Reading Paul with the Reformers: Reconciling Old and New Perspectives

by Stephen J. Chester

In debates surrounding the New Perspective on Paul, the sixteenth-century Protestant Reformers are often characterized as the apostle’s misinterpreters-in-chief. In this book Stephen Chester challenges that conception with a careful and nuanced reading of the Reformers’ Pauline exegesis.

Examining the overall contours of Reformation exegesis of Paul, Chester contrasts the Reformers with their opponents and explores particular contributions made by such key figures as Luther, Melanchthon, and Calvin. He relates their insights to contemporary debates in Pauline theology about justification, union with Christ, and other central themes, arguing that their work remains a significant resource today.

Published in the 500th anniversary year of the Protestant Reformation, Chester’s  Reading Paul with the Reformers  reclaims a robust understanding of how the Reformers actually read the apostle Paul.

Genres: Biblical Studies, Theology, Christian, Church History

500 pages, Hardcover

Published July 11, 2017

About the author

Stephen J. Chester is professor of New Testament and academic dean at North Park Theological Seminary in Chicago. He is also the author of Conversion at Corinth: Perspectives on Conversion in Paul's Theology and the Corinthian Church.

Reviews

[Ryan Storch · Rating 5 out of 5]

In light of current conversations, this book is particularly pertinent. Chester sets out to present the Reformers' exegesis of Paul and interact with modern interpreters of Paul. In his book, Chester argues that 1) the Reformers were not monolithic in their interpretation of Pauline texts. 2) Union with Christ seems to be the central point of particularly Calvin’s exegesis. 3) The New Perspective is not monolithic. 4) The NPP often represents an ill-informed understanding of the reformers. The reformers ' exegesis includes much of what the NPP focuses on.

[Drake · Rating 5 out of 5]

An incredible work of scholarship that is immensely helpful in understanding the interpretations of Paul’s writings by the Reformers, the contributions and serious missteps of the New Perspective, and how insights from both can be gleaned to improve our own reading of Pauline texts.

[Steve Stanley · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars

A couple of big takeaways that I thought helpful: (1) 2nd Temple Judaism was not monolithic, NPP is not monolithic in all its views, and as well the Reformers were not monolithic in *every single view* (so, e.g., saying “the reformed view” might sometimes be too simplistic considering Luther, Calvin, & Melanchthon’s disagreements); (2) NPP relies on the Reformers more than they (often) admit; (3) rejecting some views of the Reformers does not automatically make one an advocate of NPP (see e.g., Westerholm’s Old and New Perspectives on Paul); (4) some Reformers did not view justification as the “center” of Pauline theology, but rather union with Christ.

Interviews:
https://eerdword.com/2017/12/13/eerdm...
https://onscript.study/podcast/stephe...
https://academic.logos.com/how-to-rea...
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/biblean...

Reviews:
Mike Bird: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/euangel...
Guy Waters (pp. 402–406): https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PD...

[Hunter Quinn · Rating 5 out of 5]

Chester proposes that the scholars associated with the New Perspectives on Paul (NPP) falsely characterize the magisterial Reformers' understanding of Pauline soteriology. Until the NPP engages in exegetical dialogue with their historical forebears, scholarship on Pauline soteriology will fail to advance. He embarks on this task in Part I by demonstrating how the Reformers shared certain exegetical and hermeneutical assumptions which set them apart from the Augustinian/Medieval tradition. After examining the shared "exegetical grammar" of the Reformers, Chesters shows that the NPP likewise uses this same exegetical framework. Part II consists of a detailed analysis of Luther's, Melanchthon's, and Calvin's respective soteriological exegesis. Finally, in Part III, Chester shows precisely where the NPP stands to be corrected by the Reformers' exegesis, and vice versa. He concludes that the Reformers failed to understand the nuances of 2nd Temple Judaism and Paul's place within it (due to their inability to access primary sources), while the NPP fails to appreciate that Paul assumes the unity of the Torah whenever he refers to "the works of the Law."

This was a marvelous book - a masterpiece of historical theology and biblical exegesis. I cannot recommend it enough.