Paul and Judaism at the End of History

by Matthew V. Novenson

The apostle Paul was a Jew. He was born, lived, undertook his apostolic work, and died within the milieu of ancient Judaism. And yet, many readers have found, and continue to find, Paul's thought so radical, so Christian, even so anti-Jewish – despite the fact that it, too, is Jewish through and through. This paradox, and the question how we are to explain it, are the foci of Matthew Novenson's groundbreaking book. The solution, says the author, lies in Paul's particular understanding of time. This too is altogether Jewish, with the twist that Paul sees the end of history as present, not future. In the wake of Christ's resurrection, Jews are perfected in righteousness and – like the angels – enabled to live forever, in fulfilment of God's ancient promises to the patriarchs. What is more, gentiles are included in the same pneumatic existence promised to the Jews. This peculiar combination of ethnicity and eschatology yields something that looks not quite like Judaism or Christianity as we are used to thinking of them.

Genres: Judaism, Religion, Christianity, History, Theology, Biblical Studies

324 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2024

Reviews

[Rachel]

Quite the read. I enjoyed his challenges to traditional interpretations of Paul and found the style rather pleasant and conversational. (It’s obvious he’s closer to my generation than the authors I usually read, but still eloquent.)

If the epithet “fast-paced” isn’t just for novels, that’s how I would describe this book.

[Viggo van Uden · Rating 5 out of 5]

In Paul and Judaism at the End of History (2024), Matthew V. Novensen presents a collection of essays exploring the apostle Paul within the context of Judaism. Novensen emphasizes that Paul was born a Jew and died a Jew, yet he has often been interpreted through a Christian lens, sometimes even in ways that position him as anti-Jewish. This paradox—between the Jewish identity of Paul and the predominantly non-Jewish perspectives of his interpreters—is central to Novensen’s investigation. He argues that the key to resolving this tension lies in Paul’s conceptualization of time and ethnicity. The book’s central aim, as stated by Novensen, is “to explore how Paul (…) thinks ethnicity and eschatology” (p. 20). Through this approach, Novensen demonstrates that Paul’s views on these matters significantly differ from those of his later interpreters.

Novensen elaborates on this through nine essays with chapters titled, among others, ‘Who Says Justification from Works of the Law?’, ‘Paul versus the Gentiles’, and ‘Liberty and Justice for All’. While some essays may resonate more strongly than others depending on the reader’s interests, the entire collection reflects a high level of scholarly rigor. Rather than serving as a handbook on Paul, this book functions as a theological and exegetical argument, positioning itself within the academic debate. Novensen engages critically with Pauline scholarship, offering well-reasoned positions that encourage reflection and engagement. Even if certain arguments do not persuade all readers, they can still appreciate the depth and precision of Novensen's reasoning

For me, chapters 2–4 stand out as the most compelling contributions. In chapter 2 (‘Paul’s Former Occupation in Ioudaismos’), Novensen examines the term Ἰουδαϊσμóς in Galatians 1:13–14. He argues that the verb ἰουδαΐζω (“to behave like a Jew”) and its nominalization Ἰουδαϊσμóς (“the act of behaving like a Jew”) must be understood within their historical context. Drawing from 2 Maccabees, he asserts that “Ἰουδαϊσμóς is the name not of an ancestral religion but of a cause, political movement, a program of activism” (p. 41). If translated as “the judaization movement,” the reference in Galatians becomes clearer. This has significant implications for interpreting Paul’s letter: Paul is not concerned with what modern scholars call “Judaism” but rather refers to his past involvement in a sectarian political movement known as Ἰουδαϊσμóς. Novensen further argues that this term cannot simply mean “Judaism,” as Paul’s reference to his former occupation implies a distinction from his continued engagement with his ancestral religion both before and after his apostolic calling.

Chapter 3 (‘Who Says Justification from Works of the Law?’) addresses the identity of those who purportedly advocated “justification from works of the law,” the view that Paul so strongly opposes. Novensen argues that Paul does not derive this phrase from the Tanakh, nor is there any clear historical evidence of anyone actually holding this position. While 4QMMT from the Qumran corpus appears at first glance to be an exception, a closer examination reveals that this text does not precisely reflect the doctrine Paul critiques. Novensen concludes that the concept of “justification from works of the law” is largely Paul’s own polemical construction. If we interpret Paul’s opposition to this idea as a broader critique of Judaism, we misunderstand the religious context of the New Testament. Paul’s Jewish contemporaries did not, in fact, hold to a doctrine of justification by legal works. This underscores, in my opinion, the importance of contextual exegesis in Pauline studies.

In chapter 4 (‘Paul versus the Gentiles’), Novensen challenges the common perception of Paul as standing in opposition to “Jewish Christianity”. He argues that Paul’s opponents in the circumcision controversy—those advocating proselyte circumcision—were not Jews, but recently circumcised Gentile proselytes. Based on textual evidence, Novensen suggests that these proselyte advocates are “foreskins by nature,” not “Jews by nature” (Rom. 2:27; Gal. 2:15). He supports this claim with references to Galatians 6:13 and terms like “incisions,” as well as corroborating evidence from early Christian sources. This argument is striking because it overturns the long-standing assumption that Paul’s opponents in the circumcision debate were Jewish. Novensen himself acknowledges the counterintuitive nature of this claim: “Surprisingly to us, perhaps, in the matter of the proselyte circumcision controversy, it was Paul versus the gentiles” (p. 110). Besides convincing me, this chapter exemplifies Novensen’s ability to challenge conventional wisdom and offer fresh perspectives through close textual analysis.

The above chapters stand out as particularly insightful, with Novensen’s argument regarding Gentile proponents of circumcision being especially compelling and thought-provoking. He successfully disrupts entrenched assumptions, returns to the primary sources while demonstrating a strong command of secondary literature, and formulates new conclusions based on careful analysis. While the remaining essays are equally rich and instructive, they may not be as immediately persuasive. Some arguments require further reflection. Nevertheless, the strength of Novensen’s book lies in his ability to engage the reader in critical theological discourse, encouraging them to carefully weigh the pros and cons. Whether one agrees with (some of) his arguments or not, Paul and Judaism at the End of History is a must-read for scholars and students of Pauline studies. The book challenges preconceived notions, encourages deeper engagement with primary sources, and situates itself firmly within scholarly debates. Novensen’s willingness to rethink established perspectives makes this work a compelling read for those interested in Pauline and New Testament studies. Highly recommended!

[Darcy · Rating 4 out of 5]

What a fascinating and thought provoking work! Though technical, Novenson is not dry. His prose and argument are compelling and clear. For me, the most significant aspects of his work are twofold. One, a decisive argument that dismantles the long influential perspective of F. C. Baur purporting a conflict between Peter and Paul, Palestinian and Hellenistic Christianity. Paul remained a thoroughgoing Jew. And his opponents were not Jewish Christians advocating for circumcision but Gentle Christians promoting Jewish proselytism. Two, though this particular argument is a bit more cumbersome, laced with extensive reference to rabbinic interpretations, the final movement of the book provides a profound and promising direction for understanding the Christian and the law.

[Colby Reese · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed reading this one. It feels as if he is trying to get as close as possible to a “Christian” reading of the text while still claiming to his radical “Paul within Judaism” perspective, which makes him more readable, more honest with textual detail, and more palatable over all. However… he is still wrong.

[Aaron Mattox · Rating 4 out of 5]

Agreed with about 1/3, disagreed with about 1/3, and I am still unsure about the rest. That said, this is a provocative read and one I will keep coming back to.