first verse, emphasizing government's God-given authority, as the key to interpretation, whereas Wolterstorff asserts (not without warrant, I think) that verses four and five, which detail more specifically what government is and why it has been so authorized by God (emphasizing government's role as God's agent to curb wrongdoing). He asserts, "With verse 4 in mind, our immediate thought is that they [governing authorities] are not just instituted, period, full stop. . . . we know that they are instituted to do something, appointed to do something" (94, emphasis original). This interpretation is certainly not new, but what is more novel is that, in his argument, this dovetails with an earlier point regarding the nature of authority, where he differentiated between positional authority (that is, actions one possesses the power to enact by virtue of a position of authority) and performance authority (that is, actions that one has been given permission to undertake; 48). While many Christian interpreters have assumed something resembling the first understanding of authority when looking at Romans 13, Wolterstorff asserts that Paul has in mind the latter. This key interpretive move is at the heart of his argument. And he takes his conclusion one important step further. He asserts that the outline of government in Romans 13 would thus imply that government is to be a rights-honoring institution, since transgressing rights is in fact injustice and governments are tasked with punishing, not perpetrating, injustice. This leads him down a path he didn't fully expect at the outset of his own work: "I found a case for the liberal democratic state gradually emerging—albeit for a less individualistic understanding of the liberal democratic state than is common" (5).

 Wolterstorff's clearly written book does an outstanding job of formulating (or at least pointing toward) a theology of government, one that has potential to bear much fruit. Readers interested in questions of politics and theology will do well to take this work into account. Likewise, those interested in Pauline theology or Romans will likewise benefit from engaging with his reading of Romans 13. The book is scholarly, but also concise and direct, making it manageable for the interested general reader, and I hope many pick it up. I look forward to engaging more with his thoughtful writing, for I think it can illuminate why conflicts between religious and political spheres do in fact occur, and help us navigate a path through them that is true to the nature of each, all the while being ultimately faithful to the sovereign Lord who holds our full and ultimate allegiance.

Thanks to Cambridge University Press and the Amazon Vine program for the review copy of this book.

Richard Longenecker, Introducing Romans

Longenecker provides an informative and in-depth survey of the major background issues to the study of Romans. It is basically composed of the material you'd expect to find in the intro of a commentary, but at greater depth. There is some repetition between the chapters, and some of the book could have been tightened up through more smoothly relating the various chapters to one another. It also seemed that his discussion interacted most with sources that were at least a decade or more old (at one point he refers to an article from 1997 as "recent"), though he does selectively draw on some recent studies. But his conclusions are well-reasoned and balanced. There isn't much that is earth-shattering. But I found one of his foundational insights rather fruitful. In his discussion of the recipients, he surveys Roman Christianity, and one of the assertions he makes is that, much like the Judaism in that city, the Roman Christians would have had a close connection with Jerusalem. This is fruitful because it means that it would not have only been ethnic Jews who may have held the law in high regard and may have held a key place for it in the plan of salvation. This insight comes up in a number of chapters and helps reread some of the evidence for what Romans is about in a fresh light. There is definitely much of benefit here, and it certainly whets the appetite for the full commentary (to which he defers discussions repeatedly). In all, a nice volume by a wise scholar.

Whose example of mission?

I was really struck by this quote as I read Joel Willitts's review of DeYoung and Gilbert's recent book on the church and mission:

Paul is not the primary model for the church’s work in the world. He was the apostle to the Gentiles (Gal 2) and was called uniquely to fulfill that particular role. Paul describes his role in 2 Corinthians 2—3 comparing his New Covenant ministry to Moses’ Old Covenant ministry. Our model for church mission, if we can find such a thing in Acts and Paul’s letters, should not be Paul, but the communities Paul left behind.

I was instantly a bit hesitant about that main statement, that Paul isn't the primary model for the church. But as I ruminated on it a bit more, I see much wisdom in it. Paul is obviously an example we should follow, someone we should imitate even as we imitate Christ. But he occupied a very particular place in the plan of God, with a unique role in salvation history as the apostle to the Gentiles. So while I think there is much wisdom in seeking the missionary methods and especially the message of Paul, we should also focus on how envisioned his churches to function, and that might be a better example yet. Food for thought.

Brilliant Resource!

I just received in the mail my copy of Synopsis of the Pauline Letters in Greek and English, and after a very brief perusal, all I can say is, "brilliant!" The layout looks thoughtful, and having Paul's writings (and relevant passages from Acts) in parallel in this format will be so helpful! I wish I had had this resource years ago. Kudos to Baker Academic and to James Ware for this helpful resource. I plan to get some good use out of it in the near future, and will post some more systematic reflections then, but in the mean time, get this one!

Michael Bird, The Saving Righteousness of God

It is a sad irony that some of the books I enjoy the most are the ones that languish on my to-be-reviewed shelf the longest. I think it's partly that I want to do them justice. And this one by Bird has been on my shelf since last fall—a testimony to its value, not its unimportance. And because I can't stand to see it sit there any longer, I offer instead this short inadequate notice to say it was truly a great book. I've been greatly enjoying, over the past year or so, delving deeply in to the world of Pauline theology, but that joy has been often tempered by frustration or even angst at the fragmented world of Pauline scholarship: so much seems contested these days, with many scholars working at cross purposes. And much of the debate is far too acrimonious. But Bird's offering in the Paternoster Monographs series is truly a gem. It offers great exegetical insight into Paul's letters, a clear-headed appraisal of what is important to the Apostle, and a constructive proposal that integrates the fruit of both the "traditional" reading of Paul and an open but critical inclusion of the "new perspective" on Paul and other contemporary approaches and estimations of the Apostle. In short, even beyond the great wealth of knowledge on Paul and his understanding of God's saving righteousness, Bird's book gives me great hope that especially the divide between old and new perspectives on Paul will be transcended as we move forward. This book is truly a must-read for anyone interested in Paul, the new Perspective, Romans, or even the New Testament more generally.

Pistis Christou and the Law

I'm reading through Galatians as I work my way through Frank Thielman's Paul and the Law. And I have been overwhelmed by Paul's logic in Galatians 3 in regard to Christ and the Law. In verse 22, Paul writes that everything was "locked up" under sin so that the promise could be given "through faith in Jesus Christ . . . to those who believe." I am well aware that the debate surrounding the various constructions and uses of pistis Christou as objective or subjective genitive is far from settled at this juncture, it has at least provided the impetus for me to look with new eyes at this passage, and to discover what is plainly there with regard to Paul's logic for why the law is in place (and in fact the reading doesn't seem to change substantively with subjective or objective renderings of the genitive construction). Paul seems to be saying that the law isn't opposed to the promise, but is in fact the necessary precondition of, and instrument through which Christ's faithfulness accomplishes our justification. The law provides in a sense the mechanism through which justification on our behalf by Christ occurs, as Christ's faithfulness under the law yields forth in God's abundant gift of life. The law is thus fulfilled and the promise is then extended to all people without the the constraint of the law, which has fulfilled its purpose in Christ. In a sense, instead of thinking of Christ as circumventing the law to bring salvation by faith (a type of theology that may at times rest just beneath the surface in my own thinking), Christ brings that salvation precisely through the law, which was God's ordained mechanism to bring blessing and life from death, even as the gift is now offered apart from that same law.

The Hermeneutics of Childhood

I've got twin two-year-olds at home, so I'm pretty immersed in their world. One of the really fascinating things I've noticed over the past year or so is their ability to filter the world, and especially unfamiliar things, through their past experiences. I can't even count how many times it happens (it's pretty much constant), but one recent example gives the feel. They have a little Yatzee battery-powered game that they got from their beloved grandpa. But they don't treat it like a game, or even like some random object that beeps. Instead, they think of it, and use it, as a phone. Because it's roughly the same shape and size as many people's digital phones. So they faithfully walk around pushing buttons and talking on it. And that assumption on their part puts something with which they have no familiarity into their world in a familiar place. And as I said, the number of examples could multiply endlessly. But what this got me thinking about is how nicely this illustrates the need for careful hermeutical reflection when reading, especially the Bible. I'm reading Frank Thielman's Paul and the Law right now, which I'm greatly enjoying, and the need for awareness of one's own context (so we don't too quickly find a Paul that fits comfortably into our own setting), as well as an awareness of the apostle's setting, are essential to reading Paul faithfully. I think there's a more developed reflection hidden in here somewhere, but it was an idea I didn't want to loose, so you get it only partially formed, for what it's worth.

Good as the privation of evil?

I've been focusing my reading on Pauline studies for the last year or so, and it's been a blast. One of the key issues that comes up again and again, in Paul's letters no less than in the vast literature they have spawned, is the meaning of righteousness, especially God's righteousness. So this has got me reflecting on what I think it is. I think, for many Christians, the answer would involve something revolving around God's holiness, understood as God's perfection and total absence of sin. It is something (akin to a pristine state, innocence) that God imparts to us as a gift. Now, I can't think of anything at all wrong with any of that (though I know some people would certainly quibble with it), but I also think it's woefully incomplete.

In Pauline studies, there is a big discussion of God's righteousness as understood objectively (a righteousness that God possesses and gives to believers) or subjectively (a quality or activity of God that brings about or entails or results in God's saving work). And while I think something of both positions carries valid and important truth, I think there is immense value in looking at God's righteousness subjectively, as something like God's faithfulness and his saving action. I think this helps us go beyond a perspective of good (held implicitly or explicitly) as that which is without evil (though that is a perfectly fine affirmation) to fill that most excellent category of God's righteousness with some amazing content: God's loving faithfulness, his saving grace, his patient purpose.

These few reflections certainly don't even begin to scratch the surface of the exegetical issues entailed in the discussion, but I hope they can be some valuable reflection on Christmas, and God's loving gift in sending his Son. For in Jesus God's righteousness is surely revealed.

Paul and Church Order—J. D. G. Dunn

Continuing my multi-author look at church order in Paul's letters takes me to James D. G. Dunn's perspective as displayed in the chapter, "Ministry and authority" in his massive Theology of Paul the Apostle. Dunn begins his characteristically thorough treatment with a survey of some of the nineteenth- and twentieth-century discussion around the issue, highlighting especially the discussion about the church structure mirrored in Paul's letters as one of "office" verses one of "charism," a debate which occurred largely in protestant circles but also emerged in Roman Catholic ones, especially as can be seen in some of the changes that took place in Vatican II. Dunn concludes that the importance of Paul's "charismatic" vision can't be questioned but that a further step must be taken, in looking at how Paul's churches actually implemented that vision, since his understanding of the church as a charismatic community shouldn't be taken as a complete ecclesiology or a complete set of instructions on church order.

Dunn's first step, after the historical survey, is to look at Paul's own apostolic authority and how it was exercised. A few insights prove helpful here. One is that Paul exercised his authority from within the community, to equip the community. Dunn observes that Paul exercises a lot of restraint in the use of his authority, rarely if ever calling for "obedience" to him but instead seeking to convince and persuade. A second salient point is that Paul sees even his own authority as subordinate to the gospel and limited in scope to his own apostolic commission.

With regard to other leaders in the congregations, Dunn makes a number of observations. One that is quite interesting is that apart from the possible mention in Phil 4:3, Paul makes no appeal to church leaders to fix a situation or handle a problem, nor does he rebuke the leadership for the failure of a church on a particular issue; instead he makes his appeals to the gathered assemblies in toto. While there are clearly people who take up certain roles or hold various leadership positions in his churches, Paul seems to envision his congregations as an integrated whole who are all responsible for these important matters. (The situation of the Pastoral Epistles is slightly different here; Dunn regards them as later developments in the Pauline tradition, but even considering them Pauline doesn't change the aforementioned situation too much since the type of authority being exercised by Timothy or Titus is more akin to Paul's own authority that it would be to that of a local elder or overseer.)

A second observation Dunn makes is that there is a careful interplay between charism and office, with the former spoke of more than the latter. Prophecy serves as a good illustration of this: Dunn asserts that "prophetic authority derived from prophetic inspiration," and "prophets didn't prophecy because they were prophets; they were prophets because they prophesied" (582). He goes on to assert that prophetic authority also wasn't limited to prophets (others could seek this gift as well), and further, that prophetic authority was subject to the assessment and discernment of others. The position of "teacher" functions similarly.

To me, this seems to mean that, while clearly envisioning a position of "authority" for those designated "prophets," this paints a much more fluid and interdependent picture of how that particular position worked than we might think of today, with categories like ordination and office being more natural and familiar to our thinking about church order.

Dunn concludes by reflecting that the canon includes both Paul's earlier letters and the later Pastoral Epistles, meaning we must hold the two together in some way, even though he sees somewhat divergent tendencies, but he concludes that while we the Pastorals show some level of routinizing and institutionalizing of the more charismatic structure evident earlier, the two elements can and must be held together.

Paul and Church Order—Gordon Fee

I have the privilege of participating in a great class on church eldership and leadership through my church, using curriculum from the Center for Church-Based Training in Dallas. And one of the issues we have been addressing early on has been the role of elders, specifically as seen in the NT. So I've been taking this opportunity to do a little reading on that particular subject. The first author I've dug into on this question has been Gordon Fee, from his book Listening to the Spirit in the Text, a spectacular collection of essays focused especially on things Pauline. In it he has two essays concerned with church order.

A few key emphases come up in Fee's discussions. The first is that Paul envisions leadership as something that is exercised from within the people of God (that is, the "laity") as opposed to something that was exercised from without, by a particular person or class of people set apart from that people (a departure, driven by christology and ecclesiology, from Israel's system of priests). Hand in hand with this emphasis is that leadership is envisioned much less (if at all) as exercising authority than as service: while it is true that churches are exhorted to submit to their leaders, the focus that emerges from Paul's vision of leadership is one of service to the body, exercising of spiritual gifting to build up and equip. A second key emphasis is on the distinction that must be made between "office" and gifting. Paul's concern with overseers and deacons seems to focus on the recognition of the Spirit's gifting of people in these areas and the congregation's role in discerning and recognizing that gifting. I would interpret this to mean much less focus on the particular "offices" that each church must fill and selecting the proper people to do so (though the latter is not necessarily an illegitimate enterprise, though it must be understood at least to some extent to be something that goes beyond the specifics of the text). A final emphasis that comes out in Fee's writing is the assertion that leadership at the local level seems to always have been plural: he is quite critical of a strong divide between "clergy" and "laity" at this point. (This last discussion is complicated some by the recognition that Paul envisioned two types of authority: an apostolic, itinerant sort that was exercised by the Jerusalem apostles, by Paul himself, and by his deputies Timothy and Titus, and a local authority established in each church.)

Fee's reconstruction of church order in Paul's writing is I think a very helpful corrective to some assumptions that many of us may bring to the text. Especially enlightening are his emphasis on the fact that "office" is of less importance than it is often accorded today. Fee is also very good on hermeneutics, and makes the point that Paul doesn't seem to be dictating a specific model of church order (that doesn't seem to be his concern) nearly as much as focusing on the character of leadership that is exercised. In a sense, that means many of our modern questions about how to organize a church are underdetermined by the evidence in the NT, though clearly there is much of relevance here. Thus, we must be careful to articulate and consider the question of the nature of the evidence we are given in these letters and how we transfer that information to our current context: how do we relate the "spirit" of the instructions to the "letter" of Paul's instruction, how do we travel from one cultural context to another, from one historical situation to another? And how does the setting and situation we infer from the text serve as God's authoritative word to us (if it does and to what extent) or how is it just the background into which that authoritative word functions. In short, these two essays provide a vast amount of food for thought, with deep exegetical insight paired with relevant hermeneutical reflection. They help us chasten our reading of the text by investigating our assumptions and also help us act as faithful members of God's people seeking to carry out God's will as expressed in his word for his gathered people.

E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism

Few books have impacted biblical studies in the past decades more than E. P. Sanders' Paul and Palestinian Judaism. This groundbreaking book has been instrumental in a reevaluation of many long-held presuppositions about Judaism at the time of Paul and Jesus, and about how Paul related to that heritage. I've long heard it referred to, cited, and criticized, so I thought it was finally time that I read it for myself. And I'm extremely glad I did.

First, a word about my reading, which was a bit selective. I chose to read the conclusions he draws at the close of the first two thirds of the book, dealing with his reevaluation of Judaism and his assertion of "covenantal nomism" as the overriding framework at the turn of the era. I then read the remainder of the book, dealing specifically with Paul and his relation to the Judaism of his day as reconstructed by Sanders. I'm not competent to comment on the foundational aspect of his thesis that Judaism is typified in Paul's day by covenantal nomism, that entry into the covenant was by God's grace and that works served to maintain that relationship as a way of staying in, other than to say it is obvious that Sanders was instrumental in awakening a reappraisal of the sources and a questioning of some long-held assumptions. I have found it to be a compelling argument, even if not completely convincing on all counts.

His chapters on Paul are uniformly well written and well argued. His foundational claim is that Paul reasoned from solution to plight, and not the other way around, so that the driving force in Paul's thinking was not what was wrong with Judaism or the Law or with humanity in general, but instead by his conviction that Jesus Christ is Lord and is the only way for salvation. This basic premise causes a reevaluation of Paul's thought process and illuminates Paul's thinking in a fresh way. Instead of focusing on justification by faith as the peak of Paul's theological reasoning (his "pattern" of religion in Sanders' terminology), participation with Christ moves more toward center stage. It is the need of Jesus Christ as Lord that is the decisive factor in his distancing himself from Law observance: not that it is futile or wrong-headed or unable to attain righteousness, even if these are also his conclusions, but first and foremost that it isn't focused on Jesus Christ as Lord. His focus on the participationist stream of Paul's thinking is especially enlightening, as he shows how important the theme of dying with Christ is to Paul's understanding of salvation. In his discussion of works, Sanders asserts that "Salvation by grace is not incompatible with punishment and reward for deeds," (517) and that is the position he asserts as Paul's. With regard to covenantal nomism, he says that Paul's view of works is in perfect agreement (518) with the Judaism of his day, but (and this is an important qualifier) Paul's pattern of religion is fundamentally different than covenantal nomism. He stresses this a number of times, asserting that while there is substantial agreement, there is a basic difference (548). That difference is Christ. Paul's pattern of religion, described as "participationist eschatology," is typified by participation in Christ, a change in lordship from the lordship of the flesh or sin to Christ, and being under grace instead of under the law. It is a transfer that takes place, and that is decisive. Even though Paul does spend a good bit of time talking about the role of works, and is rightly concerned with justification by faith, which Sanders includes in his scheme, it is Christ that takes center stage, and union with Christ that is the driving force of his thought. Anything that is pointing toward a different goal is entirely useless, and thus the observance of the Law in order to obtain righteousness is not so much destructive or in need of reformation as it is working in a totally different order than union with Christ.

Even though his discussion of Paul isn't much more than a hundred pages, this short review can only scratch the surface of this seminal work. I came to it with a pretty good acquaintance with many critiques of Sanders' work, and I look forward to continuing to sift this great piece of reasoning and argument. At the very least, it is abundantly clear that he has brought to light a number of themes in Paul that are too often underplayed or subordinated (such as participation or lordship), or at least, that were until after he published this study. I look forward to continuing to study Paul's theology and soteriology, and this important work is clearly one of the indispensable stopping points along that way.

Michael Gorman, Inhabiting the Cruciform God

In this study of Pauline soteriology, Gorman focuses on Paul's "grand narrative" of kenosis, justification, and theosis as key themes for understanding Paul's view of salvation in Christ. The key text for explicating the narrative is Phil 2:5-11, where the kenosis and exaltation of Christ form the key movements in the description of Christ's incarnation. For Gorman, this narrative is key to understanding Christ, and salvation, and even more, it is key to understanding God. He sets as one of the book's key agendas the claim that "cruciformity is theoformity, or theosis," built on the foundational claim that "kenosis (self-emptying) reveals the character of God" (2). This key element of the thesis is worked out in the first chapter of the book, with a careful study of Philippians 2 and it's implications for Paul's master story. He then turns to an extended study of justification as co-crucifixion, a participation in the life and death of Christ, and specifically in Christ's covenant fulfillment. (Thus, the pistis christou debate features prominently in the chapter, as the subjective genitive reading there is an important element in the argument, though it doesn't stand or fall solely on that point.) He then turns to holiness as the actualization of justification (not some subsequent and separate movement) and closes with an argument for nonviolence as an essential part of Paul's entire viewpoint.

I greatly enjoyed Gorman's important work. It is well written and clearly argued throughout, and he demonstrates a thorough familiarity with Paul and his letters. I am extremely sympathetic to the core theological argument of the book, that kenosis not only pertains to Christ but also reveals something of the character and manner of working of God the Father as well. His chapter on justification is likewise illuminating, and I think he is convincing that theosis (as he carefully defines it) is an element in Paul's soteriology, one that is often neglected in the Western tradition. Whether "justification by co-crucifixion leading to theosis" is the one soteriological model for Paul is most certainly a more difficult argument to pull off, but at the least Gorman has demonstrated how the "crucified with Christ" language and thought patter in an important one for Paul. His chapters on holiness and nonviolence are similarly thought-provoking and challenging, and I have no doubt that this work overall provides an argument to be reckoned with. Gorman constantly brought me back to the text of Paul's letters to notice details I had previously missed while at the same time making a synthetic argument for an overarching framework that is helpful in thinking like Paul thought. So while I may not agree with him in all particulars, this is clearly a great work, and I am glad to recommend it.

Gordon Fee, God's Empowering Presence

I have no intention of doing this important work justice in this short review, so instead, let me give a few words of appreciation. This nearly encyclopedic book encapsulates what must have been years of research and months of careful exegesis. The first three-fourths of the book consists of a passage-by-passage look at every mention and allusion to the Holy Spirit in Paul's letters. Each passage is exegeted with care, always with an eye to its context and its place in the larger argument of the letter. I had intended to only skim these chapters of exegesis, dipping in at what seemed to be important points, but kept finding myself absorbed in Fee's writing, and though I didn't read it in its entirety, I have no doubt it would repay careful study. The book then closes with a section of synthesis in which Fee brings together the fruits of his research.

The conclusions, like the exegesis they follow, are too extensive to summarize here, other than to say that Fee makes a very convincing case for the importance of the Holy Spirit to Paul's thinking, as well as to Paul's very life. I cannot recommend this book highly enough to anyone who is interested in Paul's life and letters or in the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Fee also has, by nature of his own Pentecostal background, a keen eye to how this doctrine has been understood or misunderstood in contemporary formulations and church practices, and this book provides a well-grounded corrective to many distortions. If you're even considering this book, don't think twice. It is not to be missed.

Frank Thielman, The Law and the New Testament

Frank Thielman is a Pauline scholar at Beeson Divinity School. In addition to his very readable commentary on Philippians in the NIVAC series, which I enjoyed studying through, he has written a number of books focusing on Paul's understanding of the law. This book broadens that focus out to include a survey of the relationship between the law and the New Testament, especially as it is envisioned in the five major streams of the NT that directly take up the question: Paul, Matthew, John, Hebrews, and Luke-Acts. Thielman deals with each author in turn, looking at their distinctive approaches to the law, with a focus on areas of both continuity and discontinuity. In the final chapter, he draws these streams together by both looking at how they differ in emphasis but also how they hold essential elements in common. He summarizes his comparison of the five authors by placing them in three categories:

1. Paul and Matthew stand together in their interest in the ethical use of the Mosaic Law.
2. John and the author of Hebrews stand together in their symbolic use of the law.
3. Luke stands by himself in his use of the law not only in ethical and symbolic ways but also to construct the story of Gods saving purposes. (168)

He also highlights three basic issues that are common ground among the five authors:

1. The Mosaic law no longer regulates the lives of God's people.
2. A new "law" has taken its place.
3. the Mosaic law remains valid, but in a new way. (176)

His final sentence sums up his study well, "Continuity is present, but the gospel is something new" (182).

Thielman's study of the law is well written, and provides a very clear introduction to this area. He is careful to look at each author in his own right, looking at the major arguments of the various letters and then highlighting how the issues surrounding the law fit into this larger picture. His chapter on Paul was especially well done, and is a very helpful study that illuminates these major components of the letters to the Romans and Galatians. This was a worthwile read, and I'm glad to have it on my shelf for future reference. It is clearly a textbook, but is no worse for that fact.

Three by Gordon Fee

Three items related to Gordon Fee for today. First, I'm working my way through God's Empowering Presence and have, as I expected, been awed by his scholarship and exegesis, but even more, have been entranced by Paul as he comes through in Fee's writing. This book has received wide praise, and it was about time I finally got to it. I haven't got to the synthesis chapters yet at the end, but the exegesis is well done, especially his overviews of the books and their arguments.

Item two is that Fee has a new commentary out in the NICNT series which he edits for Eerdmans on 1 and 2 Thessalonians, which I hope to pick up soon. His Philippians volume in that series is a volume I deeply appreciated, both for it's learning but even more for its pastoral sensativity and it's helpful words of application.

Third, I just picked up, again long overdue, Fee's Listening to the Spirit in the Text. Reading Fee always makes me want to read more of him, and this collection of essays has some great stuff on Paul, so it fits right in with my current Pauline emphasis.

N. T. Wright, Justification

Justification is one of the core doctrines of the Christian faith, and in both evangelical and more mainline circles, it has been contested territory for a generation or more. N. T. Wright is one of the giants of biblical studies today, with broad recognition in both academic and in more popular circles, with an important multi-volume series from Fortress Press, Christian Origins and the Question of God, and with a string of popular presentations of important facets of the Christian faith, Simply Christian, Suprised by Hope, and After You Believe, all from HarperOne. He is also important because of his rather unique ability to attract admirers and detractors from across the theological spectrum. With his keen insight into Paul, both building on his past work and in anticipation of his forthcoming academic work on the Apostle, this important work zeroing in on the doctrine of justification is one for which I eagerly awaited. And Justification is truly a book to be reckoned with. It is a comprehensive (though, as the author admits, not exhaustive) statement of the place of justification in Paul's thought, and I find myself far more appreciative than anything for this carefully reasoned book.

Wright begins by laying out some important groundwork for the present book by locating it especially within the evangelical conversation concerning the classical "Reformed" view of justification, especially as espoused by John Piper (whose recent book, The Future of Justification, was a sustained critique of Wright's perspective particularly on this issue), and locating his views with reference to the new perspective on Paul, of which Wright could be considered one of the primary contemporary proponents, though he seeks to provide "fresh" perspectives that move beyond what is often termed the "new" perspective. I'd like to proceed in a thematic way by extending some words of appreciation and interest toward a couple of Wright's major themes.

Clearly, the largest idea that Wright advocates is locating of the doctrine of justification, and the understanding of the "righteousness of God," firmly within the context of covenant. He describes God's righteousness as God's covenant faithfulness, and, more specifically, God's faithfulness to the one-plan-through-Israel-to-the-world. The problem that God addresses in the Messiah is that Israel has failed in its part of the plan, to be God's instrument in and to the world, so the plan becomes one-plan-through-the-faithful-Israelite-to-the-world, as Jesus the Messiah becomes the instrument of God's work in and to the world, fulfilling God's covenant plans, demonstrating God's faithfulness to the covenant with Abraham even though it seemed to be foiled by sin.

Wright seeks not to upend the traditional Reformation emphases of justification by faith, God's grace, forgiveness of sins, but instead to locate them in the broader, deeper, and what he asserts to be more truly Pauline story of God's covenant and God's covenant people. He writes,

"Justification by faith—God's declaration in the present time that all those who believe that God raised Jesus from the dead, all those who confess him as Lord, are true members in the renewed covenant, and are assured thereby of final salvation—belongs inextricably . . . within the framework of Paul's vision of God's single plan of salvation, through Israel and hence through Israel's Messiah, for the sake of all the nations and ultimately for the whole cosmos." (247)

I think there can be no doubt that Wright has illumined some of the questions that were clearly on Paul's mind, and has demonstrated a certain logic, especially about Israel, that helps to fill out much that is right but incomplete in traditional thinking. He also stresses repeatedly that much of the "old perspective" is right and true, just as he often distances himself from or modifies the "new perspective" take, seeking to move beyond both to a more complete theology of Paul that incorporates both the sin-salvation and one-people-of-God facets into a more robust way of thinking.

Another interesting facet to Wright's argument concerns present justification and future judgment. He asserts, very clearly, that justification entails a present verdict that someone (or, maybe more properly, some people) are in the right with God, have achieved the status of righteous/righteousness. The second thing he discusses, at some length, is how this relates to the final judgment. Wright proposes that present justification corresponds to the future verdict of righteousness, but that the two aren't the same. The final verdict, as Romans 2 makes clear, is based on being "doers" of the law. But, and here is the pivotal move for Wright, this doesn't mean a return to the merit theology of the Medieval era, or a works righteousness, but it does mean living a new life enslaved not to the law and sin but to righteousness. This obviously raises some important questions, both about how we in fact live a life that attains this final verdict and how we know it—in short, the question of assurance. This is the topic Paul takes up in Romans 5 to 8, in explaining how the "verdict already announced is indeed a true anticipation of the verdict yet to be announced" (225). The answer for Paul, according to Wright, is the Spirit. It is the Spirit "who makes that victory [of Jesus Christ and of the Father's love triumphing in his Son's death] operative in our moral lives and who enables us to love God in return" (239).

So much more could be said about this insightful and wide-ranging book. It is highlighted not only by his insightful restatement of the doctrine of justification but also by two chapters that provide a sustained and systematic reading of Romans and Galatians, to see how Paul's logic in those two central letters, as interpreted by Wright, informs the doctrine.

Wright has clearly taken the arguments back to Paul and sought to show how fresh readings of the original texts of Scripture can bring fresh light. His writing is always well-crafted and clear, and he does an admirable job of presenting his arguments at a level that appeal to an interested general reader in addition to those more thoroughly versed in the current debates within biblical studies. It certainly remains to be seen which of his readings will win the day, but there is without doubt much of value in the overall framework he proposes, especially of setting the gospel in the larger framework of God's work in the world. I look forward to seeing where this conversation goes in the future.

Mark Reasoner, Romans in Full Circle

Mark Reasoner's Romans in Full Circle (Westminster John Knox, 2005) is a brief but very helpful survey of historical approaches to Paul's most theological letter. He chooses twelve loci from the letter (heavily weighted to the first eleven chapters, since that is where most of the attention has historically been paid). For each locus, he sets up briefly the issues at hand, and then proceeds to lay out a selective but informative history of interpretation focusing on some of the major interpreters throughout history. He always starts with Origen, and then proceeds through major developments, usually hitting on Augustine, Abelard, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Barth, and Post-Barthian and Narrative approaches (and occasionally mentioning Pelagius and Erasmus, among others, as they are pertinent). This survey usually shows how major interpretations developed, where they changed, and what bearing they have on other loci.

Reasoner's premise is that Romans interpretation is moving in a "full circle" from Origen, who focused especially on the relation of Jew and Gentile in the letter, through Augustine and the focus on the individual, through Luther and a focus on Justification, through Barth and a focus on God and his righteousness, and back through the new perspective and narrative approaches to the relation of Romans to Israel's story and the role that the relation of Jew and Gentile plays in the structure of Paul's argument.

This attention to the original setting, he asserts, is leading readers back toward Origen. He concludes, "These approaches include reading both Christ's faithfulness and faithfulness in Christ as in view in Romans 3, a willingness to discus the universal scope of Christ's obedience at the end of Romans 5, reading the ego of Romans 7 as someone who is not fully in Christ, insisting on a human will whose free choices have real consequences in the order of salvation . . ., viewing ethnic Israel as God's chosen people (Romans 9-11), and reading 13:1-7 with deconstructive strategies that emphasize how believers must not always be subject to the government" (145).

Though he doesn't explicitly set out to evaluate or contextualize the "new perspective," I think Reasoner's survey shows how many parts of the "new" perspective are in fact quite old, giving pause to the oft-leveled criticism that the new perspective is taken with "novelty." Like I mentioned, this book doesn't set out to advocate or criticize the new perspective, but it does provide some important material for the debate.