What do you think?
Rate this book
Paul, Then and Now
Reckoning with the hermeneutical struggle to make sense of Paul as both a historical figure and a canonical muse. Matthew Novenson has become a leading advocate for the continuing relevance of historical-critical readings of Paul even as some New Testament scholars have turned to purely theological or political approaches. In this collection of a decade’s worth of essays, Novenson puts contextual understandings of Paul’s letters into conversation with their Christian reception history. After a new, programmatic introductory essay that frames the other eleven essays, Novenson explores topics Engaging with numerous schools of thought in Pauline studies—Augustinian, Lutheran, New Perspective, apocalyptic, Paul-within-Judaism, religious studies, and more—while also rising above partisan disputes between schools, Novenson illuminates the ancient Mediterranean context of Paul’s letters, their complicated afterlives in the history of interpretation, and the hermeneutical struggle to make sense of it all.
264 pages, Hardcover
Published June 17, 2022
8 people are currently reading
37 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
May 22, 2024
I disagree with some of Novenson’s conclusions, but he presents different issues in Pauline scholarship fairly in this collection of essays.
August 3, 2022
On the cover of Matt Novenson's new book, we see Rembrandt's self-portrait styled as St. Paul (or St. Paul's portrait with the face of the painter). A very suitable parable for what the book is about! Matt's book assemblies together 11 essays on Paul published in various paces over past ten years or so and prefaces them with a new programmatic piece 'Our Apostles, Ourselves.' In this programmatic essay, Novenson wrestles with the phenomenon of 'hermeneutical ventriloquism,' that is later interpreters turning Paul's words into their own and making Paul a spoke-person for their respective theology/ideology. A history of Pauline interpretation, argues Novenson, is a chronicle of such attempts. And Novenson is not necessarily standing against the use of Paul's words for theological purposes, but he contends for recognition of the gap between Paul's own words within Paul's temporal horizon and Augustine's 'sin that came into the world through one person,' Luther's 'righteousness from faith,' or Dabney's 'the one who called a slave is the Lord's freedperson' (p. 7).
So what is Novenson's solution? He opts for readings which 'make Paul weird again.' Such readings, for him, are the likes of Albert Schweitzer and Paula Fredriksen. Novenson wants Paul who is ancient, strange, unlike us, and uninterested in furthering modern agendas. Historical criticism, thus, is a useful tool for the task and most essays in the book are historical-critical studies of various aspects of Pauline letters.
'Romans 1–2 between Theology and Historical Criticism' takes up the locus classicus of Christian hamartiology. Novenson argues that disproportionate interest received by this passage is due to the fact that this is the closest we get in the Bible to the mature Christian doctrine of sin (or at least it major building-pieces). He compares two major "approaches" to this text: one contending that we need to get rid of theological to get this passage right (so Stanley Stowers), and the other saying that Paul's discourse is inherently theological and we need to read Paul theologically to get him right (so John Barclay). Who is right? Neither, according to Novenson.
'Ioudaios, Pharisee, Zealot' is a fascinating study about what we know and, more importantly, what we don't know about various ethno-religious identities of the apostle.
'Did Paul Abandon Either Judaism or Monotheism' deals with the fundamental question whether Paul abandoned his Jewish religion to become something else. Novenson shows the complexity inherent in the modern analytical categories of 'Judaism' and 'Monotheism.' Paul, contends Novenson, was certainly a Jew. Some of his opinions were a minority opinions within Judaism of his days (e.g., that Jesus was the messiah), other opinions place him within mainstream. But none make him anything other than a pious Jew, zealous for his ancestral traditions.
'Romans and Galatians' deals with the two letters which to many interpreters lay the foundations of Paulinism (righteousness, Christ-faith, works). Novenson argues that their status as canon-within-canon reflects specific interests of interpreters rather than Pauline thought as such.
'The Self-Styled Jew of Romans 2 and the Actual Jew of Romans 9–11' makes the case for reading Rom 2 as concerned with Gentile Judaiser rather than actual Jew. Novenson contends that when Paul turns to actual Jews in Rom 9–11, his tone differs markedly from accusations levelled against 'you who call yourself a Jew' (Rom 2:17). It is so, says Novenson, because Rom 2:17ff deals not with the actual Jew, but with a Gentile who attempts to be one.
'The Messiah ben Abraham in Galatians' deals with various ways of portraying Jesus as messiah.
'The Classical Rhetorical Idiom "God is Witness" in Its Pauline Usage' makes a persuasive case that when Paul calls God for witness, he reflects not the Old Testament self-imprecatory tradition, but rather classical texts making gods witnesses.
'What Eschatological Pilgrimage of the Gentiles' deals with conspicuous absence of the Gentile-pilgrimage motif in Pauline letters.
'Wither the Paul within Judaism Schule' takes the sample of two books on Paul (by Fredriksen and Gager) to show that Paul within Judaism school is far from any uniformity. He also marks that both authors are interested in reception of Paul in Jewish sources. There is, therefore, no tidy division between scholars interested in Pauline reception and continuity with Christianity, and scholars interested in Paul's background and continuity with Judaism.
'The Pauline Epistles in Tertullian's Bible' asks questions about Paulinism or Paulinism in early Christianity.
Finally, 'Anti-Judaism and Philo-Judaism in Pauline Studies, Then and Now' returns to the central question of ventriloquism and asks about various construals of Judaism in Pauline interpretation. Novenson shows that there is an ambiguity inherent in the term anti-Jewish reading of Paul. For some, it may mean a reading which claims that Paul himself was anti-Jewish. For others, it may mean a reading coloured by interpreter's own anti-Judaism. Maccoby offers a former type of reading, while F. Baur does the latter thinking he is doing the former (cf. Novenson p. 182).
What do I make of the book? I enjoyed it thoroughly! It is thought-provoking and utterly stimulating read. I may not agree with all his conclusions, but it's the kind of book that one wants to wrestle with.
So what is Novenson's solution? He opts for readings which 'make Paul weird again.' Such readings, for him, are the likes of Albert Schweitzer and Paula Fredriksen. Novenson wants Paul who is ancient, strange, unlike us, and uninterested in furthering modern agendas. Historical criticism, thus, is a useful tool for the task and most essays in the book are historical-critical studies of various aspects of Pauline letters.
'Romans 1–2 between Theology and Historical Criticism' takes up the locus classicus of Christian hamartiology. Novenson argues that disproportionate interest received by this passage is due to the fact that this is the closest we get in the Bible to the mature Christian doctrine of sin (or at least it major building-pieces). He compares two major "approaches" to this text: one contending that we need to get rid of theological to get this passage right (so Stanley Stowers), and the other saying that Paul's discourse is inherently theological and we need to read Paul theologically to get him right (so John Barclay). Who is right? Neither, according to Novenson.
'Ioudaios, Pharisee, Zealot' is a fascinating study about what we know and, more importantly, what we don't know about various ethno-religious identities of the apostle.
'Did Paul Abandon Either Judaism or Monotheism' deals with the fundamental question whether Paul abandoned his Jewish religion to become something else. Novenson shows the complexity inherent in the modern analytical categories of 'Judaism' and 'Monotheism.' Paul, contends Novenson, was certainly a Jew. Some of his opinions were a minority opinions within Judaism of his days (e.g., that Jesus was the messiah), other opinions place him within mainstream. But none make him anything other than a pious Jew, zealous for his ancestral traditions.
'Romans and Galatians' deals with the two letters which to many interpreters lay the foundations of Paulinism (righteousness, Christ-faith, works). Novenson argues that their status as canon-within-canon reflects specific interests of interpreters rather than Pauline thought as such.
'The Self-Styled Jew of Romans 2 and the Actual Jew of Romans 9–11' makes the case for reading Rom 2 as concerned with Gentile Judaiser rather than actual Jew. Novenson contends that when Paul turns to actual Jews in Rom 9–11, his tone differs markedly from accusations levelled against 'you who call yourself a Jew' (Rom 2:17). It is so, says Novenson, because Rom 2:17ff deals not with the actual Jew, but with a Gentile who attempts to be one.
'The Messiah ben Abraham in Galatians' deals with various ways of portraying Jesus as messiah.
'The Classical Rhetorical Idiom "God is Witness" in Its Pauline Usage' makes a persuasive case that when Paul calls God for witness, he reflects not the Old Testament self-imprecatory tradition, but rather classical texts making gods witnesses.
'What Eschatological Pilgrimage of the Gentiles' deals with conspicuous absence of the Gentile-pilgrimage motif in Pauline letters.
'Wither the Paul within Judaism Schule' takes the sample of two books on Paul (by Fredriksen and Gager) to show that Paul within Judaism school is far from any uniformity. He also marks that both authors are interested in reception of Paul in Jewish sources. There is, therefore, no tidy division between scholars interested in Pauline reception and continuity with Christianity, and scholars interested in Paul's background and continuity with Judaism.
'The Pauline Epistles in Tertullian's Bible' asks questions about Paulinism or Paulinism in early Christianity.
Finally, 'Anti-Judaism and Philo-Judaism in Pauline Studies, Then and Now' returns to the central question of ventriloquism and asks about various construals of Judaism in Pauline interpretation. Novenson shows that there is an ambiguity inherent in the term anti-Jewish reading of Paul. For some, it may mean a reading which claims that Paul himself was anti-Jewish. For others, it may mean a reading coloured by interpreter's own anti-Judaism. Maccoby offers a former type of reading, while F. Baur does the latter thinking he is doing the former (cf. Novenson p. 182).
What do I make of the book? I enjoyed it thoroughly! It is thought-provoking and utterly stimulating read. I may not agree with all his conclusions, but it's the kind of book that one wants to wrestle with.
Read
March 21, 2025A series of studies published by the author. Carefully researched and presented. Novenson shows how Paul is weird. He does not fit comfortably in any of the common schemes where scholars try to put him. Worth the time!
January 13, 2026
This collection of previously published essays serves as a pretty good survey of the current state of the question on Paul and Judaism, with plenty of side comments on what it means to do historical critical exegesis in and for a postmodern world.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews