Saving Righteousness of God on Amazon.com

For those who want a copy of my book on the New Perspective on Paul called The Saving Righteousness of God (subtitled: "Ten Reasons why Tom Wright is not the Anti-Christ, just a very naughty boy") see the side bar as it is now available on Amazon.com and also from Wipf & Stock publishers.

Conversation on the NPP

Thanks to Mark Mattison for telling me about An Evening Conversation on Jesus and Paul with James D.G. Dunn and N.T. Wright based on a dialogue between the two at the Durham Uni seminar back in 2004.

On a related topic, the PCA on-line magazine "Faith on-line" has published the PCA report of the
Ad Interim Study Committee on Federal Vision, New Perspective, and Auburn Avenue Theologies. The pro and con of this document is . . . well, actually, I just can't be bothered anymore. Go read it yourself.

A Letter from Smyrna

Over at Evangelical Textual Criticism Peter Head has posted A letter to the Global Church from The Protestant Church of Smyrna which is a must read. It is also a call to prayer and a time for reflection on the meaning of the cross for our day.

F.F. Bruce on John 3.16

'For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life'

- John 3:16 (NET).

‘If there is one sentence more than another which sums up the message of the Fourth Gospel, it is this. The love of God is limitless; it embraces all mankind. No sacrifice was too great to bring its unmeasured intensity home to men and women: the best that God had to give, he gave – his only Son, well-beloved’.

F.F. Bruce, The Gospel & Epistles of John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994), 89-90.

Penal Substitution and Propitiation

I wonders if part of the current debate (see my earlier post Wright on Penal Substitution) is because there is a failure to distinguish between "penal substitution" and "propitiation". They are related but they are not the same thing. What is more, how is God's wrath to be understood?

We can define Penal Substitution (PS) as the view that God punishes Jesus for our sins by putting him in our place on the cross. No definition of PS that I know of (e.g. Robert Latham, Leon Morris, or John Stott) mentions wrath as far as I can remember. PS means that God prosecutes his contention against our sin by handing over Jesus to the cross to die in our stead. I think PS is taught in Rom. 8.1-3 and implied in Rom. 3.25, 1 Cor. 5.7, Gal. 3.13 and 1 Tim. 2.6. If Dan Wallace is right (GGBB, 383-89) then there may be some grounds for seeing a semantic overlap between the prepositions hyper "for" and anti "in place of", e.g. "Jesus died hyper [for/in place of] us" or in order to deal with our sins. But it is one thing to say that Jesus satisfied the justice of God, and it is another thing to say that he satisfies the wrath of God - they are not the same. I would also concur with St. Leon of Morris that hilasterion means "propitiation". The meaning is that Jesus' death appeases and satisfies God's wrath. What is more, in Romans the verdict of condemnation against human wickedness occassioned by God's wrath in 1.18-32 is identical to the verdict executed in Christ's death in Rom. 3.21-26 - so there is a connection between atonement, justice, and wrath. But how? Well, when that verdict is executed then God's wrath is propitiated.

What is God's wrath for that matter? I don't think it is the inevitable and impersonal exercise of God's justice in a moral universe (C.H. Dodd) nor can it be described as God's action as a "vengeful Father" (I think that is what Stephen Chalke is objecting too). The best definition of wrath is that it is the response of God's holiness towards evil, it is the display of God's righteous indignation towards human depravity (F.F. Bruce, Romans). It is neither impersonal nor spiteful. About a year ago I read a horrid story of a 4 year old girl who was beaten to death by her mother's boyfriend and the couple put her body in a suitcase through it in the River Ness. When I read that story I felt wrath, a righteous anger. It wasn't spiteful, it was not disproportionate, but my anger against such an horrendous crime was appropriate to me as a Father and and a law-abiding citizen - that action demanded punishment and I wanted to see that punishment meted out fully and finally. On the cross, God does not extract "revenge" against the Jesus, rather he executes his wrath (righteous indignation) against sin in the body of the sinless Son.

For those in want of further eading, let me recommend the following:

Carson, D.A. ‘Atonement in Romans 3:21-26.’ In The Glory of the Atonement: Biblical, Theological, and Practical Perspectives, eds. Charles E. Hill and Frank A. James (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2004), 119-39.

Gathercole, Simon. ‘The Cross and Substitutionary Atonement.’ SBET 21 (2003): 152-63.

McGowan, A.T.B. ‘The Atonement as Penal Substitution.’ In Always Reforming: Explorations in Systematic Theology, ed. A.T.B. McGowan (Leicester, England: IVP, 2006), 183-210.

McKnight, Scot. A Community Called Atonement (Nashville: Abingdon, forthcoming 2007).

Paul and Perseverance

Today in my Pauline Theology class we had a lecture on Paul and Perseverance. I opened the lecture with a discussion about whether or not the bumper-sticker-theology phrase "once saved, always saved" is an appropriate representation of Paul's conception of perseverance. Views were expectedly diverse on the topic but mostly in favour of it. I set out to show that things are a little more complex than that. We then worked through the Pauline materials and had a bit of an intro to the view of Judith Gundry-Volf. After that I then asked the students to come up with a new bumper-sticker-theology phrase that more adequately describes Paul's perspective on perseverance while I went and made myself a drink. When I came back they had come up with this phrase:

Salvation! Work out what God has worked in!

Well done to Paul, Ian, Anne, George, and Dan.

Jesus the Messiah - I

At the end of the year I am hoping to finish writing an article on the historical Jesus and the question of whether or not he made a messianic claim. Did Jesus claim to be the Messiah? Scholarship is mooted at this point. Indeed, a non-messianic Jesus is deeply ingrained in certain elements of scholarship. The main views seem to be:

• Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah and the Church proclaimed Jesus as Messiah as an inference based on his resurrection.
• The disciples proclaimed Jesus as Messiah during his life but Jesus rejected the title.
• Jesus did not claim the title, but neither did he reject it.
• Jesus claimed to be the Messiah

In a future post I hope to offer one or two or thirteen reasons why I think he did claim to be enacting a messianic role.

Wright on Penal Substitution

Alot is going on around the web about penal substitution esp. in relation to the views of Stephen Chalke, N.T. Wright, and a recent book edited by Mike Ovey, Steve Jeffery, and Andrew Sach (eds.) Pierced for our Transgressions (IVP). Jim Hamilton and Denny Burke add their comments. N.T. Wright responds to his critics on the Fulcrum website.

Here is a quote from NTW himself:

"No clearer statement is found in Paul, or indeed anywhere else in all early Christian literature, of the early Christian belief that what happened on the cross was the judicial punishment of sin. Taken in conjunction with 8:1 and the whole argument of the passage, not to mention the partial parallels in 2 Cor 5:21 and Gal 3:13, it is clear that Paul intends to say that in Jesus’ death the damnation that sin deserved was meted out fully and finally, so that sinners over whose heads that condemnation had hung might be liberated from this threat once and for all."

Wright, ‘Romans,’ 10.574-75

Bywater on VanLandingham

Kevin Bywater (Ph.D cand. at Durham Uni) begins his review/evaluation of Chris VanLandingham's book on judgment and justification in Judaism and Paul. See his blog Living Waters.

Jensen on being "Reformed"

Peter Jensen, Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, has a lecture on Why I am a Reformed Christian. Please listen to it if you are so inclined.

Paul and Gender II

William Mounce (Pastoral Epistles, 103) approvingly cites this quotation from David M. Scholer:

"The concept of genuinely objective biblical interpretation is a myth. All interpretation is socially located, individually skewed, and ecclesiastically and theologically conditioned ... All biblical interpreters, regardless of where they now stand on the issue of women in ministry, have been deeply influenced by both the sexism and misogyny of our culture and also the currents of nineteenth-century women's rights and twentieth-century feminist movements."

In other words, the door of biases swings both ways.

Paul Winter and the Son of Man

Paul Winter: ‘the place of origin of the Son of Man myth must be sought neither in Iran, nor in Judea, not even in Ugarit, but in German universities’.

Cited in Simon Gathercole, The Pre-Existent Son, 255.

A Definition of Mission

Later in the year I'm returing to the topic of mission or proselytism in the ancient world. I think that alot of the arguments about whether or not second-temple Judaism was a missionary religion or not comes down to a matter of the definition of mission and the differences between conversion and adherence - balancing sociological and theological factors also contributes to the definition. For example James C. Paget defines a missionary religion as ‘one which, in a variety of ways, makes it clear that conversion to that religion is a good thing’. Based on his work on mission-commitment in Judaism, John Dickson defines mission as ‘the range of activities by which members of a religious community desirous of the conversion of outsiders seek to promote their religion to non-adherents’. Martin Goodman identifies different types of missionary activity including: information, education, apologetic and proselytization. For him the latter consists of: 'Those who approved of proselytizing mission believed that, as members of a defined group, they should approve of those within their number who might choose to encourage outsiders not only to change their way of life but also to be incorporated within their group'. What started me thinking on this subject was Scot McKnight's much under read book Light Among the Gentiles: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period (1991) which is well worth checking out.

Paul and Gender

I'm currently writing a chapter for my new Paul book and the chapter is called: Bourgeois Babes, Bossy Wives, and Bobby Haircuts. It is honestly one of the hardest things I've ever written on (Jesus and the Law is # 2) and I am continuing to plow throw it with great caution and care. But I very much liked this quote from Judith Gundry-Volf:

"In sum, Paul seems to affirm both equality of status and roles of women and men in Christ and women’s subordinate or secondary place. He appears to think that sometimes the difference between male and female is to be expressed in patriarchal conventions and that sometimes these conventions should be transcended or laid aside."

Judith Gundry-Volf, ‘Paul on Women and Gender: A Comparison of Early Jewish Views,’ in The Road from Damascus: The Impact of Paul’s Conversion on his Life, Thought, and Ministry, ed. Richard N. Longenecker (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997), 186.

Paul and Scripture Seminar

The website for the Paul and Scripture Seminar (SBL) is hosted by Bruce Frisk. The papers from the 2006 Washington meeting include the following:

Bruce N. Fisk, Westmont College

Synagogue Influence on Paul's Roman Readers

Stephen Moyise, University of Chichester UK
How does Paul Read Scripture?

Stanley E. Porter, McMaster Divinity College CA
Paul and his Bible: His Education and Access to the Scriptures of Israel

Christopher D. Stanley, St. Bonaventure University
The Role of the Audience in the Interpretation of Paul's References to the Jewish Scriptures

Diana M. Swancutt, Yale Divinity School
Scripture 'Reading' and Identity Formation in Paul: Paideia Among Believing Greeks

For those who do not know, Paul and Scripture is a battlefield between guys like Richard Hays one the one hand who think that Paul quotes Scripture with the literary context in mind and on other hand the likes of Chris Stanley who think that the context was not important and not evident to his readers (to put it simply).

Preachings on Romans 14.1-15.7

Over the next couple of weeks in my church, Dingwall Baptist Church, I am preaching through Romans 14.1-15.7 and two major verses stick out in my mind:

Romans 14:19 - So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.

[Those who have read my Saving Righteousness book will now how much I love that verse]

Romans 15:7 - Therefore welcome one another as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God.

I think these two verses some up much of the exhortation in 14.1-15.7 and I wish all churches had them written somewhere in the auditorium or etched on the desk of all committee meetings.

Trying to teach about the "weak" and "strong" is a bit daunting also, both at a scholarly and popular level. Were the weak Jews, Jewish Christians or Gentiles?

Horace (Sat. 1.9.68-72) includes a story where one person refuses to speak to another person and the approached person says:

"Today is the thirtieth sabbath. Would you affront the circumcised Jews?"
The other replies, "I have no scruples".
Then he retorts, "But I have. I am a somewhat weaker brother, one of the many. I will talk another day."
(See commentaries by Ben Witherington and Charles Talbert).

The Pre-Christian Michael Bird

I know that given recent events in America this is probably not the best time to post this, but to give my friends in the blogosphere a laugh I thought I would upload this photo of me from my Army days, just to show that I was not always a NT Geek. For the record, I believe in stringent gun control laws. When I first joined the Army I weighed a remarkable 45 kg and moved up to 65 kg in about two months. It was actually during my time in the Army that I became a Christian and being a Christian in the Army was not always easy! The Army philosophy is what I call Cartesian Alcoholism: "I drink, therefore, I am!" But I developed skills (public speaking, discipline, and confidence) that prepared me for an academic career and I learnt very quickly to be able to provide an answer for the hope that you have (1 Pet. 3.15). My time in the Army (13 years all up) shaped a lot of my character and taught me how to cope with adversity, so in that sense, I am grateful for it. From now I am only a soldier of Christ and I carry a NA27 instead of an M-60 - Amen!

Zahn on the Pastoral Epistles

It is a good exercise to ocassionally read older NT Introductons when you get a chance and it makes you realize that very little is actually new these days. I have been flicking through Theodor Zahn's NT Intro and here is what he had to say about the Pastoral Epistles:

With regard to that last refuge of so-called criticism, namely, the linguistic character of the letters, it is to be remarked at the outset that a pseudo-Paul, by repeating and imitating Pauline expressions, would be sure to make mistakes and so betray himself. The opposite is what we really find. Even the greetings, which would be the most apt to be handled in this way, are thoroughly originaly, hwoing dependence neitehr upon earlier letters nor upon teh common model. Here also is to be observed the peculiarity of Paul's style, by which he repeats within short range a characteristic word once used or a realted word, without prejudice to the fact that for one not a Greek he has command of an unusually larger number of words and expressions, which would tend rater to increase with time than to diminish. Itis also to be observed that 1 Tim. and Titus were written withint a short time of each otehr and for like reasons, and that of 2 Tim. also is considerably close to thtese letters both in time and purpose than it is to any of the Epistles that we have investigated. Consequently the fact that these three letters have certain expressions in common which either are found not in the earlier Pauline Epistles at all, or occur only rarely, is no proof that they are spurious, but only goes to confirm the conclusion arrived at from the investigation of their contens, that they all belong to the same period of Paul's life, and that the last. If it be admitted tha the linguistic phenomena of the letters controvert altogether the efforts of numerous "apologists" to find a palce for 1 Tim. and Titus in the earlier period of Paul's life, then the "critics" in their turn ought not to deny that 2 Tim. is different from the other two not only in content, but also linguistically. Such difference is very difficult to understand if all three are the work of a forger, but very easy to explain if they wre written by Paul under the conditions which the letters themselves disclose.

T. Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament (ed. M.W. Jacobus; 3 vols; 3rd edn; Minneapolis: Kock and Klock/Kregal, 1953), 2.121-22.

David deSilva on Revelation

For those interested in studies on the book of Revelation, the following volumes by David deSilva will be available soon:

Seeing the World Through John’s Eyes: The Rhetoric of the Book of Revelation (Louisville, KY:Westminster John Knox Press, 2006 [or 2007 ?]).

A Socio-rhetorical Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008).

The Legacy of Paul

Next to Jesus Paul has been the most influential figure in the history of Christianity. Although all the NT writers are working out the implications of Jesus for particular communities of believers, Paul in his numerous letters does this on the widest scale of all. That range, plus the depth of this thought and the passion of his involvement, have meant that since his letters became part of the NT, no Christian has been unaffected by what he has written. Whether or not they know Paul's words well, through what they have been taught about doctrine and piety, all Christians have become Paul's children in the faith.

Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1997), 422.

One might write a history of dogma as a history of the Pauline reactions in the church, and in doing so would touch on all the turning points of the history. Marcion after the Apostolic Fathers; Irenaeus, Clement and Origen after the Apologists; Augustine after the Fathers of the Greek Church; the great Reformers of the Middle Ages from Agobard to Wessel in the bosom of the medieval Church; Luther after the Scholastics; Jansenism after the Council of Trent; everywhere it has been Paul, in these men, who produced the Reformation. Paulinism has proved to be a ferment in the history of dogma, a basis it has never been.

Adolf von Harnack, History of Dogma (trans. Neil Buchanan; Boston: Little, Brown, 1901), 1.136.