Periodical Reviews -- By: Jefferson P. Webster

Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 171:681 (Jan 2014)
Article: Periodical Reviews
Author: Jefferson P. Webster


Periodical Reviews

By The Faculty and Library Staff of Dallas Theological Seminary

Jefferson P. Webster

Editor

“A New Perspective on the New Perspective,” J. D. G. Dunn, Early Christianity 4 (2013): 157-82.

Despite being around for decades, the so-called new perspective on Paul (NPP) remains misunderstood and an object of serious debate. Many who are considered part of this movement have significant differences with others who are also so labeled. To use “NPP” in this review is convenient but not intended to imply that this is a unified school or movement. Given this diversity, there is no one better to summarize many of its most important contributions than James Dunn, a prolific writer within this perspective and the scholar who coined the label “new perspective on Paul” in his 1982 Manson Memorial Lecture at Manchester University. This article is not a “new perspective on the new perspective” per se but rather a new (or fresh) and well-written summary of contributions this movement has made to Pauline studies. It provides a solid overview of aspects of the NPP that affect justification so that those interested can decide for themselves whether or not the perspective contributes to Pauline theology.

Dunn’s article focuses on the “new perspective on justification by faith,” which is timely in light of recent debates on this issue, seen most notably in the dialogue between John Piper and N. T. Wright (respectively, The Future of Justification, Crossway, 2007; Justification, IVP, 2009). Nevertheless, what it discusses provides an excellent introduction to the NPP more broadly.

Dunn begins by arguing that the NPP’s teaching on justification is not really new at all (p. 157). He states, “It is ‘new’ because the dimension of Paul’s teaching which it highlights has been largely lost to sight in more contemporary expositions, even though it was so central to Paul’s own formulation of the doctrine. It is ‘new’ because it gives a renewed emphasis to aspects of the historical situation, which were fundamental to that formulation and which should remain fundamental for our understanding of Paul’s gospel for today” (p. 157). Dunn argues that the NPP “does not pretend or think or want to replace all elements of the ‘old perspective’ ” (p. 157). This is an important point and not often understood by those with only minimal exposure to the debate. Dunn notes that “it is not necessary for the ‘new perspective’ to call into question what have traditionally been taken to be the central emphases of Paul’s doctrine” (pp. 157-58). Acceptance

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe

visitor : : uid: ()