What do you think?
Rate this book
Justification Reconsidered: Rethinking A Pauline Theme
Much has been written of late about what the apostle Paul really meant when he spoke of justification by faith, not the works of the law. This short study by Stephen Westerholm carefully examines proposals on the subject by Krister Stendahl, E. P. Sanders, Heikki R is nen, N. T. Wright, James D. G. Dunn, and Douglas A. Campbell. In doing so, Westerholm notes weaknesses in traditional understandings that have provoked the more recent proposals, but he also points out areas in which the latter fail to do justice to the apostle.Readers of this book will gain not only a better grasp of the ongoing theological debate about justification but also a more nuanced overall understanding of Paul.
112 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2013
40 people are currently reading
220 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 39 reviews
March 7, 2014
There was a young man named Tim. Tim was a curious theological reader who cut his teeth on Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology and was weaned on the pure milk of John Piper books. Tim loved to flaunt his ESV Study Bible at local coffee shops, and court young women who wore Chacos. Tim was an all-star amongst his friends, a veritable demigod for introducing them to such words like "Calvinism," "Complementarian," and "Supralapsarianism." He knew about Nestorius, Athanasisus, and Augustine. He was known to lament that too many people "prayed like Modalists." And he had aspirations of ultimately attending a good evangelical seminary like Southern Seminary or DTS.
However, something happened in Tim's "journey": he discovered a gem in the quarry of biblical scholarship. What was this gem? First, it was NT Wright's magisterial "Christian Origins" series, then followed by James D.G. Dunn's "Jesus, Paul, and the Gospels." Then, as if the bomb had finally gone off, Tim discovered E.P. Sanders' "Paul & Palestinian Judaism." That was it. Tim was gone. He traded his ESV Study Bible for the Book of Common Prayer, transferred from DTS to Duke Divinity School, and the Likes on his Facebook page are only "phenomenology," "Chvrches," and "Chemex (official)."
I see Tim from time to time. He's a pretty cool dude, but he seems kind of confused a lot.
Thankfully, the Tim's of this world can now accompany their readings of Krister Stendahl with Stephen Westerholm's newest, "Justification Reconsidered: Rethinking a Pauline Theme." Westerholm has written some other things on justification previously, but this book is helpful precisely because it is so short and gets straight to the point.
Westerholm manages to address several questions that have surrounded Pauline studies in the last 100 years in under 100 pages (what a feat!). Krister Stendahl, E.P. Sanders, N.T. Wright, James D.G. Dunn, Douglas Campbell are all discussed and interacted with such that the reader can walk away with at least a cursory understanding of the lay of Pauline terrain while still affirming the old "Lutheran" perspective. For that reason, it is a great book to give to the Tim's of the world. This, along with Tom Schreiner's "40 Questions on Paul and the Law," would accompany one another very well.
However, something happened in Tim's "journey": he discovered a gem in the quarry of biblical scholarship. What was this gem? First, it was NT Wright's magisterial "Christian Origins" series, then followed by James D.G. Dunn's "Jesus, Paul, and the Gospels." Then, as if the bomb had finally gone off, Tim discovered E.P. Sanders' "Paul & Palestinian Judaism." That was it. Tim was gone. He traded his ESV Study Bible for the Book of Common Prayer, transferred from DTS to Duke Divinity School, and the Likes on his Facebook page are only "phenomenology," "Chvrches," and "Chemex (official)."
I see Tim from time to time. He's a pretty cool dude, but he seems kind of confused a lot.
Thankfully, the Tim's of this world can now accompany their readings of Krister Stendahl with Stephen Westerholm's newest, "Justification Reconsidered: Rethinking a Pauline Theme." Westerholm has written some other things on justification previously, but this book is helpful precisely because it is so short and gets straight to the point.
Westerholm manages to address several questions that have surrounded Pauline studies in the last 100 years in under 100 pages (what a feat!). Krister Stendahl, E.P. Sanders, N.T. Wright, James D.G. Dunn, Douglas Campbell are all discussed and interacted with such that the reader can walk away with at least a cursory understanding of the lay of Pauline terrain while still affirming the old "Lutheran" perspective. For that reason, it is a great book to give to the Tim's of the world. This, along with Tom Schreiner's "40 Questions on Paul and the Law," would accompany one another very well.
April 10, 2015
It should be titled "The New Perspective on Paul's View of Justification Reconsidered." A great introduction to the major themes of men of like Stendahl, N.T. Wright, Sanders, Dunn, and others. Westerholm argues that while these men to varying degrees have helped us see Paul in new ways, the classic reading of justification by faith alone through Christ alone because we are wretched sinners is still the way to understand justification in Paul's letters. He is particularly strong on the idea that when Paul said "righteous" he did not mean "in the covenant."
One section was interesting. Westerholm notes that while Jews did believe in salvation by grace (often defined as covenantal grace) they did not have a strong doctrine of sin. Whereas Paul saw all men, including himself as wicked to the core and unable to do good outside of Christ, Jews saw themselves as being essentially good people whom God saved. It made me think about how important the doctrine of sin is our theology.
I would recommend this book to those who are looking for a quick, but pretty thorough, refutation of the NPP and others interpretation of justification in Paul.
One section was interesting. Westerholm notes that while Jews did believe in salvation by grace (often defined as covenantal grace) they did not have a strong doctrine of sin. Whereas Paul saw all men, including himself as wicked to the core and unable to do good outside of Christ, Jews saw themselves as being essentially good people whom God saved. It made me think about how important the doctrine of sin is our theology.
I would recommend this book to those who are looking for a quick, but pretty thorough, refutation of the NPP and others interpretation of justification in Paul.
June 26, 2024
This was a great read. The high points for me were chapters 2 and 5. In chapter 2, Westerholm engages with E.P. Sanders' claim that both for Judaism and for Paul, salvation was by grace. Westerholm argues that the statement requires a number of important qualifications (he lists 3) to be true, qualifications that actually highlight the differences in Paul's understanding of grace in contrast to his non Christian Jewish opponents. He demonstrates this, in part, by summarizing John Barclay's work on grace as a gift, which I found illuminating. In short, while these Jewish opponents did believe in salvation by grace, this grace had a works principle built in due to the fact that they did not have a Christian doctrine of sin. Westerholm writes, "it follows that humanity's predicament must be more desperate than Jews otherwise imagined." (p. 33)
Next, I appreciated Westerholm's discussion of "works of the law" and his grounding the meaning of that phrase, not in Paul's Jewish opposition, but in the law itself as a (impossible) mechanism for righteousness. He writes, "those who seek, in Paul's justification formula, the clue to 'what Paul finds wrong in Judaism' are as guilty of misconstruing Paul's argument as they are of caricaturing Judaism." (p. 80) I think he is very close here to the meaning of works of the law.
For all of its high points, there was much in the book I disagreed with. Even still, it is a great read and an excellent short book on justification in conversation with the so-called New Perspective on Paul (NPP). It's amazing to me how much ground Westerholm was able to cover in so few pages.
Next, I appreciated Westerholm's discussion of "works of the law" and his grounding the meaning of that phrase, not in Paul's Jewish opposition, but in the law itself as a (impossible) mechanism for righteousness. He writes, "those who seek, in Paul's justification formula, the clue to 'what Paul finds wrong in Judaism' are as guilty of misconstruing Paul's argument as they are of caricaturing Judaism." (p. 80) I think he is very close here to the meaning of works of the law.
For all of its high points, there was much in the book I disagreed with. Even still, it is a great read and an excellent short book on justification in conversation with the so-called New Perspective on Paul (NPP). It's amazing to me how much ground Westerholm was able to cover in so few pages.
April 7, 2018
"Reconsidering" and "Rethinking" aren't really accurate. Same ol' JF model.
September 21, 2019
I have great fondness for Westerholm and his approach to Paul, particularly as it relates to his doctrine of justification and the New Perspective on Paul. If you have read his earlier work, you will not be surprised by his basic line of argumentation in this book. It is a great summation of his previous scholarship on the NPP, although it does also contain some new insights. The book could be taken as a response to the NPP by looking at six different aspects of the NPP, using a representative scholar as his main interlocutor for that chapter.
Ch. 1: The Peril of Modernizing Paul. Krister Stendahl famously argued that Protestant interpreters of Paul had modernized Paul by reading Paul through the lens of Luther’s introspective conscience and his quest to find a gracious God. In response, Westerholm shows that those who responded to Paul’s message must have been concerned about how to be delivered from God’s wrath and accepted by God (e.g., 1 Thess 1:9-10). Ironically, Westerholm suggests, it is Stendahl rather than Luther who was guilty of modernizing Paul by reading Paul as if he were concerned only with the sociological problem of Gentile inclusion in the people of God.
Ch. 2: A Jewish Doctrine? E. P. Sanders contested the older Protestant caricature of Judaism as a legalistic religion devoid of any concept of divine grace. In response, Westerholm acknowledges that Sanders was right to correct that caricature by showing that Judaism did have a concept of grace. Nevertheless, Judaism’s understanding of grace was not as radical as Paul’s, as even Sanders himself admitted, since the Rabbis did not have a doctrine of the essential sinfulness of humanity. When Paul became convinced on the road to Damascus that a crucified and risen man was the Messiah, Paul concluded that he was crucified for our sins, and this in turn led him to a much deeper sense of humanity’s essential sinfulness and bondage to sin, much deeper than anything Judaism ever envisioned. A deeper awareness of humanity’s plight goes hand-in-hand with a more radical understanding of grace.
Ch. 3: Are “Sinners” All That Sinful? Heikki Räisänen claimed that Paul was inconsistent in his analysis of human sinfulness. On the one hand, Paul pulls no punches and declares that humans are in bondage to sin and utterly incapable of transforming themselves apart from grace. On the other hand, there are passages where Paul seems to take it all back, when he says that unbelievers, apart from grace, can do things that are morally good (e.g., Rom 2:14-15, 26-27; 13:1-4). Westerholm appeals to Augustine, Luther, and Calvin who understood Paul to be saying that while the unregenerate can do works that are externally good, they are not done from the right motive of love for God, and therefore are nothing more than splendid vices.
Ch. 4: Justified by Faith. This punchy chapter is devoted to N. T. Wright’s odd claim that the verb “to justify” in Paul means “to declare one to be a member of the Abrahamic family, God’s covenant people.” Westerholm does a quick word study of “righteousness” language in the OT and in Paul, and shows that the word is used frequently in an ordinary sense to designate the moral behavior that God requires of humans, and the verb is used to designate “to find innocent, to declare one to be righteous.” Paul’s usage, in a soteriological sense, has to do with God’s provision of righteousness for the unrighteous. When God “justifies the ungodly” he does so in a just manner because of the atoning death and righteousness of Christ imputed to those who, in themselves, are unrighteous. (I was influenced by Westerholm in making this very argument at length in my about-to-be-published dissertation The Righteousness of God.)
Ch. 5: Not By Works of the Law. James D. G. Dunn reinterpreted the phrase “the works of the law” (which Paul says don’t justify us) to mean only the boundary markers of circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, and the food laws that separated Jews from Gentiles. Here Westerholm takes aim at another key pillar of the NPP and shows that it is a misunderstanding of Paul’s point. When Paul says that we are not justified by the works of the law, he is not attacking a Jewish misuse of the law (turning it into a means of ethnic divisiveness to keep the Gentiles out of the people of God). Rather, he is pointing out that sinners are not able to perform the good moral deeds required by the law as given by God, and therefore the law cannot be the means of attaining righteousness before God. For fallen humanity, the law (though holy and good in itself) can only bring condemnation and a curse. Righteousness before God must therefore come by a different route – by faith in the crucified and risen Messiah.
Ch. 6: Justification and “Justification Theory.” Douglas Campbell wants to create a major paradigm shift in the interpretation of Paul’s theology, from a legal-justification paradigm to a radically different apocalyptic paradigm. He wrote a massive tome (1,218 pages!) titled The Deliverance of God arguing this point at length. Westerholm objects to the dichotomy that Campbell pushes. He rejects as Marcionite the claim that we must choose between a God who is good (the apocalyptic paradigm’s view of God) and a God who is just (justification theory’s view of God).
This is a great little book taking on the New Perspective on Paul. Westerholm shows that the Old Perspective still has life in it and cannot be dismissed as passé.
Ch. 1: The Peril of Modernizing Paul. Krister Stendahl famously argued that Protestant interpreters of Paul had modernized Paul by reading Paul through the lens of Luther’s introspective conscience and his quest to find a gracious God. In response, Westerholm shows that those who responded to Paul’s message must have been concerned about how to be delivered from God’s wrath and accepted by God (e.g., 1 Thess 1:9-10). Ironically, Westerholm suggests, it is Stendahl rather than Luther who was guilty of modernizing Paul by reading Paul as if he were concerned only with the sociological problem of Gentile inclusion in the people of God.
Ch. 2: A Jewish Doctrine? E. P. Sanders contested the older Protestant caricature of Judaism as a legalistic religion devoid of any concept of divine grace. In response, Westerholm acknowledges that Sanders was right to correct that caricature by showing that Judaism did have a concept of grace. Nevertheless, Judaism’s understanding of grace was not as radical as Paul’s, as even Sanders himself admitted, since the Rabbis did not have a doctrine of the essential sinfulness of humanity. When Paul became convinced on the road to Damascus that a crucified and risen man was the Messiah, Paul concluded that he was crucified for our sins, and this in turn led him to a much deeper sense of humanity’s essential sinfulness and bondage to sin, much deeper than anything Judaism ever envisioned. A deeper awareness of humanity’s plight goes hand-in-hand with a more radical understanding of grace.
Ch. 3: Are “Sinners” All That Sinful? Heikki Räisänen claimed that Paul was inconsistent in his analysis of human sinfulness. On the one hand, Paul pulls no punches and declares that humans are in bondage to sin and utterly incapable of transforming themselves apart from grace. On the other hand, there are passages where Paul seems to take it all back, when he says that unbelievers, apart from grace, can do things that are morally good (e.g., Rom 2:14-15, 26-27; 13:1-4). Westerholm appeals to Augustine, Luther, and Calvin who understood Paul to be saying that while the unregenerate can do works that are externally good, they are not done from the right motive of love for God, and therefore are nothing more than splendid vices.
Ch. 4: Justified by Faith. This punchy chapter is devoted to N. T. Wright’s odd claim that the verb “to justify” in Paul means “to declare one to be a member of the Abrahamic family, God’s covenant people.” Westerholm does a quick word study of “righteousness” language in the OT and in Paul, and shows that the word is used frequently in an ordinary sense to designate the moral behavior that God requires of humans, and the verb is used to designate “to find innocent, to declare one to be righteous.” Paul’s usage, in a soteriological sense, has to do with God’s provision of righteousness for the unrighteous. When God “justifies the ungodly” he does so in a just manner because of the atoning death and righteousness of Christ imputed to those who, in themselves, are unrighteous. (I was influenced by Westerholm in making this very argument at length in my about-to-be-published dissertation The Righteousness of God.)
Ch. 5: Not By Works of the Law. James D. G. Dunn reinterpreted the phrase “the works of the law” (which Paul says don’t justify us) to mean only the boundary markers of circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, and the food laws that separated Jews from Gentiles. Here Westerholm takes aim at another key pillar of the NPP and shows that it is a misunderstanding of Paul’s point. When Paul says that we are not justified by the works of the law, he is not attacking a Jewish misuse of the law (turning it into a means of ethnic divisiveness to keep the Gentiles out of the people of God). Rather, he is pointing out that sinners are not able to perform the good moral deeds required by the law as given by God, and therefore the law cannot be the means of attaining righteousness before God. For fallen humanity, the law (though holy and good in itself) can only bring condemnation and a curse. Righteousness before God must therefore come by a different route – by faith in the crucified and risen Messiah.
Ch. 6: Justification and “Justification Theory.” Douglas Campbell wants to create a major paradigm shift in the interpretation of Paul’s theology, from a legal-justification paradigm to a radically different apocalyptic paradigm. He wrote a massive tome (1,218 pages!) titled The Deliverance of God arguing this point at length. Westerholm objects to the dichotomy that Campbell pushes. He rejects as Marcionite the claim that we must choose between a God who is good (the apocalyptic paradigm’s view of God) and a God who is just (justification theory’s view of God).
This is a great little book taking on the New Perspective on Paul. Westerholm shows that the Old Perspective still has life in it and cannot be dismissed as passé.
February 3, 2015
I found this brief book on Paul's language when dealing with justification super helpful. Chapter 3, "Are "Sinners" All That Sinful" was by far my favorite. A gold mine of sorts.
June 4, 2020
Excellent little book. Westerholm does a fine job making sense and distinction of several prominent and influential recent proposals regarding Paul's doctrine of justification, all of which provide a challenge to the "Lutheran" understanding of Justification (the common heritage of Protestants since the Reformation). He then succinctly presents a challenge from Paul himself and the rest of the Bible as well to establish the superiority of the older position. To do this with as many authors as he does (Stendahl, Sanders, Räisänen, Wright, Dunn, Campbell) in 99 pages is of course one of the most severe limitations of this book. The only author you could contend receives adequate attention here is Paul himself--but that's the point. Regardless of how well you might consider each author to have been treated, Paul (who's writings alone among them are the church's infallible standard) is engagingly and thoroughly read, in light of and contra the others.
I am often interupted in my reading, and had to take care to know where I was when I resumed. Westerholm tends to take up the voice of the antagonists as he explains their viewpoint, and where nuance can sometimes be well burried (every falsehood being built of some part truth), I might have started back assuming I was reading Westerholm's position and getting confused. Back up, start again--the book is short enough to do this with little loss of time. For those who can sit and read a chapter--and they are short--this should not be a problem at all.
I appreciated Westerholm's ability to appreciate the insights of the antagonists where they are useful and can serve as a corrective (such as not *always* reading justification in exclusively individualistic terms).
I also appreciated the somewhat more Lutheran tone of Westerholm's understanding of the Law/Gospel dynamic. I have had a foot in that camp since Moo's presentation of a "Modified Lutheranism" in the Five Views book on that subject. (The other foot is in the dispensational camp. Neither of the three Reformed views appeals to me, despite one of them being the more popular among the particular brand of dispensationalism in which I was originally exposed to these questions). Most of my current readings and exposure on the topic is from among the Reformed, and so far wholly unpersuasive, so Westerholm's clarity on the issue is a breath of fresh air to me.
A few takeaways:
1. There is no basis for saying that a concern for the individual which is fundamental to the Reformation's understanding of these things ("How can I find a merciful God?") did not originate with Augustine. That it is an explicit concern in Scripture, and that it is a known concern in more ancient society can be easily enough established.
2. Paul's problem with works contra grace extends to *all* efforts to live holy lives and not merely to a supposed misuse of the Law of Moses.
3. "Righteousness" "never did, never will" (98) mean "membership in the covenant."
4. That Paul could speak both of man's inability to do what is good and his ability to do what is good is not a contradiction, an unconscious concession, nor a development in his thought. Properly understood, both are true and the statements are reconcilable. Further, the answer to the apparent dilemma delineated by the Reformers, though not stated by Paul or other Scriptures, has a high likelihood of being correct.
Thus he ends: "the doctrine of justification *means* that God declares sinners righteous, apart from righteous deeds, when they believe in Jesus Christ. Those so made righteous represent the new humanity, the people of God’s new creation (Rom 5:17–19)." (99)
I look forward to reading more from this author.
I am often interupted in my reading, and had to take care to know where I was when I resumed. Westerholm tends to take up the voice of the antagonists as he explains their viewpoint, and where nuance can sometimes be well burried (every falsehood being built of some part truth), I might have started back assuming I was reading Westerholm's position and getting confused. Back up, start again--the book is short enough to do this with little loss of time. For those who can sit and read a chapter--and they are short--this should not be a problem at all.
I appreciated Westerholm's ability to appreciate the insights of the antagonists where they are useful and can serve as a corrective (such as not *always* reading justification in exclusively individualistic terms).
I also appreciated the somewhat more Lutheran tone of Westerholm's understanding of the Law/Gospel dynamic. I have had a foot in that camp since Moo's presentation of a "Modified Lutheranism" in the Five Views book on that subject. (The other foot is in the dispensational camp. Neither of the three Reformed views appeals to me, despite one of them being the more popular among the particular brand of dispensationalism in which I was originally exposed to these questions). Most of my current readings and exposure on the topic is from among the Reformed, and so far wholly unpersuasive, so Westerholm's clarity on the issue is a breath of fresh air to me.
A few takeaways:
1. There is no basis for saying that a concern for the individual which is fundamental to the Reformation's understanding of these things ("How can I find a merciful God?") did not originate with Augustine. That it is an explicit concern in Scripture, and that it is a known concern in more ancient society can be easily enough established.
2. Paul's problem with works contra grace extends to *all* efforts to live holy lives and not merely to a supposed misuse of the Law of Moses.
3. "Righteousness" "never did, never will" (98) mean "membership in the covenant."
4. That Paul could speak both of man's inability to do what is good and his ability to do what is good is not a contradiction, an unconscious concession, nor a development in his thought. Properly understood, both are true and the statements are reconcilable. Further, the answer to the apparent dilemma delineated by the Reformers, though not stated by Paul or other Scriptures, has a high likelihood of being correct.
Thus he ends: "the doctrine of justification *means* that God declares sinners righteous, apart from righteous deeds, when they believe in Jesus Christ. Those so made righteous represent the new humanity, the people of God’s new creation (Rom 5:17–19)." (99)
I look forward to reading more from this author.
August 23, 2021
A page turner? That depends on what you're looking for. This is a read that is written well for a discipline where many are not as adept at word-craft. However, Westerholm is a clear, concise writer, and that shines in his work. The book is not a long read nor is it overly complex; it's a distillation, summation, and exposition of varying views on justification in the Pauline corpus.
My one area that I would differ is that Westerholm is not the most thoroughgoing Reformed thinker. What I mean is that he does not hold to a covenant of works or creation (he explicitly states there was no covenant before Noah), he does not go into more detail regarding the law written upon the heart (Rom.2:14-15; though he does briefly describe it), and he could have done a more extended description of traditional understanding of justification. Granted, his intent is to show different interpretations, defend traditional understanding, and dismantle opposing views; he does these fairly well. There's only so much he can do in a bit over 100 pages.
I'd recommend this to pastors, theologians, or those hearing about "new perspectives on Paul." Coming from a confessional Reformed and Presbyterian world, I can personally attest to the damage that is caused to doctrine from those who view "justification theory" as inherently wrong, 2nd Temple Judaism being a religion of grace instead of legalistic works (just read the Talmud to understand how wrong that is), or that Paul is seeking to bridge the divide between Jew-Gentile rather than man and God. It's a good starting point in understanding how pivotal justification is for a right formulation of doctrine, but there are more fleshed out works that have been written. Not a bad read for introductory material!
My one area that I would differ is that Westerholm is not the most thoroughgoing Reformed thinker. What I mean is that he does not hold to a covenant of works or creation (he explicitly states there was no covenant before Noah), he does not go into more detail regarding the law written upon the heart (Rom.2:14-15; though he does briefly describe it), and he could have done a more extended description of traditional understanding of justification. Granted, his intent is to show different interpretations, defend traditional understanding, and dismantle opposing views; he does these fairly well. There's only so much he can do in a bit over 100 pages.
I'd recommend this to pastors, theologians, or those hearing about "new perspectives on Paul." Coming from a confessional Reformed and Presbyterian world, I can personally attest to the damage that is caused to doctrine from those who view "justification theory" as inherently wrong, 2nd Temple Judaism being a religion of grace instead of legalistic works (just read the Talmud to understand how wrong that is), or that Paul is seeking to bridge the divide between Jew-Gentile rather than man and God. It's a good starting point in understanding how pivotal justification is for a right formulation of doctrine, but there are more fleshed out works that have been written. Not a bad read for introductory material!
July 18, 2017
I'm giving this book five-stars for what it is. It's not the end-all, be-all book on the doctrine of justification. It's a short take on recent controversies associated with the doctrine. It's accessible to lay readers, it's biblical, and it's full of common sense. Westerholm deals with more recent views on Paul, such as those of N. T. Wright and Douglas Campbell. He's clearly familiar with these author's large works and, though he doesn't dig deeply into them in this book, he shows how their views on justification falter and how the Reformers got the doctrine right. The church needs more of these books, works by capable scholars who know their stuff but can present relevant information in a concise way.
(Finished reading on July 23, 2015.)
(Finished reading on July 23, 2015.)
March 6, 2020
I really like Westerholm's overall approach towards interacting with other thinkers. He is always respectful in his disagreements, and is clearly "fluent" in the opposing arguments (unlike some other popular writers who wade into these waters....), and this tiny book is packed with an amazing amount of rich theological writing.
For those who want a clear overview of the "justification debate," then this is the place to go; I found it even more helpful than reading the full back-and-forth publications of Piper & Wright, for example. It's also the place to go for one of the most thoughtful defenses of the "old perspective," one that takes the NP seriously. For those who are into the weeds of these debates, this is a high recommendation.
For those who want a clear overview of the "justification debate," then this is the place to go; I found it even more helpful than reading the full back-and-forth publications of Piper & Wright, for example. It's also the place to go for one of the most thoughtful defenses of the "old perspective," one that takes the NP seriously. For those who are into the weeds of these debates, this is a high recommendation.
February 23, 2020
Great defense of the historic view of justification, particularly as regards the meaning of the word in Scripture and Paul's understanding of "works of the law".
In a longer book, I'd love to see how the positive contributions of the NP for within the traditional framework of salvation, covenant, law and faith. I do think we could learn about the community element without sacrificing the need for individual people to be made right with God.
In a longer book, I'd love to see how the positive contributions of the NP for within the traditional framework of salvation, covenant, law and faith. I do think we could learn about the community element without sacrificing the need for individual people to be made right with God.
November 12, 2023
Excellent book that goes contra the NPP. Some have stated that the NPP is no longer making the headlines, yet the false teaching of the NPP is in the air and lingering on the ground level. His exegesis of Galatians was right on! So this is a much needed read. I gave it four stars wishing that the author would make more explicit in its pages the perfect active obedience of the sinless Christ imputed to the sinner.
January 18, 2025
This book by Westerholm offers a critique of the new perspective on Paul. I found this book to be a very helpful critique of recent scholarship on Paul and makes a good case for why the reformers for the most part interpreted Paul in a biblically faithful way. I think this book is helpful to show you can interpret Paul using both old and new perspectives, you don’t need to choose one over the other.
January 10, 2018
Well written, concise offering on the place and meaning of Justification, not only with in the writings of Paul, but all of scripture. Great food for thought in conversation with other writers on Paul and his works.
August 15, 2019
Very well articulated argument. This book sheds light on the traditional Protestant view of justification as it relates to the "New Perspective" arguments, and does a great job examining and defining both sides of the coin and presenting an argument for one side based on the evidence.
August 8, 2020
A clear introduction to the New Perspective on Paul (NPP) controversy from a conservative writer. He gives an overview of E.P. Sanders and N.T. Wright and then defends the historical view of Paul on justification. I will reference it in the future.
November 19, 2022
Second time readings this (first time ca. 2015). Westerholm engages the New Perspective on Paul from a largely traditional Lutheran perspective. He represents various proponents and major texts of the NPP fairly and engages them well. This books is also elegantly written.
July 17, 2018
Westerholm kills it. Super dope.
May 8, 2019
Great, helpful little book!
March 23, 2020
Wonderful (and short!) refutation of the NPP.
June 16, 2022
A very helpful, concise defense of the traditional understanding of justification and critique of the New Perspective on Paul.
June 30, 2022
A good overview/summary of the new perspectives on Paul.
July 30, 2023
Another fantastic book by Westerholm. Read Perspectives Old and New, then read this.
May 21, 2024
A magnificent defense of the traditional understanding of justification! A must read for anyone who wants to understand what the Scriptures clearly say about this doctrine.
September 5, 2024
Great response to the NPP.
March 15, 2017
An excellent, short rebuttal of the New Perspective on Paul and defense of the Reformed doctrine of justification. I especially liked the chapter on "Justification Theory": Westerholm shows how the moral law of God is not arbitrary but a natural expression of the goodness of God and creation. The "nutshell" summary at the end was very good as well.
August 18, 2014
An except from my full review here http://mydigitalseminary.com/justific...
At 112 pages, Justification Reconsidered serves as a great introduction to the discussion on justification and the New Perspective, and also a rebuttal of non-traditional claims. It would be an excellent book to assign for student reading, or even a launching pad for research papers. However, it should not be dismissed or underestimated as a mere introduction due to its brevity; this is an important contribution to scholarship on its own right. While only so much can be covered in a book this size, Westerhom's focus is pointed, his argumentation is tight, and he is able to pack a surprising amount of great content into relatively few pages.
At 112 pages, Justification Reconsidered serves as a great introduction to the discussion on justification and the New Perspective, and also a rebuttal of non-traditional claims. It would be an excellent book to assign for student reading, or even a launching pad for research papers. However, it should not be dismissed or underestimated as a mere introduction due to its brevity; this is an important contribution to scholarship on its own right. While only so much can be covered in a book this size, Westerhom's focus is pointed, his argumentation is tight, and he is able to pack a surprising amount of great content into relatively few pages.
May 8, 2015
Westerholm is always clear, and in this work, he is exceedingly concise (less than 100pp). However, this small work is tremendously helpful in orienting the modern debate on Paul's doctrine of justification and providing clarity on the apostle's intent. Logical and eminently biblical, Westerholm's critique of contemporary theories of justification (e.g. New Perspective on Paul) is devastating. If you are a NPP advocate, I believe you will be hard pressed to remain such after reading this work. If you are an "Old Perspective" advocate but are unsure of the force of NPP arguments, then this work will provide the needed reassurance that the historic view of justification is, on the whole, the biblical view.
June 5, 2015
This book is absolutely fantastic. Very short, but very erudite and phenomenally well argued, Westerholm deals with various New Perspective approaches to the doctrine of justification, and wonderfully assesses these perspectives in light of one another and the more traditional protestant perspective. Westerholm actually critiques all perspectives, old and new, but does a fantastic job of demonstrating that many aspects of the old perspective are not, as many New Perspective writers claim, only a Lutheran line, but are drawn from a careful reading of Paul's work. This is an absolute must read for anyone interested in the current state of Pauline scholarship from all perspectives.
April 20, 2015
It's a very tall order to understand the many scholarly attempts to reinvent the traditional understanding of Paul's doctrine of justification. These revisionist writings are typically lengthy, detailed and erudite. Who has the time to wade through all the material? Thanks to Stephen Westerholm, you can now get a broad overview in less than 100 pages along with a strong response from the traditional reformed perspective. This is just the tip of the iceberg, but a good place to start.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 39 reviews