Paul and Judaism Revisited: A Study of Divine and Human Agency in Salvation

by Preston M. Sprinkle

Ever since E. P. Sanders published Paul and Palestinian Judaism in 1977, students of Paul have been probing, weighing and debating the similarities and dissimilarities between the understandings of salvation in Judaism and in Paul. Do they really share a common notion of divine and human agency? Or do they differ at a deep level? And if so, how? Broadly speaking, the answers have lined up on either side of the old perspective and new perspective divide. But can we move beyond this impasse?

Preston Sprinkle reviews the state of the question and then tackles the problem. Buried in the Old Testament's Deuteronomic and prophetic perspectives on divine and human agency, he finds a key that starts to turn the rusted lock on Paul's critique of Judaism. Here is a proposal that offers a new line of investigation and thinking about a crucial issue in Pauline theology.

Genres: Theology, Christianity, New Testament, Biblical Studies

256 pages, Kindle Edition

First published May 14, 2013

Reviews

[Bob · Rating 4 out of 5]

The New Perspective on Paul espoused by E.P. Sanders, J.D.G. Dunn, and N.T. Wright, each in somewhat distinctive ways, emphasizes the idea of continuity between the Apostle Paul and the Old Testament and Second Temple Judaism writers. These theologians oppose the idea that the Old Testament focused on salvation by works of the law while the New Testament teaches salvation by God's gracious initiative. They propose the idea of "covenantal nomism", that is that God initiates a covenant relationship with his people and obedience to the law or commands of God follows as a response of covenantal faithfulness to God's gracious work. The Apostle Paul's main contention was that under the New Covenant, God has extended that covenant to all peoples and that covenant faithfulness continues to be the appropriate response of recipients of this grace. The "works of the law" to which Paul refers are the "identity markers" of circumcision, and ceremonial and food laws that excluded Gentiles.

My point in this review is not to discuss or debate the New Perspective (which I hope I've adequately summarized) but to review Preston Sprinkle's recent work which takes a finer grained look at the contention of "continuity" between Paul and his various Jewish sources. First of all Sprinkle makes a distinction which he observes in Old Testament scripture between approaches to salvation that emphasize divine versus human agency. The latter he refers to as Deuteronomic and emphasizes that the blessings of the covenant depend on the human agency of keeping the law. The former he refers to as Prophetic which emphasizes a perspective he finds in the prophetic literature that emphasizes human inability to keep the law or even come to repentance and the initiative of God to restore Israel apart from these things. The prophetic prospective also emphasizes divinely empowered obedience to the law that comes from heart renewal. Sprinkle would contend that this is in continuity with Paul.

He then explores the Qumran and other post-Old Testament writings, looking at the issues of the work of the Spirit, pessimism about human ability to repent and keep the law, the basis on which people are declared right with God, and the issue of judgment according to works. While he finds some instances of a more Prophetic perspective (particularly in some Qumran hymns, and Pseudo Philo and the Testament of Moses), he finds that most take a Deuteronomic or mixed approach that emphasizes human agency in repentance and observance of the law.

What Sprinkle helpfully does then, is show that the contention of continuity between Paul and Second Temple Jewish sources needs to be nuanced. His extensive survey of this literature, which he often parallels with Paul, makes the discontinuities apparent. What I wonder about however in his use of the distinction between Deuteronomic and Prophetic perspectives is, has he created or sanctioned a discontinuity within the Old Testament canon, and is this warranted? He simply seems to accept and argue this discontinuity, or at least distinction without consideration of the implications thereof.

The great value in this work is its exploration of the Qumran and other Jewish writings of the Second Temple Period in the light of the New Perspective discussion. What he makes clear is much of this literature reflects an "obedience to the law" rather than strictly "covenantal nomism" perspective. These sources do not speak with one voice, and not all are in harmony with Paul.

[Lee Harmon · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of those books that you are going to love if you’re intrigued with this stuff (the New Perspective on Paul), and hate if you’re not. I ate it up. It’s a relatively hard read, even though the Greek language is kept to a minimum. Beginners in Pauline theology may feel overwhelmed, but more studied theologians will be captivated.

The question is, where did Paul get his ideas, and exactly what does he teach regarding salvation? Is salvation conditional upon works, or is it a gift by the grace of God? A quick scan will uncover a lot more works-based verses in the Pauline writings than you might think. Perhaps there are two instances requiring salvation: the initial inbreaking of the Kingdom, fulfilling the prophecies of acceptance by faith/grace, and the final judgment, in which the prize must be earned? Does that mean God’s gift incurs an obligation, and is that obligation tied to the works of the Law? What exactly is Paul’s hangup with the Law, anyway? Sprinkle admits that the one single verse that set him on this journey is found in the Law of Moses:

Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD. –Leviticus 18:5

After a review of the Old Testament’s two conflicting ideas about restoration—Deuteronomic, which requires human repentance, and prophetic, in which God’s promise is unconditional—Sprinkle gears up to the New Testament and Paul’s take on salvation: justification and human agency, the role of the eschatological Spirit, and anthropology. He compares Paul with the Qumran community, noting their similarities and differences. (There are some short comparisons with other Judaic writings, but the major focus is on the Dead Sea Scrolls.)

It’s worth noting that Spring is a devoted Christian who does not consider Qumran writings to be inspired. Thus, determining the true flavor of Paul’s message, especially where it contrasts other Judaic thinking, is of fundamental importance. The research is very scholarly and convincing, and the footnotes are legion and quite interesting.

Definitely recommended.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sprinkle does a good job bringing a fairly academic discussion to a more lay audience. His thesis is this: there are two primary strands of engagement of justification and obedience in the Old Testament. First, is the more Deuteronomic which calls God's people to obedience and expects them to have the capacity to respond in obedience. The second is the Prophetic, which has a more pessimistic view toward humanity's capacity to obey and looks toward a final justifying work of God. Paul's view of anthropology and justification definitively falls in the latter (Prophetic) camp. The question, then, is what was the understanding of Paul's Jewish contemporaries?

Sprinkle surveys the contemporary Jewish literature (primarily from Qumran) and determines that the literature leans toward the Deuteronomic, while having strands of Prophetic. Simply put, "Paul's emphasis on divine agency is not unparalleled, even if it is more intricately developed and filled out than others."

We're owed a real debt to Sprinkle's book on at least two counts: 1) his navigation of the polarized debate between those asserting a "New Perspective" on Paul and those holding up a more classical treatment of Paul -- Sprinkle manages to create a helpful space between the two sides; 2) the casting of Paul's dramatic Damascus road encounter with Christ and its impact on his anthropology and account of the justifying work of God.

[Lindsay John Kennedy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an excerpt from my full review here http://wp.me/p2YKx0-16d

While there are some smaller points where I disagreed with Sprinkle, or at least wasn’t fully convinced, I think on the whole his (fairly gentle) criticisms of the New Perspective are sound and carefully balanced. He successfully shows areas where Paul differed (though perhaps not as greatly as previously assumed) with the soteriology of Judaism of his day, but he also doesn’t rip Paul out of his world and time and force him into a modern context. This results in a very careful, nuanced book. As mentioned before, Sprinkle lets the facts speak for themselves, and doesn’t appear to force his conclusion onto the texts. Those who like their theology pre-packaged nicely and neatly will not enjoy this book, but those who want to closely examine the issues for themselves and have a patient and gentle guide, seeking to be unbiased in the process, will do well to pick up Paul and Judaism Revisited.

Many thanks to IVP UK for providing a copy of Paul and Judaism Revisited for review. I was not required to provide a positive review.

[Miss Polymath · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a great addition to the conversation of the New Perspective(s) on Paul. Sprinkle tackles the issue by identifying theological paradigms with which Jewish texts or writers viewed the restoration of Israel, called Deuteronomic and Prophetic motifs (basically man repents and God restores vs God unilaterally restores regardless of repentance). He seeks to investigate how the Apostle Paul and the Jewish writers agree and disagree based on which motifs each of them hold to in their Israel restoration theology.

While many things written in his book brought clarity, unfortunately, it brought up just as more questions as those it answered. How do the motifs relate to each other? Lindsay Kennedy sums up my questions better than I can:

"Is the OT contradictory; does it disagree with itself on how one is restored to God? As the prophets dwelt on Israel’s exile due to their unfaithfulness to the covenant they realized man was incapable of obedience, hence the Prophetic motif of restoration – God Himself will restore His people. Does this mean the Deuteronomic commands to repentance were in vain? Since the Prophetic scheme recognizes that the sinfulness of man is unable to achieve what the Deuteronomic commands, then why did God even command repentance in the Deuteronomic motif? This question sounds a bit like Paul, no? (Rom 7:7). Or should we see a closer relationship between the Prophetic and Deuteronomic, and if so, how does the relationship play out? Does God’s unilateral/Prophetic restoration cause the Deuteronomic to be fulfilled in the individual? In other words, are the conditional commands in Deuteronomy just bypassed in the Prophetic motif, or are they actually fulfilled?" (http://mydigitalseminary.com/paul-and...)

Even though Sprinkle book doesn't specifically address the implications of his research concerning the New Perspective of Paul issue, from this book it seems Sprinkle believes that because the Qumran writers did not share Paul's soteriology but that they were, for the most part, trying to please God by their own works. They weren't viewing their works in the specific western form mindset of "work your way to heaven", but viewed the same works-based-righteousness principle in terms of being born as an Israelite, following the Torah, and initiating national restoration by their behavior. In his own words from his blog on the issue, especially regarding the interpretation of Romans and Galatians:

"My only problem with this understanding of Paul and Judaism is this: it’s wrong. Having studied the original documents of Judaism for the last 10 years, I must say that while they were not robustly legalistic (merit mongers working their way to heaven apart from grace), they also weren’t as 'Calvinistic' as Paul (please excuse the anachronism). That is, on the whole, first-century Jews weren’t as hard core about God’s agency in salvation as Paul. Our beloved apostle believed that 'God justifies the ungodly' (Rom 4:5) and nowhere in first century Judaism do we see such a radical assertion (4 Ezra come close)."

and

"...although the [New Perspective on Paul] has very helpfully brought to light the importance of the Jew/Gentile issue in Paul, this should not be pitted against a more classic reading of Romans and Galatians. In other words, we need to distinguish between the unique and surprising content of justification by faith (Rom 4:4-6)—that God declares righteous his ungodly enemies—and its universal scope (Rom 4:9-16)—that this salvation is given to Jew and Gentile on the same basis. The 'Old Perspective' seemed to emphasize only the former, while the 'New Perspective' the latter. Both, to my mind, are beautiful and true, and do not mutually exclude each other."

(https://www.prestonsprinkle.com/blogs...)

It took me forever to read this book because it's not an easy to read and is pretty dry throughout, especially if you know nothing about its surrounding issues; however, it provides a lot of great information and I do recommend it if you're studying historical Jewish theology in-depth.

[Lee Irons · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sprinkle’s thesis, in a nutshell, is that the OT depicts two different models or paradigms for the restoration of Israel after the exile: a Deuteronomic model and a Prophetic model. The Deuteronomic model makes Israel’s restoration conditional upon Israel’s repentance and recommitment to keeping the law. The Prophetic model views Israel’s restoration as God’s unconditional and unilateral act in which God, by his Spirit, transforms Israel and causes her to become faithful. Sprinkle then uses these two paradigms as heuristic lenses to compare and contrast the soteriologies of Paul and of the Qumran sect. (In Chapter 8, he also brings in other early Jewish texts like Jubilees, the Psalms of Solomon, 4 Ezra, and others.)

The main question is: “Does humanity possess the unaided ability to initiate a return to God and obey his laws?�� (p. 128). The Deuteronomic model says yes, whereas the Prophetic model says no. Sprinkle argues that the Qumran texts are divided – the didactic texts follow the Deuteronomic model, but the hymnic texts (especially the Hodayot) follow the Prophetic model. Sprinkle also argues that Paul’s soteriology fits in with the Prophetic model.

Read this book if you want to get schooled in the ins and outs of Qumranian soteriology. Sprinkle added some wrinkles, nuances, and complications to my previous one-sided thinking. Before reading this book, I had focused too much on the Hodayot and so I had thought that the Qumran Community had an exclusively monergistic, predestinarian theology, without taking into account some of the other more “Deuteronomic” passages from the non-hymnic material.

Sprinkle has shown that the category of divine vs. human agency is an extremely important dimension of the continuities and discontinuities between Pauline and Jewish soteriology. However, I’m not sure that the “agency” rubric gets at the fundamental core of the difference between Paul and Judaism. That is important, to be sure, but I would say that the heart of the difference is over the source of righteousness before God -- does it come from doing the law (“the righteousness of the law”), or from the atoning/law-fulfilling work of Christ (“the righteousness of God/faith”). Of course, the agency question is part of this, but the Christological dimension needs to be highlighted more (which Sprinkle does mention at various points).

One final point, I appreciated Sprinkle’s interpretation of Romans 2:13 (pp. 186-191). That verse reads: “For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers who will be justified” (ESV). Sprinkle says that he finds more merit “in the slowly dying hypothetical view,” although he makes a slight modification to it in light of our post-Christ redemptive-historical situation. He writes: “I do not think Paul believes that ‘if someone does the required works, he or she will be righteous before God’ but since ‘no one keeps the law ... the only pathway to a right relation with God is faith in Christ.’” I agree and refer to this as “the empty-set interpretation.”

[John Kight · Rating 5 out of 5]

Paul and Judaism Revisited: A Study of Divine and Human Agency in Salvation by Preston Sprinkle is an exciting and refreshing investigation into the thought and theology of Paul as it relates to Second Temple Judaism. This book follows in the footsteps of Sprinkle’s previous work Law and Life: The Interpretation of Leviticus 18:5 in Early Judaism and in Paul (2008). In fact, much of the research and questions answered in Paul and Judaism Revisited arose out of the latter investigation. In both of these works, Sprinkle has shown with clarity the divergence of Pauline thought from that of Early Judaism and thus has provided a significant contribution to the ongoing conversation pegged by the New Perspective on Paul (NPP).

Paul and Judaism Revisited sets out “to compare soteriological motifs in Paul and Qumran in order to better understand how these two Second Temple communities understood divine and human agency in salvation” (p. 36). For Sprinkle, there appears to be no straightforward line of continuity between Paul and the Qumran communities concerning a singular soteriological motif. Moreover, as Sprinkle acknowledges, there doesn’t even appear to be a line of continuity within the Qumran community itself. This diversity adds to the complexity of understanding Paul and does much to undermine traditional and NPP soteriological claims. Sprinkle presents a portrait of Paul that is framed within a Prophetic Restoration structure rather than the Deuteronomic Restoration structure generally found in the Qumran communities.

Paul and Judaism Revisited: A Study of Divine and Human Agency in Salvation by Preston Sprinkle is an excellent book for anyone interested in Pauline thought concerning salvation, the NPP, Second Temple Judaism, and the intersection of any of these areas of study. Sprinkle has offered a fresh and up-to-date exploration of one of the most frequently traveled roads in biblical-theological studies today. While disagreement will assuredly come from those rooted within the NPP, the caliber of Sprinkle’s work cannot be denied, and his presentation should be praised. This is a book that will make you think long and hard about the external influences on Paul’s thought and theology, and provide grounds for reevaluation and consideration therein. As with all of Sprinkle’s books, this book comes highly recommended!

I received a review copy of this books in exchange for and honest review. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.

[Paul, · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a dry book. But it is filled with careful, nuanced scholarship on the New Perspective on Paul. Sprinkle examines Qumranic texts to see how to situate Paul within the various groups of first-century Judaism. He focuses on pessimism / optimism with regard to human capacity for righteousness, the work of the spirit of God, the role of works in judgment, and divine and human agency. The first and last prove to be critical components. The diversity of the Qumranic community makes generalization difficult. But, I think one can say that no community of early Jewish thought was willing to believe that God would justify the wicked. Paul's views on divine agency and human sinfulness are seen (especially in the hymnic literature of Qumran), but nowhere is there such an emphasis on those two aspects. The role of the Spirit of God is vastly larger in Paul's writings.
This was a very helpful work to place the New Perspective in perspective. Sprinkle's summary of the discussion in the first chapter was helpful. By broadening the scope of research and comparison, he showed that some of the earliest generalizations are untenable, and many of the rest need further proof.
However, this book does not really discuss the New Perspective, as such. Meaning that there is no discussion of what the theological impact of Sanders' beliefs were or what the implications of his own position are.

[David Haines · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting analysis and comparison of Paul's teachings and Qumran literature concerning Human and Divine agency in the justification of mankind. Well worth the read.
Review to come on my blog (philosopherdhaines.blogspot.ca).