glenn packiam's blog

The New Perspective on Paul-- A Pastoral Explanation, Pt. 4: "The Works of the Law"

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This is Part 4 of a 4-part series. It would be critical to read Part 1 , Part 2, and Part 3 of this series first.]

The final focus of my attempt at a pastoral explanation of the "New Perspective on Paul" also has to do with the meaning of a phrase. This time, we won't need to turn to Greek grammar or explore the use of the phrase in the Greek translation of the Old Testament. The phrase is the "works of the law."

The NPP's new shade of meaning on this phrase has to do with the context of "Second Temple Judaism", or Judaism around the 1st century. Based on writings that were part of the Dead Seas Scolls and other inter-testamental writings, some scholars have argued that the phrase, "works of the law", referred to specific Torah-observances. These were Torah-observances that specifically marked out their Jewish identity, a matter of central importance for a people who have come out of exile and begun to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple. What were these specific "works of the law"? Jewish dietary laws, Jewish holy days, and circumcision. Each of these "Torah-observances" specifically marked their ethnic identity as the people of God, as descendants of Abraham. It is no coincidence that the specific Torah observances that Jesus and Paul set aside were....Jewish holy days (Jesus healing on the Sabbath!), circumcision (Paul's arguent in Galatians), and Jewish dietary restrictions (Paul in 1 Corinthians).

Without this reading of the phrase "works of the law", Paul and James seem to be in conflict with each other. Paul wrote:

Romans 3:27-28 (NET)
"Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded! By what principle? Of works? No, but by the principle of faith! 3:28 For we consider that a person is declared righteous by faith apart from the works of the law.

But James wrote:

James 2:22-24 (NET) 
"You see that his faith was working together with his works and his faith was perfected by works. 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, 'Now Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness,' and he was called God’s friend. 2:24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone."

Are Paul and James contradicting each other? It's easy to see why Luther called James an "epistle of straw!" But when you consider the NPP's reading of "the works of the law" as specific Torah observances that marked out their Jewish identity, Paul and James are not in conflict. The rest of Paul's above passage says:

Rom. 3:29 (NET)
"Or is God the God of the Jews only? Is he not the God of the Gentiles too? Yes, of the Gentiles too! 3:30 Since God is one, he will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 3:31 Do we then nullify the law through faith? Absolutely not! Instead we uphold the law.”

Paul is not simply arguing against legalism; he's arguing against Jewish exclusivism! To be sure, Paul would have been against legalism too. And there's no reason to say that legalist weren't his problem, as some extreme NPP advocates may.

What does this mean for the Christian?
1. Faith in Christ trumps all other identifiers.
 When people come to faith in Christ, that faith is our new "ID badge." You may as well throw the old ones away. Faith in Christ is what marks us out as the chosen people of God, not our race, not our nationality, not our gender. We are brothers and sisters with Palestinian Christians and Russian Christians and Rwandan Christians, and so on. In other words, our identity as Americans is not as important as our fellowship in Christ. Our national pride or history or sense of belonging is not near as important as our identity as the people of God-- marked out by faith in Christ. When we understand our allegiance and loyalty to those who are our brothers and sisters in Christ over and sometimes against our allegiance or loyalty to a nation or a race, we begin to understand what it means to be "one in Christ."

2. Good works are not excluded from the Gospel.
The Reformers knew this and emphasized this. We are saved for good works not by good works, they often said. But yet, all this fear of legalism among contemporary Protestants often results in a Gospel that has no room for works. When you see that Paul's "works" (Eph. 2:8-9 can address both legalists and Jewish exclusivists)  was often a short-hand for "works of the law", which was another way of saying "Jewish exclusivism", you realize that Paul never saw the law as being in opposition to faith or grace or the Gospel. 

Israel's "problem" was not that they loved the law; Israel's "problem" was that they could not obey the law AND that they thought they were the only recipients of God's grace. The Jewish "problem" Jesus was addressing was their confidence in their ability to obey; the Jewish "problem" Paul was addressing was their conviction of their exclusiveness.

Through Jesus Christ, God's grace has come to all people, as was always God's plan. It is that grace that empowers us through the Holy Spirit to now obey what God has always asked of His people. His law-- as a whole-- is a reflection of His love and wisdom and order. One way of saying this is that our salvation begins by faith in God's grace in Christ Jesus; our salvation continues by cooperating with God's grace through the Holy Spirit.

Thanks be to God!

(And thanks for indulging me in doing this!)

The New Perspective on Paul-- A Pastoral Explanation, Pt. 3: "The Righteousness of God"

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This is Part 3 of a 4-part series. It would be critical to read Part 1 and Part 2 of this series first.]

In Part 1 we discussed how the New Perspective takes a fresh look at Judaism as "covenantal nomism" rather than a religion of legalism. In Part 2, we explored how the translation of the Greek phrase pistis Christou could be read the "faithfulness of Christ" instead of simply "faith in Christ."

Now, in Part 3, we will explore another phrase that has been at the center of the NPP discussion: the phrase, “the righteousness of God”, or in Greek, dikaiosune theou. The Reformed tradition has typically taken this to mean God’s moral righteousness, and it is related to the notion of a “treasury of merit” that Christ stored up on our behalf that can now be transferred—“imputed” is their preferred word—to us. But many advocates of the New Perspective on Paul argue that dikaiosune theou can be seen as God’s covenant faithfulness.

N. T. Wright writes:
“The main argument for taking dikaiosune theou to denote an aspect of the character of God himself is the way in which Paul is summoning up a massive biblical and intertestamental theme, found not least in Isaiah 40—55 which I have argued elsewhere is vital for him. God’s dikaiosune, his tsedaqah, is that aspect of his character because of which, despite Israel’s infidelity and consequent banishment, God will remain true to the covenant with Abraham and rescue her none the less.” (From www.ntwrightpage.com)

This interpretation makes sense with Paul’s line of reasoning in Romans 3. The question that Paul is asking is, roughly, “How can God keep His covenant with Israel to bless the nations through them despite Israel’s unfaithfulness?” The answer, Paul says, is by sending Jesus as Israel’s Messiah, to be faithful on their behalf and to fulfill their commission. God’s covenant faithfulness can be seen “through the faithfulness of Jesus the Messiah” (Rom. 3:22, NET). Through Jesus-- the seed of Abraham-- God remains faithful to His promise in Genesis 12 to bless all peoples through Abraham's family. 

If the "righteousness of God" is not so much a kind of "moral righteousness" that He imputes but a "covenant faithfulness" that He demonstrates, does that mean that there is no such thing as "imputed righteousness"? Not necessarily. Advocates of the NPP argue that God does indeed “reckon us to be righteous”, but that this is not the same as putting God’s own righteousness in us. Some Pauline scholars have argued that it may be more accurate to speak of union with Christ (or incorporation with Christ) since Paul’s language is about our being “in Christ” while the language of “imputation” is missing from his letters.* I’m not sure that the difference between being declared righteous because of our incorporation with Christ rather than because of His righteousness being imputed to us makes that much of difference to the believer: either way we stand righteous before God because of Christ.

SO…What does this reading of “the Righteousness of God” mean for the Christian?

God does not scrap His projects or forget His promises or abandon His people.
God promised that He would use Abraham’s family to bless the whole world; Israel was to be a light to the Gentiles, the instrument of God’s salvation. God is so great that not even Israel’s unfaithfulness could stop God from keeping His promise. It is no accident that Jesus came as the seed of Abraham. (Matthew traces Jesus’ genealogy to Abraham for a reason!)

You and I have become God's covenant people because God was faithful to His promise to bless all peoples through Abraham's family by sending Jesus as the seed of Abraham. This is a testimony to the truth that God cannot be stopped; His plan cannot be thwarted-- not even by our sin and unfaithfulness. The Gospel reveals God's faithfulness-- His unstoppable, never-giving-up love. As the covenant people of God-- the ones who belong to God because we have been joined with Christ, we can trust that the same faithfulness of God that brought salvation to the world through Jesus will keep us until the end. In Paul's words, "He who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus" (Phil. 1:6, NIV). 

OK. That's all for Part 3. Here is the link to Part 4.

*The passage that usually comes to mind when arguing for imputed righteousness is 2 Corinthians 5:21. But N. T. Wright makes the following rebuttal: “The entire passage is about the way in which Paul’s new covenant ministry, through the death and resurrection of Jesus, is in fact God’s appointed means for establishing and maintaining the church. ‘So that we might become God’s righteousness in him’ means that in Christ those who are called to be apostolic preachers actually embody God’s own covenant faithfulness.” Wright goes on: “Is there then no ‘reckoning of righteousness’ in, for instance, Romans 5.14–21? Yes, there is; but my case is that this is not God’s own righteousness, or Christ’s own righteousness, that is reckoned to God’s redeemed people, but rather the fresh status of ‘covenant member’, and/or ‘justified sinner’, which is accredited to those who are in Christ, who have heard the gospel and responded with ‘the obedience of faith’.” (www.ntwrightpage.com)