What do you think?
Rate this book
An Anomalous Jew: Paul among Jews, Greeks, and Romans
Lively, well-informed portrait of the complex figure who was the apostle Paul
Though Paul is often lauded as the first great Christian theologian and a champion for Gentile inclusion in the church, in his own time he was universally regarded as a strange and controversial person. In this book Pauline scholar Michael Bird explains why.
An Anomalous Jew presents the figure of Paul in all his complexity with his blend of common and controversial Jewish beliefs and a faith in Christ that brought him into conflict with the socio-religious scene around him. Bird elucidates how the apostle Paul was variously perceived — as a religious deviant by Jews, as a divisive figure by Jewish Christians, as a purveyor of dubious philosophy by Greeks, and as a dangerous troublemaker by the Romans. Readers of this book will better understand the truly anomalous shape of Paul’s thinking and worldview.
Though Paul is often lauded as the first great Christian theologian and a champion for Gentile inclusion in the church, in his own time he was universally regarded as a strange and controversial person. In this book Pauline scholar Michael Bird explains why.
An Anomalous Jew presents the figure of Paul in all his complexity with his blend of common and controversial Jewish beliefs and a faith in Christ that brought him into conflict with the socio-religious scene around him. Bird elucidates how the apostle Paul was variously perceived — as a religious deviant by Jews, as a divisive figure by Jewish Christians, as a purveyor of dubious philosophy by Greeks, and as a dangerous troublemaker by the Romans. Readers of this book will better understand the truly anomalous shape of Paul’s thinking and worldview.
322 pages, Paperback
Published November 11, 2016
24 people are currently reading
86 people want to read
About the author
Michael F. Bird
87 books159 followersDr. Michael Bird (Ph.D University of Queensland) is Lecturer in Theology at Ridley Melbourne College of Mission and Ministry. He is the author of several books including Jesus and the Origins of the Gentile Mission (2006), The Saving Righteousness of God (2007), A Bird’s-Eye View of Paul (2008), Colossians and Philemon (2009), Crossing Over Sea and Land: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period (2009), and Are You the One Who is to Come? The Historical Jesus and the Messianic Question (2009).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
November 29, 2016
An Anomalous Jew, Michael F. Bird’s newly published addition to the field of Pauline scholarship, begins with the obvious: the Apostle Paul was a Jew. Paul was born into a Jewish family and spent his early years studying the Torah. As he grew older, he became a Pharisee, and according to both Luke’s description in Acts and Paul’s own words in Galatians, he worked actively to eradicate the young Christian movement before himself becoming a follower of Jesus.
In the introduction, Bird draws attention to the fact that, even as a Christ-believer working among the Gentiles, Paul expressed concern for his “kindred according to the flesh” (Rom. 9:3, NRSV) and affirmed the value of Israel’s election and covenants (p.2). In sum, the man was deeply Jewish. What makes the issue complicated, though, is that Paul also said some things that, as Bird puts it, “no Torah-affirming Jew could seemingly say” (p.3).
Exploring Paul’s Religious Identity
In the face of these tensions, Bird explains that Pauline interpreters are faced with some important questions: “Where in Judaism should we situate Paul? What kind of Jew was he? And how did he relate to contemporary Judaism as a Christ-believing Jew?” (p.8). Answering these sorts of questions is a daunting task to be sure, but Bird energetically takes them on. So, what should we call Paul? For some, like J. Louis Martyn and Love Sechrest, he is best described as “a former Jew” (pp.10-12). On the far other end of the spectrum, Mark Nanos and Pamela Eisenbaum would insist on calling Paul “a faithful Jew” (pp.22-23). Somewhere between these two extremes sits the category of “a transformed Jew,” which for Bird encompasses much of the work done by proponents of the “New Perspective on Paul” (NPP), authors like N.T. Wright and James Dunn (pp.12-19).
After selectively surveying the last hundred years or so of Pauline scholarship, Bird eventually settles on the characterization of “an anomalous Jew” as the most helpful, a term he adopts from John Barclay (though not without a few modifications) (p.26). Bird has a knack for taking an integrative approach to scholarship, attempting to retain the best parts of different Pauline schools while seeking to set aside their more problematic emphases. Hence, he explains to readers that there are elements that seem helpful in each of the surveyed approaches to Paul’s identity. For Bird, though, Paul’s “anomaly” is more foundational than his declaration of God’s good news to the Gentiles without requiring circumcision. Rather, it has more to do specifically with what Paul calls in Galatians the “revelation of Jesus Christ“:
[T]he anomalous nature of Paul’s thought consists of his apocalyptic interpretation of the Messiah’s death and resurrection, which forced him into a rereading of Scripture and into a different praxis that yielded a transformation of “common Judaism” whereby the story and symbols of Judaism were now redrawn around Jesus the Messiah and his followers, who constituted the renewed Israel of an inaugurated eschaton. (p.28)
The rest of the book puts flesh on the bones of this characterization by looking at a few anomalous aspects of Paul’s life and thought. There are chapters devoted to the meaning of salvation for Paul in relation to the rest of 2nd Temple Judaism, the nature of Paul’s apostolic mission to the Gentiles, and his posture towards the Roman Empire (p.29). Bird also wades into more contemporary debates about salvation-history vs. apocalypticism in Galatians, which allows him to critique some modern renderings of the “Apocalyptic Paul” and suggest that salvation-history and apocalyptic don’t necessarily have to be held in stark opposition to one another. Though we will unfortunately be unable to explore all of these topics in full detail, I hope that some valuable things can be learned by delving into a few of them.
Paul, Judaism, and Salvation
Traditional Protestant interpreters of Paul often see in his letters a deep and passionate critique of a Judaism legalistic and centered on works-righteousness. Bird points out that this type of reading reached its climax with the writings of Wilhelm Bousset in the 19th century and people like Strack-Billerbeck in the 20th century (p.32). For Bird, this conception of a purely legalistic Judaism is inadequate. He writes, “It is not hard to trace statements that strikingly emphasize God’s mercy and election of Israel, expressed chiefly in the covenant, as the efficacious force in salvation” (p.33).
The NPP rose to prominence (partly) in reaction to legalistic portrayals of Judaism. E.P. Sanders set the agenda in Paul and Palestinian Judaism with his portrayal of Palestinian Judaism as “covenantal nomism,” which Bird summarizes with the dictum “grace to get in and works to stay in,” though the obedience that maintains one’s position in the covenant is itself often seen as a response to the prior grace of God (p.37). In the years since the publication of Sanders’ book, responses to it—both positive and negative—have been many. One of the more legitimate criticisms is that Sanders overly-minimized the diversity of soteriological patterns in Palestinian Judaism in order to fit them all in the category of “covenantal nomism” (pp.37-39). Not all Jewish texts dealt with the dynamics of grace, covenant, and works in the same way. For Bird, there is “no single Jewish soteriology,” which means that it is “impossible to compress all narrations of the basis, agency, and scope of salvation in Judaism into a single esoteric descriptor like covenantal nomism” (p.38).
This is a point where I especially wish Bird had been able to engage with Barclay’s massive Paul and the Gift, especially since the term “an anomalous Jew” itself originates in Barclay’s earlier work. In Paul and the Gift, Barclay delves into the various dimensions (“perfections”) of grace. He nuances Sanders’ arguments by asserting that, “Grace is everywhere in Second Temple Judaism but not everywhere the same” (Paul and the Gift, p.6). Barclay goes on to argue that while Sanders looked mainly for evidence regarding Jewish belief in the priority of grace, Paul was relatively unique among Jewish writers in that he perfected the incongruity of grace (Paul and the Gift, p.320). Barclay’s taxonomy of grace is an elegant tool for helping scholars try to better discern how Paul resembled and differed from other voices in 2nd Temple Judaism, rather than merely demonstrating that he did.
What makes Paul “anomalous” for Bird when it comes to salvation and Judaism? Among other things, he believes that Paul demonstrates an uncommonly “strong anthropological pessimism” (p.41). Paul possessed a radical understanding of the severity of humanity’s plight, which led him to criticize the Law for being unable to deliver Israel and humanity from sin. Additionally, Paul portrayed the Torah as being (in some ways) temporary rather than eternal. Paul critiqued other forms of Judaism for looking “the Torah rather than to the Messiah for the revelation of God’s righteousness, for the reconciliation of the world, and for the renewal of creation” (p.68). Additionally, Bird suggests that Paul relativized the importance of his Jewish ethnic identity in light of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection (and the positioning of believers as “in Christ”) (p.53).
Apostle to the Gentiles and Jews?
Another topic addressed by Bird in An Anomalous Jew is the nature of Paul’s mission to spread the gospel among the nations. Paul is well-known as the “Apostle to the Gentiles.” However, Bird argues against the idea that Paul ever explicitly turned away from preaching the gospel to Jews when the chance arose. He characterizes the division of labor between Paul and Peter in Gal. 2:9 as being about “emphases rather than strict boundaries” (p.102). This is consistent with the earlier opinion of Martin Hengel that “It was never possible to draw a neat division between mission to the Gentiles and mission to the Jews in the church” (The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ, p.154).
Bird suggests that initially—based on evidence from the Pauline letters and Acts—Paul’s early time in Damascus, Arabia, and Jerusalem may have centered on preaching “primarily, though maybe not exclusively,” to other Jews (p.103). After he joined in with the Antioch church, Paul began working with a greater focus on Gentiles in Syria, Cyprus, and Asia, but even here Bird suggests that Paul continued to follow his normal pattern of starting with people associated with local Jewish synagogues. The “Antioch incident,” which is recounted in Galatians, played a significant role in directing Paul’s efforts towards more exclusively gentile environments:
The capitulation of the church of Antioch to pressure from the Jerusalem church to adopt a model of proselytism as a basis for table fellowship resulted in a split between Paul and others, with Paul retaining the “old Antioch” position. The subsequent result was that Paul focused thereafter more fully on Gentile converts and also attempted to socially insulate them from spheres of Jewish influence where they would not be pressured to judaize to the point of circumcision. (p.103)
So, in summary, what is Bird saying here? He isn’t saying that Paul was “apostle to the Jews” in the same way that Peter was. Rather, he is asserting that “While doors opened up among the Gentiles, they were never closed to the Jews” (p.104). And this, Paul’s continued openness to preaching to fellow Jews, even as he tried to insulate his Gentile converts from pressures to judaize, formed another anomalous aspect of Paul’s identity.
Paul and the Empire
In the book’s final chapter, Bird explores Paul’s relationship to the Roman Empire. Was the Apostle a strident anti-imperial activist? Or did he find the Roman political realm basically uninteresting? N.T. Wright, for instance, declares that “for Paul, Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not” (Paul: In Fresh Perspective, p.69). Seeing an anti-imperial dimension to Paul’s identity is plausible to Bird for a number of reasons. For one thing, Paul sometimes uses theological language that echoes rhetoric used throughout the Greco-Roman world to proclaim the success and triumph of the emperor (p.229). While Bird maintains that “Paul’s principle source for his theologizing is the Septuagint and Christian traditions,” he nevertheless thinks that Paul uses this language to tacitly critique the totalizing claims of Rome.
The evidence isn’t completely one-sided. There are also passages that give evidence for Paul’s willingness to shrewdly use of the benefits of the Roman Empire when possible. For example, Paul was willing to appeal to Caesar in order to escape imprisonment (Acts 25). It is also true that the “one explicit thing said about the state in Romans” (in Rom. 13) affirms the validity of Christian submission to ruling powers (p.217). In light of both the strengths and weaknesses of the discussion surrounding the anti-imperial perspective on Paul, Birds unsurprisingly ends up with a rather moderate position on the matter:
[A]lthough Paul’s thought and practice do not suggest a militant anti-Roman activism, he nonetheless engages in a not-so-subtle critique of the Roman socioreligious edifice because it stands opposed to the ultimate manifestation of the kingdom of God and the lordship of Jesus Christ. (p.206)
Conclusion
In An Anomalous Jew, Bird displays a striking familiarity with the literature of Pauline scholarship, whether that’s in regards to discussions between Old Perspective and NPP writers, or the somewhat more recent “Apocalyptic Paul.” Therefore the book ends up situating both Paul’s identity among Jews, Greeks, and Romans, and also contextualizing the voices of Pauline scholars in relation to one another
Alongside a number of other recent works, Bird’s careful and imaginative efforts here represent what I think may be a real step towards getting past the scholarly stalemates that have occurred in Pauline studies over recent years. Reading through the book’s pages, one can notice a real amount of influence by N.T. Wright—which is no bad thing. Bird is willing to criticize the excesses of scholars on both sides of the scholarly pendulum. It’s a shame that he was unable engage deeply with Barclay’s Paul and the Gift, but I think this book will nevertheless help spur on the ongoing discussion about the shape of Paul’s admittedly complex identity. It’s a sometimes dense, but very worthwhile read.
Disclosure: I received this book free from Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. for review purposes. The opinions I have expressed are my own, and I was not required to write a positive review.
In the introduction, Bird draws attention to the fact that, even as a Christ-believer working among the Gentiles, Paul expressed concern for his “kindred according to the flesh” (Rom. 9:3, NRSV) and affirmed the value of Israel’s election and covenants (p.2). In sum, the man was deeply Jewish. What makes the issue complicated, though, is that Paul also said some things that, as Bird puts it, “no Torah-affirming Jew could seemingly say” (p.3).
Exploring Paul’s Religious Identity
In the face of these tensions, Bird explains that Pauline interpreters are faced with some important questions: “Where in Judaism should we situate Paul? What kind of Jew was he? And how did he relate to contemporary Judaism as a Christ-believing Jew?” (p.8). Answering these sorts of questions is a daunting task to be sure, but Bird energetically takes them on. So, what should we call Paul? For some, like J. Louis Martyn and Love Sechrest, he is best described as “a former Jew” (pp.10-12). On the far other end of the spectrum, Mark Nanos and Pamela Eisenbaum would insist on calling Paul “a faithful Jew” (pp.22-23). Somewhere between these two extremes sits the category of “a transformed Jew,” which for Bird encompasses much of the work done by proponents of the “New Perspective on Paul” (NPP), authors like N.T. Wright and James Dunn (pp.12-19).
After selectively surveying the last hundred years or so of Pauline scholarship, Bird eventually settles on the characterization of “an anomalous Jew” as the most helpful, a term he adopts from John Barclay (though not without a few modifications) (p.26). Bird has a knack for taking an integrative approach to scholarship, attempting to retain the best parts of different Pauline schools while seeking to set aside their more problematic emphases. Hence, he explains to readers that there are elements that seem helpful in each of the surveyed approaches to Paul’s identity. For Bird, though, Paul’s “anomaly” is more foundational than his declaration of God’s good news to the Gentiles without requiring circumcision. Rather, it has more to do specifically with what Paul calls in Galatians the “revelation of Jesus Christ“:
[T]he anomalous nature of Paul’s thought consists of his apocalyptic interpretation of the Messiah’s death and resurrection, which forced him into a rereading of Scripture and into a different praxis that yielded a transformation of “common Judaism” whereby the story and symbols of Judaism were now redrawn around Jesus the Messiah and his followers, who constituted the renewed Israel of an inaugurated eschaton. (p.28)
The rest of the book puts flesh on the bones of this characterization by looking at a few anomalous aspects of Paul’s life and thought. There are chapters devoted to the meaning of salvation for Paul in relation to the rest of 2nd Temple Judaism, the nature of Paul’s apostolic mission to the Gentiles, and his posture towards the Roman Empire (p.29). Bird also wades into more contemporary debates about salvation-history vs. apocalypticism in Galatians, which allows him to critique some modern renderings of the “Apocalyptic Paul” and suggest that salvation-history and apocalyptic don’t necessarily have to be held in stark opposition to one another. Though we will unfortunately be unable to explore all of these topics in full detail, I hope that some valuable things can be learned by delving into a few of them.
Paul, Judaism, and Salvation
Traditional Protestant interpreters of Paul often see in his letters a deep and passionate critique of a Judaism legalistic and centered on works-righteousness. Bird points out that this type of reading reached its climax with the writings of Wilhelm Bousset in the 19th century and people like Strack-Billerbeck in the 20th century (p.32). For Bird, this conception of a purely legalistic Judaism is inadequate. He writes, “It is not hard to trace statements that strikingly emphasize God’s mercy and election of Israel, expressed chiefly in the covenant, as the efficacious force in salvation” (p.33).
The NPP rose to prominence (partly) in reaction to legalistic portrayals of Judaism. E.P. Sanders set the agenda in Paul and Palestinian Judaism with his portrayal of Palestinian Judaism as “covenantal nomism,” which Bird summarizes with the dictum “grace to get in and works to stay in,” though the obedience that maintains one’s position in the covenant is itself often seen as a response to the prior grace of God (p.37). In the years since the publication of Sanders’ book, responses to it—both positive and negative—have been many. One of the more legitimate criticisms is that Sanders overly-minimized the diversity of soteriological patterns in Palestinian Judaism in order to fit them all in the category of “covenantal nomism” (pp.37-39). Not all Jewish texts dealt with the dynamics of grace, covenant, and works in the same way. For Bird, there is “no single Jewish soteriology,” which means that it is “impossible to compress all narrations of the basis, agency, and scope of salvation in Judaism into a single esoteric descriptor like covenantal nomism” (p.38).
This is a point where I especially wish Bird had been able to engage with Barclay’s massive Paul and the Gift, especially since the term “an anomalous Jew” itself originates in Barclay’s earlier work. In Paul and the Gift, Barclay delves into the various dimensions (“perfections”) of grace. He nuances Sanders’ arguments by asserting that, “Grace is everywhere in Second Temple Judaism but not everywhere the same” (Paul and the Gift, p.6). Barclay goes on to argue that while Sanders looked mainly for evidence regarding Jewish belief in the priority of grace, Paul was relatively unique among Jewish writers in that he perfected the incongruity of grace (Paul and the Gift, p.320). Barclay’s taxonomy of grace is an elegant tool for helping scholars try to better discern how Paul resembled and differed from other voices in 2nd Temple Judaism, rather than merely demonstrating that he did.
What makes Paul “anomalous” for Bird when it comes to salvation and Judaism? Among other things, he believes that Paul demonstrates an uncommonly “strong anthropological pessimism” (p.41). Paul possessed a radical understanding of the severity of humanity’s plight, which led him to criticize the Law for being unable to deliver Israel and humanity from sin. Additionally, Paul portrayed the Torah as being (in some ways) temporary rather than eternal. Paul critiqued other forms of Judaism for looking “the Torah rather than to the Messiah for the revelation of God’s righteousness, for the reconciliation of the world, and for the renewal of creation” (p.68). Additionally, Bird suggests that Paul relativized the importance of his Jewish ethnic identity in light of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection (and the positioning of believers as “in Christ”) (p.53).
Apostle to the Gentiles and Jews?
Another topic addressed by Bird in An Anomalous Jew is the nature of Paul’s mission to spread the gospel among the nations. Paul is well-known as the “Apostle to the Gentiles.” However, Bird argues against the idea that Paul ever explicitly turned away from preaching the gospel to Jews when the chance arose. He characterizes the division of labor between Paul and Peter in Gal. 2:9 as being about “emphases rather than strict boundaries” (p.102). This is consistent with the earlier opinion of Martin Hengel that “It was never possible to draw a neat division between mission to the Gentiles and mission to the Jews in the church” (The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ, p.154).
Bird suggests that initially—based on evidence from the Pauline letters and Acts—Paul’s early time in Damascus, Arabia, and Jerusalem may have centered on preaching “primarily, though maybe not exclusively,” to other Jews (p.103). After he joined in with the Antioch church, Paul began working with a greater focus on Gentiles in Syria, Cyprus, and Asia, but even here Bird suggests that Paul continued to follow his normal pattern of starting with people associated with local Jewish synagogues. The “Antioch incident,” which is recounted in Galatians, played a significant role in directing Paul’s efforts towards more exclusively gentile environments:
The capitulation of the church of Antioch to pressure from the Jerusalem church to adopt a model of proselytism as a basis for table fellowship resulted in a split between Paul and others, with Paul retaining the “old Antioch” position. The subsequent result was that Paul focused thereafter more fully on Gentile converts and also attempted to socially insulate them from spheres of Jewish influence where they would not be pressured to judaize to the point of circumcision. (p.103)
So, in summary, what is Bird saying here? He isn’t saying that Paul was “apostle to the Jews” in the same way that Peter was. Rather, he is asserting that “While doors opened up among the Gentiles, they were never closed to the Jews” (p.104). And this, Paul’s continued openness to preaching to fellow Jews, even as he tried to insulate his Gentile converts from pressures to judaize, formed another anomalous aspect of Paul’s identity.
Paul and the Empire
In the book’s final chapter, Bird explores Paul’s relationship to the Roman Empire. Was the Apostle a strident anti-imperial activist? Or did he find the Roman political realm basically uninteresting? N.T. Wright, for instance, declares that “for Paul, Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not” (Paul: In Fresh Perspective, p.69). Seeing an anti-imperial dimension to Paul’s identity is plausible to Bird for a number of reasons. For one thing, Paul sometimes uses theological language that echoes rhetoric used throughout the Greco-Roman world to proclaim the success and triumph of the emperor (p.229). While Bird maintains that “Paul’s principle source for his theologizing is the Septuagint and Christian traditions,” he nevertheless thinks that Paul uses this language to tacitly critique the totalizing claims of Rome.
The evidence isn’t completely one-sided. There are also passages that give evidence for Paul’s willingness to shrewdly use of the benefits of the Roman Empire when possible. For example, Paul was willing to appeal to Caesar in order to escape imprisonment (Acts 25). It is also true that the “one explicit thing said about the state in Romans” (in Rom. 13) affirms the validity of Christian submission to ruling powers (p.217). In light of both the strengths and weaknesses of the discussion surrounding the anti-imperial perspective on Paul, Birds unsurprisingly ends up with a rather moderate position on the matter:
[A]lthough Paul’s thought and practice do not suggest a militant anti-Roman activism, he nonetheless engages in a not-so-subtle critique of the Roman socioreligious edifice because it stands opposed to the ultimate manifestation of the kingdom of God and the lordship of Jesus Christ. (p.206)
Conclusion
In An Anomalous Jew, Bird displays a striking familiarity with the literature of Pauline scholarship, whether that’s in regards to discussions between Old Perspective and NPP writers, or the somewhat more recent “Apocalyptic Paul.” Therefore the book ends up situating both Paul’s identity among Jews, Greeks, and Romans, and also contextualizing the voices of Pauline scholars in relation to one another
Alongside a number of other recent works, Bird’s careful and imaginative efforts here represent what I think may be a real step towards getting past the scholarly stalemates that have occurred in Pauline studies over recent years. Reading through the book’s pages, one can notice a real amount of influence by N.T. Wright—which is no bad thing. Bird is willing to criticize the excesses of scholars on both sides of the scholarly pendulum. It’s a shame that he was unable engage deeply with Barclay’s Paul and the Gift, but I think this book will nevertheless help spur on the ongoing discussion about the shape of Paul’s admittedly complex identity. It’s a sometimes dense, but very worthwhile read.
Disclosure: I received this book free from Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. for review purposes. The opinions I have expressed are my own, and I was not required to write a positive review.
June 10, 2021
A lot of "big books on Paul" have been published in the past twenty years by leading Pauline scholars. Bird does the reader a service by accounting for a lot of important debates without exhausting every angle, making this book both helpful and readable.
An important aspect of interpreting the content of Paul's letters overall is solving the puzzles of Paul's disposition towards his social environment; meaning - how Paul fit within his Jewish, Greek, and Roman milieu. Paul was a Jew, with a Greek and Roman education, advocating with and on behalf of Gentiles, within the Roman Empire. So, where did all of this leave him in terms of his self-perception? How would such a dynamic and eclectic personality be received by his various audiences across the Roman world? How would this affect what he wrote?
There are extremes within various interpretive traditions. Everything from the idea that Paul was a supersessionist who left his Judaism in the dust, to the opposite view that Paul was still entirely Jewish but was making a way for Gentiles to join into a Jewish paradigm under Christ. John Barclay wrote that these extremes exist because there are elements of truth in the various views on Paul, and that the best way to view Paul is to regard him as largely "anomalous" to each of the social worlds he sought to navigate. Bird runs with this idea in extremely fruitful ways, arguing for various via media positions on polarizing Pauline debates to show that Paul was both an identifiable product of his environment and an innovative thinker who adapted his views according to his understanding of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. So, in answer to the questions: was Paul a Jew? Yes and no. Was he apocalyptic or rooted in Jewish salvation history? Both depending on what you mean. On and on. Bird does an excellent job of nuancing these discussions and offering helpful solutions.
My only ever so slight critique would be regarding the final chapter on Paul's disposition to the Roman Empire. Bird recognizes that Paul was not explicitly anti-Empire, but does argue for various possible subversions. He repeats Sandmel's famous dictum regarding Parallelomania, but then proceeds at points to possibly cross the line into it by going probably too far in offering subversive parallels between Paul's letter to the Romans and Roman cultural imperial language and norms. I agree with most of Bird's conclusions in the chapter, but I land with Barclay and others who largely regard Paul as mostly disinterested in the Empire. I think Bird lands largely in the right place, but some of the possible parallels he addresses were likely more coincidental than intentional on Paul's part.
This is a stellar book. In fact, if I teach any future courses on Paul it's a book I'd likely asks students to read. It's academic in tone but likely readable to most well read laypeople.
An important aspect of interpreting the content of Paul's letters overall is solving the puzzles of Paul's disposition towards his social environment; meaning - how Paul fit within his Jewish, Greek, and Roman milieu. Paul was a Jew, with a Greek and Roman education, advocating with and on behalf of Gentiles, within the Roman Empire. So, where did all of this leave him in terms of his self-perception? How would such a dynamic and eclectic personality be received by his various audiences across the Roman world? How would this affect what he wrote?
There are extremes within various interpretive traditions. Everything from the idea that Paul was a supersessionist who left his Judaism in the dust, to the opposite view that Paul was still entirely Jewish but was making a way for Gentiles to join into a Jewish paradigm under Christ. John Barclay wrote that these extremes exist because there are elements of truth in the various views on Paul, and that the best way to view Paul is to regard him as largely "anomalous" to each of the social worlds he sought to navigate. Bird runs with this idea in extremely fruitful ways, arguing for various via media positions on polarizing Pauline debates to show that Paul was both an identifiable product of his environment and an innovative thinker who adapted his views according to his understanding of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. So, in answer to the questions: was Paul a Jew? Yes and no. Was he apocalyptic or rooted in Jewish salvation history? Both depending on what you mean. On and on. Bird does an excellent job of nuancing these discussions and offering helpful solutions.
My only ever so slight critique would be regarding the final chapter on Paul's disposition to the Roman Empire. Bird recognizes that Paul was not explicitly anti-Empire, but does argue for various possible subversions. He repeats Sandmel's famous dictum regarding Parallelomania, but then proceeds at points to possibly cross the line into it by going probably too far in offering subversive parallels between Paul's letter to the Romans and Roman cultural imperial language and norms. I agree with most of Bird's conclusions in the chapter, but I land with Barclay and others who largely regard Paul as mostly disinterested in the Empire. I think Bird lands largely in the right place, but some of the possible parallels he addresses were likely more coincidental than intentional on Paul's part.
This is a stellar book. In fact, if I teach any future courses on Paul it's a book I'd likely asks students to read. It's academic in tone but likely readable to most well read laypeople.
June 8, 2025
Bird helps navigate the morass of scholarship on Paul’s relationship to his Jewish heritage and purposes a way forward that is both refreshing and intriguing, combining strengths from various approaches into what he calls the anomalous position. He skillfully and convincingly critiques and weaves together elements from each of the broad approaches: a former Jew, a transformed Jew (aka New Perspective), a faithful Jew (ie. Paul within Judaism), a radical Jew, and an anomalous Jew (the latter of which he adopts and qualifies). As he explains, “In my estimation, the anomalous nature of Paul’s thought consists of his apocalyptic interpretation of the Messiah’s death and resurrection, which forced him into a rereading of Scripture and into a different praxis that yielded a transformation of ‘common Judaism’ whereby the story and symbols of Judaism were now redrawn around Jesus the Messiah and his followers, who constituted the renewed Israel of an inaugurated eschaton” (28). Paul, as a marginal Jew, “believed that God was calling a people of Gentle and Jews to himself through Jesus Christ” (29).
A major portion of the book engages the Galatian and Antioch controversies. Bird’s careful historical and biblical analysis provides a compelling foundation for any study of Galatians and the larger Pauline corpus. The result is not only a further teasing out of Paul’s distinctive stance amongst the burgeoning Christ movement, but also a profoundly helpful mapping of the developing tensions between the Jewish believers and the larger Jewish world, and how this tension seeped into the church in its post-Jerusalem Council development.
Though the book ends abruptly (a summary chapter would have been nice), ultimately, what Bird has produced is a seminal contribution to the study of Pauline theology within the larger exploration of Christian origins, especially its community and theological development.
A major portion of the book engages the Galatian and Antioch controversies. Bird’s careful historical and biblical analysis provides a compelling foundation for any study of Galatians and the larger Pauline corpus. The result is not only a further teasing out of Paul’s distinctive stance amongst the burgeoning Christ movement, but also a profoundly helpful mapping of the developing tensions between the Jewish believers and the larger Jewish world, and how this tension seeped into the church in its post-Jerusalem Council development.
Though the book ends abruptly (a summary chapter would have been nice), ultimately, what Bird has produced is a seminal contribution to the study of Pauline theology within the larger exploration of Christian origins, especially its community and theological development.
July 6, 2022
This volume from Michael Bird summarizes several major debates on Paul from the past generation and tries to place Paul as a thinker and writer in relation to Judaism, apocalyptic thought, and the Roman empire. Those familiar with Pauline scholarship will be familiar with many of the perspectives presented but it is readable for those who may not have a lot of time invested in these debates.
August 29, 2018
Bird's chapter on the apocalyptic Paul is stellar. Worthwhile for that chapter alone.
May 18, 2017
Summary: A collection of studies on the life and ministry of Paul that explores this unusual Jew who is comfortable moving among Greeks and Romans as he proclaims the Christ he encountered on the way to Damascus.
About the only thing scholars can agree upon concerning the Apostle Paul is that he was born a Jew. In an introductory chapter, Michael F. Bird surveys the options most commonly chosen to explain this apostle who claims on one hand that everything from his former life as a Jew is "crap" compared to the surpassing worth of Christ, and yet "becomes a Jew, in order to win the Jews." Is he really a former Jew who has abandoned Judaism? A transformed Jew, an Israelite in Christ? A faithful Jew? Or a radical Jew? There is something to be said for each of these views and significant scholars associated with each one. Bird proposes an alternative--Paul is an anomalous Jew because he tries "to create a social space for a unified body of Jewish and Gentile Christ-believers worshiping God" (p. 28).
In succeeding chapters, Bird presents five "studies" (most individually published elsewhere) that underscore the anomalous character of Paul's Jewishness, shaped by his mission to Gentiles and Jews. He begins by exploring Paul's ideas of salvation, which both comes from the Jews and is for the Jews, but is also for the Gentiles and found in Christ, and not Torah. Chapter 2 shows how Paul is indeed apostle both to Gentiles and to Jews and how much the latter occupied his attention. Chapter 3 addresses the debate between apocalypticism and salvation history in Paul through a study of Galatians showing both elements reaching their height in the revelation of Christ to the Gentiles. Chapter 4 focuses in on the incident at Antioch described in Galatians 2:11-14 as the beginning of Paulinism "understood as the antithesis between Christ and Torah when the salvation and equal status of Gentiles is on the line" (p. 203). It also marks a parting in the ways between Paul and the Jerusalem church, not absolute as evident in Paul's efforts for the relief of that church. Finally, chapter 5 explores the "anti-imperial" undertones of Paul's letter to the Romans. On its face it presents no civil or military challenge to Roman order. Yet its assertions of the kingdom of the Messiah and the new sociopolitical entity of the church in fact was a profound challenge to Rome which would ultimately supplant empire.
Bird writes:
"In sum, Paul was a religious anomaly. He appeared on the scene of the Greco-Roman world like a sudden yet small ripple moving upon the waters of a still river. He goes mostly unnoticed in his own time, and yet by the time the ripple reaches the shore of the modern age, it has become a tsunami. Paul's anomaly, offensive as it was to the Jews and odd as it was to Greeks, became the Gentile Christianity that eventually swallowed up the Roman Empire and that, even to this day, two millenia later, casts its shadow upon the religious landscape of the world. Not bad for a Jewish tentmaker from Tarsus!" (p. 30)
Of the writing of books on Paul, there seems no end! What makes this one distinctive is that it provides a reading of Paul's life and mission that reconciles seemingly disparate threads of scripture and explains them by Paul's vision of the new people, Jew and Gentile together, formed by Messiah Jesus. It explains both the consonant and dissonant elements in his Jewishness, his reaction at Antioch, and the content of his letter to the Roman church.
Michael Bird represents a younger generation of theological scholars from "down under" who are beginning to make their mark in biblical and theological studies. I look forward to hearing more from him and others like him!
____________________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.
About the only thing scholars can agree upon concerning the Apostle Paul is that he was born a Jew. In an introductory chapter, Michael F. Bird surveys the options most commonly chosen to explain this apostle who claims on one hand that everything from his former life as a Jew is "crap" compared to the surpassing worth of Christ, and yet "becomes a Jew, in order to win the Jews." Is he really a former Jew who has abandoned Judaism? A transformed Jew, an Israelite in Christ? A faithful Jew? Or a radical Jew? There is something to be said for each of these views and significant scholars associated with each one. Bird proposes an alternative--Paul is an anomalous Jew because he tries "to create a social space for a unified body of Jewish and Gentile Christ-believers worshiping God" (p. 28).
In succeeding chapters, Bird presents five "studies" (most individually published elsewhere) that underscore the anomalous character of Paul's Jewishness, shaped by his mission to Gentiles and Jews. He begins by exploring Paul's ideas of salvation, which both comes from the Jews and is for the Jews, but is also for the Gentiles and found in Christ, and not Torah. Chapter 2 shows how Paul is indeed apostle both to Gentiles and to Jews and how much the latter occupied his attention. Chapter 3 addresses the debate between apocalypticism and salvation history in Paul through a study of Galatians showing both elements reaching their height in the revelation of Christ to the Gentiles. Chapter 4 focuses in on the incident at Antioch described in Galatians 2:11-14 as the beginning of Paulinism "understood as the antithesis between Christ and Torah when the salvation and equal status of Gentiles is on the line" (p. 203). It also marks a parting in the ways between Paul and the Jerusalem church, not absolute as evident in Paul's efforts for the relief of that church. Finally, chapter 5 explores the "anti-imperial" undertones of Paul's letter to the Romans. On its face it presents no civil or military challenge to Roman order. Yet its assertions of the kingdom of the Messiah and the new sociopolitical entity of the church in fact was a profound challenge to Rome which would ultimately supplant empire.
Bird writes:
"In sum, Paul was a religious anomaly. He appeared on the scene of the Greco-Roman world like a sudden yet small ripple moving upon the waters of a still river. He goes mostly unnoticed in his own time, and yet by the time the ripple reaches the shore of the modern age, it has become a tsunami. Paul's anomaly, offensive as it was to the Jews and odd as it was to Greeks, became the Gentile Christianity that eventually swallowed up the Roman Empire and that, even to this day, two millenia later, casts its shadow upon the religious landscape of the world. Not bad for a Jewish tentmaker from Tarsus!" (p. 30)
Of the writing of books on Paul, there seems no end! What makes this one distinctive is that it provides a reading of Paul's life and mission that reconciles seemingly disparate threads of scripture and explains them by Paul's vision of the new people, Jew and Gentile together, formed by Messiah Jesus. It explains both the consonant and dissonant elements in his Jewishness, his reaction at Antioch, and the content of his letter to the Roman church.
Michael Bird represents a younger generation of theological scholars from "down under" who are beginning to make their mark in biblical and theological studies. I look forward to hearing more from him and others like him!
____________________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.
January 15, 2017
I have been wanting to read NT Wright's massive volume on Paul for a while, but a few considerations have kept me from doing so. Mainly, I was encouraged to finish the first three (rather massive) volumes before I read his big one on Paul. I did that. However, I still did not feel equipped to dive into "Paul and the Faithfulness of God," so I began looking for other resources.
Then I remembered that Michael Bird had put together a volume examining key aspects of New Perspectives proponents and presenting Paul as a rather complex, anomalous person, especially in regards to his Judaism. Having read and benefited much from Bird in the past, I figured this would be a good place to gain some insight before taking a swing at Wright.
"An Anomalous Jew" is a really good book. My concerns about approaching Wright is that it would be over my head and that I would get bogged down in the details. These concerns played out in the reading of Bird, so I have a feeling they may be justified. Bird's examination of perspectives on Paul is detailed and thorough. It is more technical that other works I have read by him (his systematic theology, for example). His style is present, but the tone is academic to the core. This is not a negative; it is just what it is.
Bird's volume is a helpful resource that deserves full attention and a slow, careful reading. That is not what I gave it the first time through, and I still enjoyed it. I cannot wait to tackle it a second time and see how fruitful and pleasant that experience is.
Review copy provided.
Then I remembered that Michael Bird had put together a volume examining key aspects of New Perspectives proponents and presenting Paul as a rather complex, anomalous person, especially in regards to his Judaism. Having read and benefited much from Bird in the past, I figured this would be a good place to gain some insight before taking a swing at Wright.
"An Anomalous Jew" is a really good book. My concerns about approaching Wright is that it would be over my head and that I would get bogged down in the details. These concerns played out in the reading of Bird, so I have a feeling they may be justified. Bird's examination of perspectives on Paul is detailed and thorough. It is more technical that other works I have read by him (his systematic theology, for example). His style is present, but the tone is academic to the core. This is not a negative; it is just what it is.
Bird's volume is a helpful resource that deserves full attention and a slow, careful reading. That is not what I gave it the first time through, and I still enjoyed it. I cannot wait to tackle it a second time and see how fruitful and pleasant that experience is.
Review copy provided.
July 1, 2023
A really great exposition of who Paul is. At times he betrayed a bit of Reformation bias, but I think he generally did a good job looking at the text. He acknowledged the idea of the new covenant, but I think he could have done more to explore Paul’s ideas of what that entails.
September 12, 2018
Delightful, helpful collection of studies on Paul.
May 28, 2023
Great overview of the various Pauline debates. Most helpful was his touching with the so called “Empire criticism” in Paul.
September 6, 2024
Few, if any, do a better job of condensing and analyzing scholarly theories than Mike Bird. This is a must read for students or anyone interested in knowing where Pauline scholarship stands.
February 12, 2025
This is an exceptional book on Paul and will reward the seriously reader with insight into the man and into the heart of his “gospel” and therefore, his letters.
February 17, 2025
It was a nice read but I would expected it to be a more interesting reading.
February 28, 2017
Had some helpful ideas, showing how Paul was an anomaly in every possible social circle. But the depth of interaction with reams of scholarship made it a tough slog indeed.
December 17, 2016
Theologian Michael F. Bird has taken on the herculean task of answering certain questions that religious scholars have debated for millennia: “Who was Paul? Where in Judaism should we situate Paul? What kind of Jew was he? And how did he relate to contemporary Judaism as a Christ-believing Jew?” "[W]as Paul an anomalous Jew on the margins of Judaism?”
Bird admits that this is a difficult task, writing a "whole industry of scholarship has attempted to map Paul in relation to Judaism and to show where he fit into the spectrum of Jewish beliefs and practices.” Placing this debate in the historical context, Bird notes that Pauline religious scholars in the twentieth century were forced to reassess and "even recast" the Jewish nature of Paul's thinking as a result of: 1. "scholarly recoil at the horrors of the European Holocaust, coupled with the observation that the grotesque evils of the Holocaust were at least partly perpetuated by a specifically Christian anti-Semitism [which] required a radical rethink of Paul and the Jewish people," and 2. "the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls.”
Bird makes clear that with this book, he intends to “test this hypothesis of Paul as an anomalous Jew on the margins in a number of areas that will highlight the jarring nature of Paul’s thought and clarify the meaning and limits of Paul’s Jewishness.” In so doing, Bird examines, among other things, Paul’s concept of “salvation,” whether Paul thought that “salvation was attainable within Judaism” and whether Paul was more involved in Jewish evangelism than previously thought.
This is an important, extremely relevant, scholarly book . Most emphatically, this is a book that deserves a wide audience.
*Michael F. Bird is lecturer in theology at Ridley Melbourne Mission and Ministry College in Australia.
(In return for an honest review, I received an advance copy from the publisher via NetGalley.)
Bird admits that this is a difficult task, writing a "whole industry of scholarship has attempted to map Paul in relation to Judaism and to show where he fit into the spectrum of Jewish beliefs and practices.” Placing this debate in the historical context, Bird notes that Pauline religious scholars in the twentieth century were forced to reassess and "even recast" the Jewish nature of Paul's thinking as a result of: 1. "scholarly recoil at the horrors of the European Holocaust, coupled with the observation that the grotesque evils of the Holocaust were at least partly perpetuated by a specifically Christian anti-Semitism [which] required a radical rethink of Paul and the Jewish people," and 2. "the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls.”
Bird makes clear that with this book, he intends to “test this hypothesis of Paul as an anomalous Jew on the margins in a number of areas that will highlight the jarring nature of Paul’s thought and clarify the meaning and limits of Paul’s Jewishness.” In so doing, Bird examines, among other things, Paul’s concept of “salvation,” whether Paul thought that “salvation was attainable within Judaism” and whether Paul was more involved in Jewish evangelism than previously thought.
This is an important, extremely relevant, scholarly book . Most emphatically, this is a book that deserves a wide audience.
*Michael F. Bird is lecturer in theology at Ridley Melbourne Mission and Ministry College in Australia.
(In return for an honest review, I received an advance copy from the publisher via NetGalley.)
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews