What do you think?
Rate this book
Justification and Variegated Nomism #1
Justification and Variegated Nomism. Volume I: The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism
Since 1977, the lines of inquiry developed by P.E. Sanders, James D.G. Dunn, N.T. Wright and others, have generated the 'New Perspective' on Paul. This perspective is profoundly tied to a certain reading of the literature of second temple Judaism which then in turn shapes what is now the dominant reading of Paul.This volume brings together an array of specialists to examine afresh the various corpora of the period. The authors analyze the highly diverse literature to determine to what extent 'covenantal nomism' is a suitable way for its categorization. The way this literature speaks of the relationship between God and Israel, election, sacrifice, the manner in which God's people are said to be rightly related to him, are all studied closely, within the genre distinctions and theological priorities of each corpus. Careful study is also devoted to 'righteousness' language.Volume 2 will apply the findings to Paul.
619 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 2001
2 people are currently reading
102 people want to read
About the author
D.A. Carson
338 books738 followersDonald A. Carson is research professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois. He has been at Trinity since 1978. Carson came to Trinity from the faculty of Northwest Baptist Theological Seminary in Vancouver, British Columbia, where he also served for two years as academic dean. He has served as assistant pastor and pastor and has done itinerant ministry in Canada and the United Kingdom. Carson received the Bachelor of Science in chemistry from McGill University, the Master of Divinity from Central Baptist Seminary in Toronto, and the Doctor of Philosophy in New Testament from the University of Cambridge. Carson is an active guest lecturer in academic and church settings around the world. He has written or edited about sixty books. He is a founding member and currently president of The Gospel Coalition. Carson and his wife, Joy, reside in Libertyville, Illinois. They have two adult children.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
March 1, 2016
Contrary to the claims of NPP proponents, who shrug this volume off without any significant interaction with its arguments (Wright, Justification, 74), the various contributes essays provide a devastating salvo against Sanders schema of Covenantal Nomism and its usefulness as a category to describe 1st century Judaism and to use as historical background for reading Paul and the New Testament.
This is not to say that Sander's model is shown be completely false, on the contrary, many of the contributors find some agreement between this model and their texts. The problem is that their is a lot of disagreement, a lot texts do not fit this model, and when texts do fit, the category of Covenantal Nomism is simply to broad to be useful, either for historical study or exegesis.
Despite claims to the contrary, Carson aptly summarizes the contributions within and comes to the same conclusion I found while reading the essays, "deploying this one neat formula across literature so diverse engenders an assumption that there is more uniformity in the literature than there is.... Covenantal Nomism as a category is not really an alternative to merit theology, and therefore it is no real response to it....In other words, does it not appear that Covenantal Nomism has become a rubric so embracing that it includes within its capacious soul huge tracts of work-righteousness or merit theology?"(544-545)
Two highlights were Seifrid's essay on justification language in the Hebrew Scriptures and early Judaism (415-442) and Deines' essay on Pharisaism and Sander's "Common Judaism" (443-504). Even here we see that the contributors don't all agree, but even with disagreement the conclusion of Carson is accurate. Seifrid disagrees with Bockmuehl (398-399, ft. 60, and 435-438) over the translation of a Hebrew word in 1QS 11:2-3, over all Seifrid's argument is more detailed and more persuasive.
The conclusions reached on righteousness language prove particularly damaging to the NPP perspective of N.T. Wright. The evidence of at least some individualism in the texts militates against Wright's absolute corporatizing of, at the very least, early Judaism and the implications he draws from there. Seifrid's work on righteousness language is damaging to Wright's already weak arguments for reading the language as "covenant-faithfulness" and "covenant status." Lastly, Carson addresses Wright's misconstrual of the belief in a continued exile (546-547, ft. 158) and the overall thesis of the book undermines and signs the death certificate for Wright's reconstruction of a Jewish background for reading Paul.
The arguments of this volume, in all there varied conclusions, show that 1st Century Jewish belief cannot be categorized under one shared pattern of religion, that of Covenantal Nomism, instead, it is a conglomerate of various similar, but different, practices and beliefs that display a variegated nomism. These papers cannot simply be dismissed because they come from a largely Old Perspective provenance.
This is not to say that Sander's model is shown be completely false, on the contrary, many of the contributors find some agreement between this model and their texts. The problem is that their is a lot of disagreement, a lot texts do not fit this model, and when texts do fit, the category of Covenantal Nomism is simply to broad to be useful, either for historical study or exegesis.
Despite claims to the contrary, Carson aptly summarizes the contributions within and comes to the same conclusion I found while reading the essays, "deploying this one neat formula across literature so diverse engenders an assumption that there is more uniformity in the literature than there is.... Covenantal Nomism as a category is not really an alternative to merit theology, and therefore it is no real response to it....In other words, does it not appear that Covenantal Nomism has become a rubric so embracing that it includes within its capacious soul huge tracts of work-righteousness or merit theology?"(544-545)
Two highlights were Seifrid's essay on justification language in the Hebrew Scriptures and early Judaism (415-442) and Deines' essay on Pharisaism and Sander's "Common Judaism" (443-504). Even here we see that the contributors don't all agree, but even with disagreement the conclusion of Carson is accurate. Seifrid disagrees with Bockmuehl (398-399, ft. 60, and 435-438) over the translation of a Hebrew word in 1QS 11:2-3, over all Seifrid's argument is more detailed and more persuasive.
The conclusions reached on righteousness language prove particularly damaging to the NPP perspective of N.T. Wright. The evidence of at least some individualism in the texts militates against Wright's absolute corporatizing of, at the very least, early Judaism and the implications he draws from there. Seifrid's work on righteousness language is damaging to Wright's already weak arguments for reading the language as "covenant-faithfulness" and "covenant status." Lastly, Carson addresses Wright's misconstrual of the belief in a continued exile (546-547, ft. 158) and the overall thesis of the book undermines and signs the death certificate for Wright's reconstruction of a Jewish background for reading Paul.
The arguments of this volume, in all there varied conclusions, show that 1st Century Jewish belief cannot be categorized under one shared pattern of religion, that of Covenantal Nomism, instead, it is a conglomerate of various similar, but different, practices and beliefs that display a variegated nomism. These papers cannot simply be dismissed because they come from a largely Old Perspective provenance.
October 2, 2014
I highly recommend this book for its bibliography. I also recommend this for anyone who wishes to understand the concepts of particular types of second temple literature. That said the structure/order of the book is lacking. This book is not for the faint of heart, because it is very boring at times. So at times one may need a break, but if you start, push through. In the end, this book is good and worth it for anyone who is studying Second temple Judaism.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews