The New Perspective on Paul: A Bibliographical Essay

by Michael F. Bird

Last Update: 30 April 2006

  • About this Bibliography
  • Introductions to the NPP
  • Antecedents to Sanders
  • Works by E.P. Sanders
  • Articles
  • Monographs
  • Justification
  • Law and “Works of the Law”
  • Studies on Judaism in Light of the NPP
  • Commentaries that Engage the NPP
  • Online Resources

About this Bibliography

This bibliography is my collection, annotation and contribution to the growing mass of literature on the New Perspective on Paul (NPP).  It is by no means an exhaustive collection, although I hope it is far more extensive than the average bibliography you’ll find at the end of lecture notes or even at the back of a textbook.  There are works that could appear under three or four different headings (esp. when they deal with Luther, Law, Justification and Judaism rolled into one!).  I have tried to stratify the various monographs and articles in a thematic way, but some works could easily overlap under different headings.  I have also cited only a handful of materials available on the internet and I limited my selection to works which I deem to be significant to the on-going debate.  A fuller referencing of electronic materials is conveniently catalogued on the ‘Paul Page’.  My thanks to Mark Mattison for posting this bibliography on his webpage and I hope it benefits students and scholars alike.

 

 

Introductions to the NPP

 

Mark M. Mattison, “A Summary of the New Perspective on Paul.”http://www.thepaulpage.com/Summary.html.

James A.  Meek, “The New Perspective on Paul: An Introduction for the Uninitiated,” Concordia Journal 27 (2001): 208-33.

Jay E. Smith, “The New Perspective on Paul: A Select and Annotated Bibliography,” Criswell Theological Review 2.2 (2005): 91-111.

Michael B. Thompson, The New Perspective on Paul (Cambridge: Grove Books Limited, 2002). Probably the best introduction to the NPP in print. It is available on-line: http://www.grovebooks.co.uk/cart.php?target=product&product_id=16249&substring=

 

 

Antecedents to Sanders

C. G. Montefiore, Judaism and St. Paul: Two Essays (New York: Dutton, 1915).  The Judaism that Paul knew was a cold form of Diaspora Judaism and not Rabbinic Judaism.

G. F. Moore, “Christian Writers on Judaism,” HTR 14 (1921): 197-254.  Moore supposed that Christian writers are influenced by an apologetic desire to see in Judaism the antithesis to grace.

G. F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era (2 vols.; Harvard: HUP, 1927).

W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology (4th ed.;Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980 [1948]).

Samuel Sandmel, The Genius of Paul: A Study in History (New York: Farrar, Straus and Cudahy, 1958).

H. J. Schoeps, Paul: The Theology of the Apostle in the Light of Jewish Religious History(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961).

Preston M. Sprinkle, “The Old Perspective on the New Perspective: A Review of Some ‘Pre-Sanders’ Thinkers,” Themelios 30 (2005): 21-31.  Highlights antecedents to Sanders in works by G.F. Moore, K. Stendahl, George Howard, Joseph Tyson and N.A. Dahl.

Krister Stendahl, “The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West,” HTR 56 (1963): 199-215; repr. in Paul among Jews and Gentiles (London: SCM, 1976), 76-96.  The seminal article where Stendahl urges that Paul had a ‘robust conscience’ and did not wrestle with feelings of personal guilt like Augustine and Luther.

Works by E.P. Sanders

E.P. Sanders, “Patterns of Religion in Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: A Holistic Method of Comparison,” HTR 66 (1973): 455-78.

E.P. Sanders, “The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism,” in Jews, Greeks and Christians, eds. Robert Hamerton Kelly and RobinScroggs (Leiden: Brill, 1976), 11-44.

E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison in Patters of Religion (London: SCM, 1977).  The ground-breaking book by Sanders where he proposes his view of Palestinian Judaism as covenantal nomism: “Covenantal nomism is the view that one’s place in God’s plan is established on the basis of the covenant and that the covenant requires as the proper response of man his obedience to its commandments, while providing means of atonement for transgression” (p. 75); “The ‘pattern’ or ‘structure’ of covenantal nomism is this: (1) God has chosen Israel and (2) given the law.  The law implies (3) God’s promise to maintain the election and (4) the requirement to obey.  (5) God rewards obedience and punishes transgression.  (6) The law provides for means of atonement, and atonement results in (7) maintenance or re-establishment of the covenantal relationship.  (8) All those who are maintained in the covenant by obedience, atonement and God’s mercy belong to the group which will be saved.  An important interpretation of the first and last points is that election and ultimately salvation are considered to be God’s mercy rather than human achievement” (p. 422).

E.P. Sanders, “On the Question of Fulfilling the Law in Paul and Rabbinic Judaism,” in DonumGentilicum: New Testament Studies in Honour of David Daube, eds. C.K. Barrett, E. Bammel and W.D. Davies (Oxford: Clarendon, 1978), 103-26.

E.P. Sanders, “Paul’s Attitude Toward the Jewish People,” USQR 33 (1978): 175-87.

E. P. Sanders, Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People (Fortress: Philadelphia, 1983).

E.P. Sanders, Paul (Oxford: OUP, 1991).

Articles

Dale C. Allison, “Jesus and the Covenant: A Response to E.P. Sanders,” JSNT 29 (1987): 57-78.

C. K. Barrett, “Paul and the Introspective Conscience,” in The Bible, the Reformation and the Church: Festschrift for James Atkinson, ed. W. P. Stephens (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 36-48.

Paul Barnett, “Galatians and Earliest Christianity,” RTR 59 (2000): 112-29.

Markus Barth, “Jews and Gentiles: The Social Character of Justification in Paul,” JES 5 (1968): 241-67.

F. Best, “The Apostle Paul and E.P. Sanders: The Significance of Paul and Palestinian Judaism,”ResQ 25 (1982): 65-74.

Michael F. Bird, “When the Dust Finally Settles: Reaching a Post New Perspective Perspective,”Criswell Theological Review (forthcoming 2005).  Bird argues that Judaism was variegated and some strands emphasized grace and others obedience.  Merit theology (of some kind) does provide the backdrop for Paul’s formulation of law and justification.  However, Paul’s primary problem was not confronting legalism but trying to get Gentiles accepted as Gentiles by Jews into fellowship.

Michael F. Bird, “Justification as Forensic Declaration and Covenant Membership: A Via Mediabetween Reformed and Revisionist Readings of Paul,” (forthcoming in Tyndale Bulletin).  This article contends that justification includes God’s declaration of righteousness for believers and the inclusion of Gentiles into the people of God.  Paul confronts an “ethnocentric nomism” and espouses a view of justification whereby God “creates a new people with a new status in a new covenant as a foretaste of the new age”.

Brendan Byrne, “Interpreting Romans Theologically in a Post-‘New Perspective’ Perspective,” HTR94 (2001): 227-41.  Byrne considers himself within the NPP but still thinks that the NPP is theologically impoverished since it fails to adequately reckon with the intense exploration of human sin and alienation from God in the early part of Romans.

Brendan Byrne, “Interpreting Romans: The New Perspective and Beyond,” Interpretation 58 (2004): 241-52.

W. S.  Campbell, “The New Perspective on Paul: Review Article.” ExpT 114.11 (2003): 383-86. Review of Seyoon Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, Michael B. Thompson, The New Perspective on Paul, and Simon J. Gathercole, Where is the Boasting?.  Campbell thinks that these works are significant but fail to abolish or refute the primary contentions of the NPP.

D. A. Campbell, “The DIAQHKH from Durham: Professor Dunn’s The Theology of Paul the Apostle,”JSNT 72 (1998): 91-111.

Tim Chester, “Justification, Ecclesiology and the New Perspective,” Themelios 30 (2005): 5-20.  A critical, yet sympathetic reading of the NPP (see esp. his summary on the pros and cons of the NPP on pp. 18-19).

Michael Cranford, “The Possibility of Perfect Obedience: Paul and an Implied Premise in Galatians 3:10 and 5:3,” NovT 36 (1994): 242-58.

Michael Cranford, “Abraham in Romans 4: The Father of All Who Believe,” NTS 41 (1995): 71-88.

A. Andrew Das, “Beyond Covenantal Nomism: Paul, Judaism, and Perfect Obedience,” Concordia Journal 27 (2001): 234-52.

James E. Davidson, “The Patterns of Salvation in Paul and in Palestinian Judaism,” JRS 15 (1989): 99-118.

W. D. Davies, “Paul: from the Jewish Point of View,” in The Cambridge History of Judaism: Volume 3 – The Early Roman Period, eds. William Horbury, W. D. Davies and John Sturdy (Cambridge: CUP, 1999), 3.678-730.

Terence L. Donaldson, “Zealot and Convert: The Origin of Paul’s Christ-Torah Antithesis,” CBQ 51 (1989): 655-82.

James D. G. Dunn, “The New Perspective on Paul,” BJRL 65 (1983): 95-122.

James D. G. Dunn, “A Man More Sinned Against than Sinning? A Response to Carl Trueman,”http://www.thepaulpage.com/Response.html.  Dunn’s impassioned response against Trueman’saccusation that Dunn repudiates the reformers.

James D. G. Dunn, “Did Paul have a covenant theology? reflections on Romans 9.4 and 11.27,” InConcept of the Covenant in the Second Temple Period, Stanley E. Porter and Jacqueline De-Roo, eds., (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 287-307.

James D. G. Dunn, “Paul and Justification by Faith,” in The Road From Damascus, ed. Richard N.Longenecker (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997), 85-101.

James D. G. Dunn, “The Theology of Galatians: The Issue of Covenantal Nomism,” Pauline Theology Volume 1: Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon, ed. Jouette M. Bassler(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 125-146.

Pamela Eisenbaum, “A Remedy for Having Been Born of Woman: Jesus, Gentiles, and Genealogy in Romans,” JBL 123/4 (2004): 671-7-2.

Timo Eskola, “Paul, Predestination and Covenantal Nomism – Reassessing Paul and Palestinian Judaism,” JJS (1997): 390-412.

J. M. Espy, “Paul’s ‘Robust Conscience’ Re-examined,” NTS 31 (1985): 161-88.

J.V. Fesko, “N.T. Wright and the Sign of the Covenant,” SBET 23 (2005): 30-39.

Donald B. Garlington, “The New Perspective on Paul: An Appraisal Two Decades Later,” Criswell Theological Review 2.2 (2005): 17-38.

Robert H. Gundry, “Grace, Works, and Staying Saved in Paul,” Bib 66 (1985): 1-38.

Simon Gathercole, “After the New Perspective: Works, Justification and Boasting in Early Judaism and Romans 1-5,” TynBul 52 (2001): 303-6.

Simon Gathercole, “Early Judaism and Covenantal Nomism: An Article-Review,” EQ 76 (2004): 153-162.

Donald A. Hagner, “Paul and Judaism: The Jewish Matrix of Early Christianity: Issues in the Current Debate,” BBR 3 (1993): 111-130.

Donald A. Hagner, “Paul and Judaism: Testing the New Perspective,” in Revisiting Paul’s Doctrine of Justification (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2001), 75-105.

Donald A. Hagner, “Paul’s Quarrel with Judaism,” in Anti-Semitism and Early Christianity: Issues of Polemic and Faith, eds. Craig A. Evans and Donald A. Hagner (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993) 128-50.

James M. Hamilton Jr., “N.T. Wright and Saul’s Moral Bootstraps,” TrinJ 25 (2004), 139-55. Hamilton contends that Wright over-emphasizes the lack of merit theology in Judaism.

Daniel J. Harrington, “Paul and Judaism: 5 Puzzles.”  Bible Review 9 (1993): 19-25, 52.

Roman Heiligenthal, “Soziologische Implikationen der paulinischen Rechhfertigungslehre imGalaterbrief am Beispiel der ‘Werke des Gesetzes’. Beobachtunger zur Identitätsfindung einerfrühchristenlichen Gemeinde,” Kairos 26 (1984): 38-53.

Morna D. Hooker, “Paul and Covenantal Nomism,” in Paul and Paulinism: Essays in Honour of C.K. Barrett, eds. M.D. Hooker and S.G. Wilson (London, 1982), 47-56.

Bruce Longenecker, “On Critiquing the ‘New Perspective’ on Paul: A Case Study,” 96 ZNW (2005): 263-271.

Donald Macleod, “How Right Are the Justified? Or, What is a Dikaios?” SBET 22.2 (2004): 173-95.

Donald Macleod, “The New Perspective: Paul, Luther and Judaism,” SBET 22 (2004): 4-31

I. Howard Marshall, “Salvation, Grace and Works in the later Writings in the Pauline Corpus,” NTS42 (1996): 339–58.

J. Louis Martyn, “Events in Galatia: Modified Covenantal Nomism Versus God’s Invasion of the Cosmos in the Singular gospel: A Response to J. D. G. Dunn and B. R. Gaventa,” in Pauline Theology Volume 1: Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon, ed. Jouette M. Bassler(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 160-79.

Frank J. Matera, “Galatians in Perspective: Cutting a New Path through Old Territory,” Int 54 (2000): 233-43.

R. B. Matlock, “Sins of the Flesh and Suspicious Minds: Dunn’s New Theology of Paul,” JSNT 72 (1998): 67-90.

R. Barry Matlock, “Almost Cultural Studies? Reflections on the ‘New Perspective’ on Paul,” inBible/Cultural Studies: The Third Sheffield Colloquium, eds. J. Cheryl Exum and Stephen D. Moore (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 433-59.

Douglas Moo, “Excursus: Paul, ‘Works of the Law,’ and First-Century Judaism,” in The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 211-17.

C. F. D. Moule, “Jesus, Judaism, and Paul,” in Tradition and Interpretation in the New Testament: Essays in Honor of E. Earle Ellis for His 60th Birthday, eds. Gerald F. Hawthorne and Otto Betz (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1987), 43-52.

Nicholas Perrin, “A Reformed Perspective on the New Perspective,” WTJ 67 (2005): 381-89.

Charles L. Quarles, “The New Perspective and the Means of Atonement in Jewish Literature of the Second Temple Period,” Criswell Theological Review 2.2 (2005): 39-56.

Charles L. Quarles, “The Soteriology of R. Akiba and E.P. Sanders’ Paul and Palestinian Judaism,”NTS 42 (1996): 185-95.

Heikki Räisänen, “Legalism and Salvation by the Law,” in Die Paulinische Literatur und Theologie(FS S. Pedersen; Göttingen, 1980), 63-83.

Karl Olav Sandnes, “‘Justification by Faith’ – An Outdated Doctrine?  The ‘New Perspective’ on Paul – A Presentation and Appraisal,” Theology and Life 17-19 (1996): 127-46.

Thomas R. Schreiner, “Israel’s Failure to Attain Righteousness in Romans 9:30-10:3,” TrinJ 12 (1991): 209-20.

Christian Stettler, “Paul, the Law and Judgement by Works,” EQ 76 (2004): 195-215.

Mark A. Seifrid, “Blind Alleys in the Controversy over the Paul of History,” TynBul 45 (1994): 73-96

Mark A. Seifrid, “The ‘New Perspective on Paul’ and its Problem,” Them 25 (2000): 4-18.

Vincent M. Smiles, “The concept of ‘zeal’ in Second-Temple Judaism and Paul’s critique of it in Romans 10:2,” CBQ 64 (2002): 282-299.

Charles H. Talbert, “Paul on the Covenant,” RevExp 84 (1987): 299-313.

Charles H. Talbert, “Freedom and Law in Galatians,” Ex Auditu 11 (1995): 17-28.

Charles H. Talbert, “Paul, Judaism, and the Revisionists,” CBQ 16 (2001): 1-22.

Frank Thielman, “Paul as Jewish Christian Theologian: The Theology of Paul in the Magnum Opus of James Dunn,” Perspectives in Religious Studies 25 (1998): 381-87.

Carl Trueman, “A Man More Sinned Against than Sinning?  The Portrait of Martin Luther in Contemporary New Testament Scholarship: Some Casual Observations of a Mere Historian.” Unpublished paper presented at Tyndale Fellowship in Cambridge in 2000. http://www.crcchico.com/covenant/trueman.html.

Gerhard H. Visscher, “New Views regarding Legalism and Exclusivism in Judaism: Is There a Need to Reinterpret Paul?” Koinonia 18 (1999): 15-42.

Francis Watson, “Not the New Perspective,” Unpublished paper delivered to the British New Testament Conference 2001.  http://www.abdn.ac.uk/divinity/staff/watsonart.shtml.  An excellent article by a NPP turncoat!  Watson’s taxonomy of the NPP using the Calvinistic acronym TULIPS is humorous and worth reading, not to mention the reasons for his change of mind on the issue.

Stephen Westerholm, “The Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith in Romans,”Interpretation 55 (2004): 253-64.

N. T. Wright, “The Paul of History and the Apostle of Faith,” TynBul 29 (1978): 61-88  Synopsis: The debate between E Käsemann and K Stendahl about justification and salvation history may be resolved with the help of a new overall view of Pauline theology.  For Paul, the messiah represents his people, so that a crucified messiah means a crucified Israel. This provides Paul with his critique of Israel, aimed not at “works-righteousness” but at “national righteousness”. Paul has been distorted by various schools of NT criticism: this view combines their strong points while avoiding their weaknesses.

N.T. Wright, “Gospel and Theology in Galatians,” in Gospel in Paul: Studies on Corinthians, Galatians and Romans for Richard N. Longenecker, eds. L. Ann Jervis and Peter Richardson (JSNTSup 108; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 222–239.

N.T. Wright, “Two Radical Jews: a review article of Daniel Boyarin, A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity,” Reviews in Religion and Theology 3 (1995): 15–23.

N.T. Wright, “Romans and the Theology of Paul,” in Pauline Theology, Volume III, eds. David M. Hay & E. Elizabeth Johnson, (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 30–67. (Republished, with minor alterations, from SBL 1992 Seminar Papers, ed. E. H. Lovering, pp. 184–213).

N.T. Wright, “New Exodus, New Inheritance: the Narrative Substructure of Romans 3—8,” inRomans and the People of God: Essays in Honor of Gordon D. Fee on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, eds. S. K. Soderlund & N. T. Wright (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 26–35.

N.T. Wright, “The Letter to the Galatians: Exegesis and Theology,” in Between Two Horizons: Spanning New Testament Studies and Systematic Theology, eds. Joel B. Green & Max Turner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 205–36.

N.T. Wright, “Coming Home to St Paul? Reading Romans a Hundred Years after Charles Gore,”SJT 55 (2002): 392–407.

N.T. Wright, “Redemption from the New Perspective,” in Redemption, eds. S.T. Davis, D. Kendall, & G. O’Collins (Oxford: OUP, 2004).

Paul F. M. Zahl, “A New Source for Understanding German Theology: Käsemann, Bultmann, and the ‘New Perspective on Paul’,” Sewanee Theological Review 39 (1996): 413-22.

Paul F. M. Zahl, “E. P. Sanders’ Paul Versus Luther’s Paul: Justification by Faith in the Aftermath of the Scholarly Crisis,” St. Luke’s Journal of Theology 34 (1994): 33-40.

Paul F. M. Zahl, “Mistakes of the New Perspective on Paul,” Themelios 27 (2001): 5-11.

Monographs

Michael Bachmann and Johannes Woyke, Lutherische und Neue Paulusperspektive: Beiträg zueinem Schlüsselproblem der gegenwärtigen exegetischen Diskussion (WUNT 2.182: Tubingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2005).

John Barclay, Obeying the Truth: A Study of Paul’s Ethics in Galatians (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988).

Daniel Boyarin, A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity (California: University of California Press, 1994).

Gary W. Burnett, Paul and the Salvation of the Individual (Leiden: Brill, 2001).

W. S. Campbell, Paul’s Gospel in an Intercultural Context: Jew and Gentile in the Letter to the Romans (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1991).

D. A. Carson, Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility: Divine Perspectives in Tension(Atlanta: John Knox, 1981).

D. A. Carson, Peter O’Brien and Mark A. Seifrid, eds., Justification and Variegated Nomism: Volume 2 – The Paradoxes of Paul (WUNT 2.181: Tubingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2004; Grand Rapids,MI: Baker, 2004). Essays include: Stephen Westerholm (The “New Perspective” at Twenty-Five); Mark A. Seifrid (Paul’s Use of Righteousness Language Against Its Hellenistic Background); MartinHengel (The Stance of the Apostle Paul Toward the Law in the Unknown Years Between Damascus and Antioch); Mark A. Seifrid: (Unrighteous by Faith: Apostolic Proclamation in Romans 1:18-3:20); S. J. Gathercole (Justified by Faith, Justified by his Blood: The Evidence of Romans 3:21-4:25); Douglas J. Moo (Israel and the Law in Romans 5-11: Interaction with the New Perspective); MoisésSilva (Faith Versus Works of Law in Galatians); Peter T. O’Brien (Was Paul a Covenantal Nomist?); Robert Yarbrough (Paul and Salvation History); Timo Laato (Paul’s Anthropological Considerations: Two Problems); Peter T. O’Brien (Was Paul Converted?); D. A. Carson (Mystery and Fulfillment: Toward a More Comprehensive Paradigm of Paul’s Understanding of the Old and the New); Timothy George (Modernizing Luther, Domesticating Paul: Another Perspective); Henri Blocher (Justification of the Ungodly [Sola Fide]: Theological Reflections).

A. Andrew Das, Paul, the Law, and the Covenant (Peabody, MA:  Hendrickson, 2001).

A. Andrew Das, Paul and the Jews (Library of Pauline Studies; ed. Stanley E. Porter; Peabody,MA:  Hendrickson, 2003).

David A. DeSilva, An Introduction to the New Testament: Context, Methods & Ministry Formation(Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2004).  See section: “The ‘New Perspective’ on Paul and Early Judaism” (pp. 500-1) and “Criticisms of the ‘New Perspective’” (pp. 518-19).

Terence L. Donaldson, Paul and the Gentiles: Remapping the Apostle’s Convictional World(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997).

John W. Drane, Paul: Libertine or Legalist? (London: SPCK, 1975).

J. Ligon Duncan, Misunderstanding Paul? Responding to the New Perspectives (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2005).

James D. G. Dunn, Jesus, Paul and the Law: Studies in Mark and Galatians (London: SPCK, 1990).

James D. G. Dunn, The New Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays (WUNT 185; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2005).

James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Cambridge: CUP, 1993).

James D. G. Dunn and Alan M. Suggate, The Justice of God: A fresh look at the old doctrine of justification by faith (Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 1993).

James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Edinburgh: T& T Clark, 1998).

James D. G. Dunn, ed., The Cambridge Companion to St. Paul (Cambridge: CUP, 2003).

Brad Eastman, The Significance of Grace in the Letters of Paul (New York: Peter Lang, 1999).

 

Kathy Ehrensperger, That We May Be Mutually Encouraged: Feminism and the New Perspective in Pauline Studies (London: T&T Clark, 2004).

Neil Elliott, The Rhetoric of Romans: Argumentative Constraint and Strategy and Paul’s Dialogue with Judaism (JSNTSup 45; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990).

Timo Eskola, Theodicy and Predestination in Pauline Soteriology (WUNT 2.100; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1998).  See “Excursus: The Theory of Covenantal Nomism” pp. 52-60.  He raises three main points: (1) If legalism means that keeping the law affects eschatological salvation, then covenantal nomism is legalistic nomism by definition. (2) Covenantal nomism is a synergisticnomism. (3) Sanders reduces soteriology to the categories of sociology.

Don B. Garlington, The Obedience of Faith (WUNT 2.38; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1991).

Don B. Garlington, Faith, Obedience, and Perseverance: Aspects of Paul’s Letter to the Romans(WUNT 79; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1994).

Don B. Garlington, In Defense of the New Perspective on Paul: Essays and Reviews (Eugene, OR:Wipf & Stock, 2005).

John G. Gager, Reinventing Paul (Oxford: OUP, 2000).

Simon J. Gathercole, Where is the Boasting? Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul’s Response in Romans 1-5 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002).  Gathercole argues that Jewish boasting concerned both election and obedience to the law.

Michael J. Gorman Apostle of the Crucified Lord: A Theological Introduction to Paul and His Letters(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004).

Sigurd Grindheim, The Crux of Election: Paul’s Critique of the Jewish Confidence in the Election ofIsrael (WUNT 2.202; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2005).

Martin Hengel (with R. Deines), The Pre-Christian Paul (London: SCM, 1991).  “Although people nowadays are fond of asserting otherwise, no one understood the real essence of Pauline theology, the salvation given sola gratia, by faith alone, better than Augustine and Martin Luther. Despite this rigorous reversal of all previous values and ideals (Phil 3.7-11), Pauline theology – and therefore also Christian theology – remains very closely bound up with Jewish theology. Its individual elements and thought-structure derive almost exclusively from Judaism. This revolutionary change becomes visible precisely in the fact that its previous theological views remain present even in their critical reversal as a negative foil, and help to determine the location of the new position.” (p. 86).

Martin Hengel & Anne M. Schwemer, Paul Between Damascus and Antioch (London: SCM, 1997).

Martin Hengel and U. Heckel, eds., Paulus und das antike Judentum (WUNT 158; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1996).

Tom Holland, Contours of Pauline Theology: A Radical New Survey of the Influences on Paul’s Biblical Writings (Mentor, 2004).

David Horrell, An Introduction to the Study of Paul (New York: Continuum, 2000).

Philip H. Kern, Rhetoric and Galatians: Assessing an Approach to Paul’s Epistle (Cambridge: CUP, 1998).

Seyoon Kim, Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002).

Matthias Konradt, Gericht und Gemeinde: Eine Studie zur Bedeutung und Funktion vonGerichtsaussagen im Rahmen der Paulinischen Ekklesiologie und Ethik im 1 Thess und 1 Kor(Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2003).

Colin G. Kruse, Paul, the Law and Justification (Leicester: Apollos, 1996).

Kari Kuula, The Law, the Covenant, and God’s Plan: Paul’s Polemical Treatment of the Law in Galatians (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999).

Timo Laato, Paul and Judaism: An Anthropological Approach (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism 115; Atlanta: Scholars, 1995).

Bruce W. Longenecker, Eschatology and the Covenant: A Comparison of 4 Ezra and Romans 1-11(JSNTSup 57; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991).

Bruce W. Longenecker, The Triumph of Abraham’s God: The Transformation of Identity in Galatians (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998).

Richard Longenecker, ed.  The Road from Damascus: The Impact of Paul’s Converstion on His Life, Thought, and Ministry (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997).

I. Howard Marshall, New Testament Theology: Many Witnesses, One Gospel (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2004) 444-50.

Mark D. Nanos, The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Paul’s Letter (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996).

Mark D. Nanos, The Irony of Galatians: Paul’s Letter in First-Century Context (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002).

Mark D. Nanos, ed., The Galatians Debate: Contemporary Issues in Rhetorical and Historical Interpretation (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson 2002).  A collection of studies on Galatians by various authors regarding the historical, rhetorical and theological issues surrounding Galatians.

Eung Chun Park, Either Jew or Gentile: Paul’s Unfolding Theology of Inclusiveness (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 2003).

Alan F. Segal, Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee (New Haven: YUP, 1990).

Vincent M. Smiles, The Gospel and Law in Galatia: Paul’s Response to Jewish-Christian Separatism and the Threat of Galatian Apostacy (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1998).

Peter Stuhlmacher, Revisiting Paul’s Doctrine of Justification: A Challenge to the New Perspective(Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2001).

Thomas R. Schreiner, Paul: Apostle of God’s Glory in Christ (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2001).

Stanley K. Stowers, A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews, and Gentiles (New Haven: YaleUniversity Press, 1994.

Chris Vanlandingham, Judgment and Justification in Early Judaism and the Apostle Paul (Peabody,MA: Hendrickson, 2006).

Guy Prentiss Waters, Justification and the New Perspectives on Paul: A Review and a Response (P&R Publishing, 2004).

Francis Watson, Paul, Judaism and the Gentiles: A Sociological Approach (SNTS 56; Cambridge: CUP, 1986).

Stephen Westerholm, Israel’s Law and the Church’s Faith (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988).

Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The “Lutheran” Paul and His Critics(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003).  Revised and updated version of Westerholm’s 1988 monograph.

N. T. Wright, The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991).

N.T. Wright, Paul: In Fresh Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005).

Tom Wright, What St. Paul Really Said (London: Lion, 1997).

Tet-Lim N. Yee, Jews, Gentiles and Ethnic Reconciliation: Paul’s Jewish Identity and Ephesians(New York: CUP, 2005).

Kent L. Yinger, Paul, Judaism, and Judgment According to Deeds (Cambridge: CUP, 1999).

Justification

 

Michael F.  Bird, “Incorporated Righteousness: A Response to Recent Evangelical Discussion Concerning the Imputation of Christ’s Righteousness in Justification,” JETS 47.2 (2004): 243-75. This article contends that “union with Christ” rather than “imputation” provides the proper exegetical context for understanding justification in Paul.

Gerald Bray, “Justification: The Reformers and Recent New Testament Scholarship,” Churchman109 (1995): 102-26.

F. F. Bruce, “Justification by Faith in the Non-Pauline Writings of the New Testament,” EQ 24 (1952): 13-26.

Craig B. Carpenter, “A Question of Union with Christ? Calvin and Trent on Justification,” WTJ 64 (2002): 363-86.

D. A. Carson, “Reflections on Salvation and Justification in the New Testament,” JETS 40 (1997): 581-608.

D. A. Carson, “The Vindication of Imputation: On Fields of Discourse and, of Course, Semantic Fields,” in “Justification”: What’s at Stake in the Current Debates?, eds. M. A. Husbands & D. J.Treier (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2004),  46-78.

Charles H. Cosgrove, “Justification in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Reflection,” JBL 106 (1987): 653-70.

Martinus C. de Boer, ‘Paul’s Use and Interpretation of a Justification Tradition in Galatians 2.15-21,’JSNT 28 (2005): 189-216.

William J.  Dumbrell, “Justification in Paul: A Covenantal Perspective,” RTR 51 (1992): 91-101.

William J.  Dumbrell, “Justification and the New Covenant,” Churchman 112 (1998): 17-29.

James D. G. Dunn, “The Justice of God: A Renewed Perspective on Justification by Faith,” JTS 43 (1992): 1-22.

Philip Eveson, The Great Exchange: Justification by faith alone in light of recent thought (Kent, England: Day One Publications, 1996).

R. Y. K. Fung, “The Status of Justification by Faith in Paul’s Thought: A Brief Survey of a Modern Debate,” Themelios 6 (1981): 4-11.

Don B. Garlington, “A Study of Justification by Faith,” Reformation and Revival 11 (2002): 55-73.

Don B. Garlington, “Imputation or Union with Christ: A Response to John Piper,” Reformation and Revival 12 (2003): 45-113.

Robert H. Gundry, “The Nonimputation of Christ’s Righteousness,” in “Justification”: What’s at Stake in the Current Debates? eds. M. A. Husbands & D. J. Treier (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2004), 17-45.  Gundry defends a forensic view of justification wholly apart from notions of imputation.

Richard B. Hays, “Justification,” in Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (6 vols.;ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 3:1129-33.

Mark Husbands and Daniel J. Treier, eds., Justification: What’s at Stake in the Current Debates(Leicester, England: Apollos, 2004).

Eberhard Jüngel, Justification: The Heart of the Christian Faith (trans. Jeffrey F. Cayzer;Edinburg/New York: T&T Clark, 2001).

Jan Lambrecht and R.W. Thompson, Justification by Faith: The Implications of Romans 3:27-31(Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1989).  Justification signifies the universality of God’s love and marks the demise of boasting in ethnocentric particularism.

Eduard Lohse, “Theologie der Rechtfertigung im kritischen Disput – zu einigen neuen Perspektivenin der Interpretation der Theologie des Apostels Paulus,” Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen 249 (1997): 66-81.

Mark C. Mattes, The Role of Justification in Contemporary Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004).

Alister McGrath, Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification (Cambridge: CUP, 1986).

Alister McGrath, “Justification,” in DPL, eds. Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1993), 517-23.

Richard K. Moore, Rectification (‘Justification’) in Paul, in Historical Perspective, and in the English Bible: God’s Gift of Right Relationship (3 vols.; Edward Mellen Press, 2002).  Moore’s massive tome argues for a relational model of Paul’s doctrine of justification.

Stephen Motyer, “Righteousness by Faith in the New Testament,” in Here We Stand: Justification by Faith Today (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1986), 33-56.  All should note Motyer’s comment: “there is no doctrine of justification in the New Testament, rather, there is a doctrine ofrighteousness” (p. 34).

Peter O’Brien, “Justification in Paul and Some Crucial Issues of the Last Two Decades,” in Right with God: Justification in the Bible and the World (Carlisle: Paternoster, 1992), 69-95.

John Piper, Counted Righteous in Christ: Should We Abandon the Imputation of Christ’s Righteousness? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2002).  A robust defense of the traditional Reformed view of imputed righteousness.  The section on the pastoral significance of the doctrine of justification (pp. 27-39) is superb.  Also available electronically at the Desiring God website.

Joseph Plevnik, “Recent Developments in the Discussion Concerning Justification by Faith,” TJT 2 (1986): 47-62.

P. Sedgwick, “Justification by Faith: One Doctrine, Many Debates?” Theology 93 (1990): 5-12.

Thomas R. Schreiner, “Did Paul Believe in Justification by Works? Another Look at Romans 2,”BBR 3 (1993): 131-58.

Mark A Seifrid, Justification by Faith: The Origin and Development of a Central Pauline Theme(NovTSup 68; Leiden: Brill, 1992).

Mark A. Seifrid, Christ, our Righteousness: Paul’s theology of justification (NSBT 9; Downers Grove: IVP, 2000).

Mark A. Seifrid, “In What Sense is ‘Justification’ a Declaration?” Churchman 114.2 (2000): 123-36.

Mark A. Seifrid, “Paul, Luther, and Justification in Gal 2:15-21,” WTJ 65 (2003): 215-30.

Robert Smith, “Justification in ‘the New Perspective on Paul’,” RTR 58.1 (1999): 16-30.

Robert S. Smith, Justification and Eschatology: A Dialogue with “The New Perspective on Paul”(Doncaster: Reformed Theological Review, 2001).

Robert Smith, “A Critique of the ‘New Perspective’ on Justification,” RTR 58.2 (1999) 98-113.

George Vandevelde, “Justification between Scripture and Tradition,” ERT 21 (1997): 128-148.

N.T. Wright, “Justification: The Biblical Basis and its Relevance for Contemporary Evangelicalism,” in The Great Acquittal, ed. G. Reid (London: Collins, 1980), 13–37.

N. T. Wright, “Justification,” in New Dictionary of Theology, eds. Sinclair B. Ferguson, David F. Wright (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1988), 359-61.

N.T. Wright, “The Shape of Justification,” Bible Review 17 (April 2001): 8, 50. Available electronically at: http://www.thetpaulpage.com/Shape.html.  Wright’s response to Paul Barnett’s critique.

N. T. Wright, “New Perspectives on Paul.” Paper presented to 10th Edinburgh DogmaticsConference August 2003.  Available electronically at:http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_New_Perspectives.htm.

John Zeisler, “Justification by Faith in Light of the ‘New Perspective’ on Paul,” Theology 94 (1991): 189-94.

Law and Works of the Law

Martin Abegg, “Paul, ‘Works of the Law’ and MMT,” BAR 20.6 (1994): 52-55, 82.

M. G. Abegg, “4QMMT C 27, 31 and Works Righteousness,” DSD 6 (1999): 139-47.

M. G. Abegg, “4QMMT,” in DNTB, eds. Craig A. Evans and Stanley E. Porter (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2000), 709-11.

Martin G. Abegg, “4QMMT, Paul, and ‘works of the law’,” in Bible at Qumran: Text, Shape and Interpretation, eds. Peter W. Flint & Tae Hun Kim (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001), 203-16.

A. J. Bandstra, “Paul and the Law: Some Recent Developments and an Extraordinary Book,” CTJ25 (1990): 249-61.

Jacqueline C. R. de Roo, “The concept of ‘works of the law’ in Jewish and Christian literature,” inChristian-Jewish Relations Through the Centuries, eds. Brook W.R. Pearson & Stanley E. Porter (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), 116-147.

Robert Badenas, Christ the End of the Law: Romans 10.4 in Pauline Perspective (JSNTSup 10; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1985).

M. Bachmann, “4QMMT und Galaterbrief, MIQSAT MA ‛AŚEY HA-TORAH und ERGA NOMOU,”ZNW 89 (1998): 91-113.

Otto Betz, “The Qumran Halakah Text Miqsat Ma’ase Ha-Torah (4QMMT) and Sadducean, Essene, and Early Pharisaic Tradition,” in The Aramaic bible: Targums in Their Historical Context, eds. D.R.G. Beattie and M.J. McNamara (JSOTSS 166; Sheffield: SAP, 1994), 176-202.

C. E. B. Cranfield, “‘The Works of the Law’ in the Epistle to the Romans,” JSNT 43 (1991): 89-101.

James D. G. Dunn, “Works of the Law and the Curse of the Law (Galatians 3:10-14),” NTS 31 (1985): 523-42.

James D. G. Dunn, ed., Paul and the Mosaic Law (WUNT 89; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1991).

James D. G. Dunn, “Yet Once More – ‘The Works of the Law’: A Response,” JSNT (1992): 99-117.

James D. G. Dunn, “4QMMT and Galatians,” NTS 43 (1997): 147-53.

Joseph A. Fitzmyer, “Paul’s Jewish Background and the Deeds of the Law,” in According to Paul: Studies in the Theology of the Apostle (New York: Paulist, 1993), 18-35.

Lloyd Gaston, Paul and the Torah (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1987).

G. Hamerton-Kelly, “Sacred Violence and ‘Works of the law’,” CBQ 52 (1990): 55-75.

Hans Hübner, The Law in Paul’s Thought, trans. James C.G. Greig (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1984).

Veronica Koperski, What are They Saying About Paul and the Law? (New York: Paulist, 2001).

Hermann von Lectenberger, “Paulus und das Gesetz,” in Paulus und das antike Judentum, eds.Martin Hengel & Ulrich Heckel (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1991).

Bruce Longenecker, “Lifelines: Perspectives on Paul and the Law,” Anvil 1 (1999): 125-30.

Brice L. Martin, Christ and the Law in Paul (NovTestSup 62; Leiden: Brill, 1989).

Douglas J. Moo, “‘Law’, ‘Works of the Law,’ and Legalism in Paul,” WTJ 45 (1983): 90-100.

Douglas J. Moo, “Paul and the Law in the Last Ten Years,” SJT (1987): 287-307.

C. Marvin Pate, The Reverse of the Curse: Paul, Wisdom, and the Law (WUNT 2.114; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2000).

Heikki Räisänen, Paul and the Law (WUNT 29; 2d ed.; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1986).

Robert Keith Rapa, The Meaning of ‘Works of the Law’ in Galatians and Romans (New York: Peter Lang, 2001).

Peter Richardson, Stephen Westerholm, et. al., Law in Religious Communities in the Roman Period: The Debate Over Torah and Nomos in Post-Biblical Judaism and Early Christianity (SCJ 4; Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1991).

Calvin J. Roetzel, “Paul and the Law: Whence and Whither?” CBR 3 (1995): 249-75.

Thomas R. Schreiner, “Is Perfect Obedience to the Law Possible?  A Re-examination of Galatians3:10,” JETS 27 (1984): 151-60.

Thomas R. Schreiner, “Paul and Perfect Obedience to the Law: An Evaluation of the view of E. P. Sanders,” WTJ 47 (1985): 245-78.

Thomas R. Schreiner, “‘Works of the Law’ in Paul,” NovT 33 (1991): 217-44.

Thomas R. Schreiner, The Law and Its Fulfillment: A Pauline Theology of Law (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1993).

Moises Silva, “The Law and Christianity: Dunn’s New Synthesis,” WTJ 53 (1991): 339-53.

R.B. Sloan, “Paul and the Law: Why the Law Cannot Save,” NovT 33 (1991): 35-60.

Klyne Snodgrass, “Spheres of Influence: A Possible Solution to the Problem of Paul and the Law,”JSNT 32 (1988): 93-113.

Frank Thielman, From Plight to Solution: A Jewish Framework for Understanding Paul’s View of the Law in Galatians and Romans (NTS LXI; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1989).

Frank Thielman, Paul and the Law: A Contextual Approach (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1994).

Lauri Thurén, Derhetorizing Paul: A Dynamic Perspective on Pauline Theology and the Law (WUNT 2/110; Tübinen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2000).

Peter J. Tomson, Paul and the Jewish Law: Halakha in the Letters of the Apostle to the Gentiles(CRINT; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990).

Chris Alex Vlachos, “Law, Sin, and Death: An Edenic Triad? An Examination with
Reference to 1 Cor 15:56.” JETS 48 (2004): 277-98. Vlachos argues that the theological soil from which Paul derived his law problematic was the Genesis Fall narrative, where the serpent expropriated the prohibition to provoke the first transgression. Rather than being polemically motivated, or being precipitated in response to either legalistic or nationalistic tendencies, Paul’s concern with the law was thus driven by primeval considerations.

Michael Winger, By what Law?  The Meaning of Nomos in the Letters of Paul (SBLDS 128; Atlanta: Scholars, 1992).

N. T. Wright, “The Law in Romans 2,” in Paul and the Mosaic Law, ed. J. D. G. Dunn (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1996), 131–50.

N. T. Wright, “Paul and Qumran : When Paul shuns the ‘works of the law,’ is he referring to the very works commended by the Dead Sea Scroll known as MMT?” Bible Review 14 (1998): 18, 54.

Studies on Judaism in Light of the NPP

Fredrich Avemarie, Tora und Leben: Untersuchungen zur Heilsbedeutung der Tora in der frühen rabbinschen Literatur (TSAJ 55; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1996).

Fredrich Avemarie and Hermann Licentenberger, eds.  Bund und Tora: Zuratheologischen Begriffsgeschicgte in alttestamentlicher, frühjüdischer und urchristlicher Tradition (WUNT 135; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1996).

Friedrich Avemarie, “Erwählung und Vergeltung: Zur optionalen Struktur rabbinischer Soteriologie,”NTS 45 (1999): 108-26.

J. M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE – 117 CE)(Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996).

Gabriele Boccaccini, Middle Judaism: Jewish Thought, 300 B.C.E to 200 C.E. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991).

Marcus Bockmuehl, Jewish Law in Gentile Churches: Halakhah and the Beginning of Christian Public Ethics (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000).

D. A. Carson, Peter O’Brien and Mark A. Seifrid, eds., Justification and Variegated Nomism: Volume 1 – The Complexities of Second-Temple Judaism (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2001). Chapters include: “Psalms and Prayers (Daniel Falk); “Scripture-Based Stories” (Craig A. Evans); “Expansions of Scripture” (Peter Enns); “Didactic Stories” (Philip R. Davies); “Apocalypse” (RichardBauckham); “Testaments” (Robert A. Kugler); “Wisdom” (Donald E. Gowan); “Tannaitic Literature” (Philip S. Alexander); Targumic Themes (Martin McNamara); “Qumran” (Markus Bockmuehl); “Josephus” (Paul Spilsbury); “Philo” (David M. Hay); “Righteousness Language in the Hebrew Scriptures” (Mark A. Seifrid); and “Pharisees” (Roland Deines).

Karl T. Cooper, “Paul and Rabbinic Soteriology: A Review Article,” WJT 44 (1982): 123-39.

Ellen Juhl Christiansen, The Covenant in Judaism and Paul: A Study of Ritual Boundaries as Identity Markers (AGAJU 27; Leiden: Brill, 1995).

James D. G. Dunn, The Parting of the Ways Between Christianity and Judaism and Their Significance for the Character of Christianity (London: SCM, 1991).

M. A. Elliott, The Survivors of Israel: A Reconsideration of the Theology of Pre-Christian Judaism(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000).

Paul Garnet, “Qumran Light on Pauline Soteriology,” in Pauline Studies, eds. D.A. Hagner andMurray J. Harris (FS for F.F. Bruce; Exeter: Paternoster, 1980), 19-32.

Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “Comparing Paul and Judaism: Rethinking our Methods,” BTB 10 (1980): 37-44.

Martin Hengel and Roland Deines, “E.P. Sanders’ ‘Common Judaism’, Jesus, and the Pharisees,”JTS 46 (1995): 1-70.

Timo Laato, Paulus und das Judentem (Ǻbo: Ǻbo Akademi, 1991).  Laato recognizes Sanders’ contribution of undoing the caricature of Judaism as “legalism” but criticizes Sanders on various points: (1) Sanders fails to adequately appropriate the late nature of rabbinic materials; (2) Sanders does not recognize the difference between Paul and Judaism as being Paul’s pessimistic outlook on the human condition; and (3) Sanders is effectively arguing for a concept of “normative Judaism” which did not exist in the first-century (see esp. 65-82).

Jacob Neusner, “Comparing Judaisms,” History of Religions 18 (1978-79): 177-91.

Jacob Neusner, “E.P. Sanders Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People,” in Ancient Judaism: Debates and Disputes (Brown Judaic Studies 64; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1994).

Jacob Neusner, Judaic Law from Jesus to the Mishnah: A Systematic Reply to Professor E.P. Sanders (Atlanta: Scholars, 1993).

Jacob Neusner, “Mr Sanders’ Pharisees and Mine: A Response to E P Sanders, Jewish Law from Jesus to the Mishnah,” SJT 44 (1991): 73-95.

Jacob Neusner, “The Use of Later Rabbinic Evidence for the Study of Paul,” in Approaches to Ancient Judaism, ed. W. S. Green (6 vols.; Chico: Scholars, 1980), 2:43-63.

George W. E. Nickelsburg, Ancient Judaism and Christian Origins: Diversity, Continuity, and Transformation (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003).  See chapter 2 “Torah and the Righteousness of Life” and chapter 3 “God’s Activity on Behalf of Humans” which compares and contrasts the soteriologyof Christianity and Judaism.  Nickelsburg does not think Judaism can be characterized as “works-righteousness” and the main Christian differences between the two were Christological.

George W. E. Nickelsburg and Robert A. Kraft, eds., Early Judaism and its Modern Interpreters(SBL; Atlanta: Scholars, 1986).  See esp. “Introduction” pp. 20-21.

Stanley E. Porter and Jacqueline De-Roo, eds. Concept of the Covenant in the Second TemplePeriod (Leiden: Brill, 2003).

E. P. Sanders, The Jewish Law (London: SCM, 1990).

E. P. Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief 63 BCE – 66 CE (London: SCM, 1992).

J. J. Scott, “Crisis and Reaction: Roots of Diversity in Intertestamental Judaism,” EQ 64 (1992): 197-212.

Mikael Winninge, Sinners and the Righteous: A Comparative Study of the Psalms of Solomon and Paul’s Letters (ConBNT 26; Stockholm, Almqvist & Wiksell, 1995).

N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God (COQG 1; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992).

Commentaries that Engage the NPP

Brendan Byrne, Romans (Sacra Pagina; Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier, 1996).

William Dumbrell, Romans: A New Covenant Commentary (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2005).

James D. G. Dunn, Romans 1-8 (WBC; Dallas, TX : Word, 1988).

James D. G. Dunn, Romans 9-16 (WBC; Dallas, TX : Word, 1988).

James D. G. Dunn, Galatians (BNTC; London: A&C Black, 1993).

Don B. Garlington, Exposition of Galatians: A New Perspective/Reformational Reading (Eugene,Oregon: Wipf & Stock, 2002).

A. Katherine Grieb, The Story of Romans: A Narrative Defense of God’s Righteousness (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 2002).

R. David Kaylor, Paul’s Covenant Community: Jew and Gentile in Romans (Atlanta: John Knox, 1988).

Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians (WBC; Dallas, TX: Word, 1990).  Longenecker is sympathetic to works by Sanders but maintains that Paul’s opponents were still “nomistic” and “legalistic”, see esp. pp. xcviii, 86.

Frank J. Matera, Galatians (Sacra Pagina; Collegeville, MN: Litrugical Press, 1992).

Scot McKnight, Galatians (NIVAC; Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995).

Peter T. O’Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians (NIGTC; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1991).

Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans (BECNT; Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1998).  The draw back of this commentary is that in a subsequent work (Paul Apostle of God’s Glory in Christ) Schreiner has changed his mind from a transformative understanding of justification to a strictly forensic view.

Charles H. Talbert, Romans (Macon: Smyth and Helwys, 2002).

Ben Witherington, Romans: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004). Witherington approaches Romans through the grid of socio-rhetorical criticism and also attempting to offer a non-Reformed reading of the epistle.  The excursus on “A Closer Look: Righteousness in the LXX, Early Judaism and Paul” (pp. 52-54) and “A Closer Look: ‘Justified’ and Concepts ofCovenental Nomism” (pp. 102-7) are useful and represent a middle ground in regard to faith and obedience.

Ben Witherington, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998).

N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible (ed. Leander E. Keck; Nashville: Abingdon 2002), 10:395-770.

N.T. Wright, Paul for Everyone: Romans (London: SPCK; 2004).

On-Line Resources

Mark M. Mattison (Webmaster).  “The Paul Page: Dedicated to the New Perspective on Paul.”www.thepaulpage.com/.  This site has a range of articles, reviews and debates about the NPP. Authors hyperlinked in the site range in stature from established scholars to amateurs.  This is probably the best website for the NPP to date and is becoming frequently cited in books and articles.

Mark Goodacre (Webmaster).  “New Testament Gateway.”  http://www.ntgateway.com/.  By far the best New Testament resource site on the web.  Goodacre’s link to Pauline studies has a good selection of on-line Pauline publications available including those relevant to the NPP.  The site is regularly updated and it contains exclusively scholarly contributions.

Kevin Bush (Webmaster).  “NTWright Page.” http://www.ntwrightpage.com/.  This site contains a selection of writings and audio sermons from N.T. Wright, bishop of Durham.

Peter M. Head.  The History of the Interpretation of the Apostle.  This page is a part of a series of lectures on the history of the interpretation of the Apostle Paul.  See:

(1) “Lecture 7: E.P. Sanders and the New Perspective on Paul,”http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Lent_07_Handout.htm.

(2) “Lecture 8: Responses to the New Perspective on Paul.”http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Lent_08_Handout.htm.

(3) “Justification and Variegated Nomism: Cambridge Seminar for NT PhD students.”

http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/J&VN.htm.

2 Comments

  1. WOW! What an exhaustive resource list. Thank you very much!

  2. Ned R. says:

    man did you seriously read all these books? i hope there are pictures in it.

Don’t miss out

Get the latest The Paul Page news, content, and more—sign up today!