Short Introductions
N. T. Wright’s What Saint Paul Really Said (Lion, 1997) not only outlines his version of the new perspective on Paul, but also includes a helpful discussion of Paul’s view of Christ. Wright’s book Paul: In Fresh Perspective (Fortress, 2006) combines this new perspective with his views on Paul’s challenge to the Roman Empire. Peter Stuhlmacher and Don Hagner, Revisiting Paul’s Doctrine of Justification: A Challenge to the New Perspective (InterVarsity, 2001), offer a critique of the broader new perspective movement from the more traditional camp.
Popular Commentaries
N. T. Wright has produced a series of New Testament commentaries in his For Everyone series (Westminster John Knox). Galatians and Thessalonians (2004) and Romans 1-8 (2004) cover issues related to the new perspective. John Stott’s The Message of Romans (InterVarsity, 1994) in the Bible Speaks Today series interacts with and criticizes the new perspective in his characteristically accessible style.
Scholarly Discussions
E. P. Sanders’s Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Fortress, 1977) set the ball rolling. James D. G. Dunn’s The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Eerdmans, 1998) applies Sanders’s evaluation of early Judaism to Paul. More critical are the two volumes edited by D. A. Carson, Peter T. O’Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid, Justification and Variegated Nomism (Baker, 2001, 2004). Stephen Westerholm’s Perspectives Old and New on Paul (Eerdmans, 2004) is also useful.
Scholarly Commentaries
On the new perspective side, James D. G. Dunn has done the most to apply his views to commentaries. See his two-volume Romans 1-8, 9-16 (Thomas Nelson, 1988), and Galatians (Hendrickson, 1993). Valuable criticisms of the new perspective can be found in Douglas J. Moo’s The Epistle to the Romans (Eerdmans, 1996) and Thomas R. Schreiner’s Romans (Baker, 1998).
Copyright © 2007 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.
Related Elsewhere:
This article accompanied “What Did Paul Really Mean?“
A recent Christianity Today editorial outlined why justification by faith alone is still our defining doctrine.
The Paul Page is dedicated to the new perspective on Paul.
Scot Mc Knight has also blogged about justification 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
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
