What Did Paul Really Mean? | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2007 > August

Christianity Today, August, 2007 |

What Did Paul Really Mean?

'New perspective' scholars argue that we need, well, a new perspective on justification by faith.

Simon Gathercole | posted 8/10/2007 08:48AM

8 of 8

Simon Gathercole is senior lecturer in New Testament at the University of Aberdeen. He was recently appointed a lecturer at the University of Cambridge, starting in October.

Related Elsewhere:

"Further Reading on the New Perspective" accompanies this article.

A recent Christianity Today editorial outlined why justification by faith alone is still Protestants' defining doctrine.

The Paul Page has original articles and interviews about the new perspective on Paul, as well as links to journal articles, books, and other materials around the web.

Scot McKnight has also blogged about the new perspective in Jesus Creed.

The Wall Street Journal published John Wilson's op-ed on N.T. Wright and the new perspective.

Many of N. T. Wright's papers and sermons on Paul are available on an unofficial site.

Simon Gathercole's "After the New Perspective: Works, Justification and Boasting in Early Judaism and Romans 1-5" is available online.

Other Christianity Today articles on theology and justification include:

Declaration: Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification

Nothing But the Blood | More and more evangelicals believe Christ's atoning death is merely a grotesque creation of the medieval imagination. Really? (May 1, 2006)

Sticking Points | Despite recent rapprochement, evangelicals and Catholics remain far apart on key issues. (December 2005)

The Gospel of Jesus Christ | An introduction to "The Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Evangelical Celebration."(David Neff, February 1, 2000)

You Can't Keep a Justified Man Down | An interview with N. T. Wright, author of The Resurrection of the Son of God. (April 1, 2003)

CT Classic: Are We Speaking the Same Language? | What Catholics really believe about justification—and why defining our terms makes all the difference. (November 1, 1999)

Reformation Day Celebrations Ain't What They Used to Be | The Lutheran-Catholic Justification Declaration is a good step, but it's only a beginning. (November 1, 1999)

Theology: Does The Gift of Salvation Sell Out the Reformation? | The recent statement from evangelical and Roman Catholic leaders on the Christian doctrine of justification "sells out" the Reformation, according to James Boice, chairman of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals (ACE). (April 27, 1998)

Paid in Full | The sacrifice of Calvary was not a part payment; it was a complete and perfect payment. (Charles H. Spurgeon, February 9, 1998)

Should Catholics and Evangelicals Join Ranks? | A recent document entitled Evangelicals and Catholics Together gives a resounding yes to this question. (July 18, 1994)
Also: Why I Signed it, Parts 1 and 2

first page |

8 of 8

share this page

August 2007, Vol. 51, No. 8

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment

Reader Reviews are below

Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.

Click here for international orders

2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Displaying 1 - 3 of 20 comments.

See all comments

tony	Posted: August 16, 2007 3:41 AM

One of the more interesting theories about the (self-proclaimed) "Apostle" Paul is that he suffered from temporal-lobe epilepsy and was hence prone to delusion. This hypothesis is actually supported by the NT descriptions of Paul's "conversion" experience. So, perhaps Paul should be taken with the same seriousness as we take present day TLE's - ie with a nod and a wink. The self-righteous, semi-coherent rantings of most of the commentaries here is clear evidence that "interpretation" of Paul's writings (and pseudo-writings) could just as easily be determined with the roll of (several) dice.

Walt Mead

Posted: August 15, 2007 6:30 PM


What's all the hoopla? As one who has been saved, I can say with certainty --- Jesus saves! Seems like I read someplace that the most simple things of God would confound the grandest thinking of man.

Darren E.

Posted: August 15, 2007 9:06 AM

Generally, Gathercole presents a fairly well-balanced treatment of the 'new perspective'. Those of the Dispensational view will have a tough time with it. The central point regards the issue of the Cross and that there is no separate plan of salvation or justification for the Jewish people outside of the Cross. Paul is very clear about this that for both Jew and Gentile, justification is through the Cross alone. What can be pointed out is that the sacrificial system in the Old Testament is a grace-based system, in particular the Atonement sacrifice that foreshadows Christ. Upon the lamb the sins of Israel were laid. There is no Law, but only Gospel hidden in that institution because it is God-initiated free justification for the sinner. But that was only until Christ. For Dispensationalists to say that when Jewish people reject the fullness of that sacrifice in Christ there is another means of justification for them that God accepts, that is completely incorrect.

The allotted time for commenting has ended.