Nanos, Mark D. and Magnus Zetterholm, editors. Paul within Judaism: Restoring the First-Century Context of the Apostle.
Minneapolis: Fortress, 2015. x + 350 pp. £25.99 (paperback), ISBN 978-1451470031.
What happens if interpreters do not assume that Paul left Judaism for
Christianity? In the wake of the last thirty years of NT scholarship that focused
on a more historically accurate understanding of Jewish patterns of life in the
first century, Pauline scholars specifically have made steps forward in
recovering a more contextually appropriate apostle Paul. However, many scholars
do not think that these new insights have been taken far enough, and several of
these are included in this crucial collection on Paul’s context. Mark D. Nanos
and Magnus Zetterholm have brought together several leading voices challenging
interpreters to move beyond the well-worn terrain of both the ‘Old’ and ‘New’ Perspective
on Paul. There is no one clear label for the views represented here. Sometimes called
the Radical Perspective on Paul, Beyond the New Perspective on Paul, or the Re-newed
Perspective on Paul, scholars read Paul within second Temple Judaism in such
diverse ways that some have simply given up on a label that could encompass
them all. Nanos suggests ‘Paul within Judaism perspective’ as a workable title
for this group (2).
The collection of essays, each structured
around a different crucial research question, opens with an introduction
written by Mark D. Nanos. In it, he describes the goal of these essays, many of
which originated in the ‘Paul and Judaism’ section of the Society of Biblical
Literature: ‘to interpret Paul within his most probable first-century context’
(2). He highlights the way this interpretative paradigm differs from existing
perspectives and then provides a detailed summary of each of the chapters in
the book.
Chapter 1, written by Magnus Zetterholm,
provides an apt survey of the state of the question with regard to Paul within
Judaism. He first highlights the all-too-close relationship between NT studies
and theological normativity. This connection reinforces the binary relationship
between Judaism and Christianity, the traditional Paul-against-Judaism
framework. Zetterholm’s purpose in this chapter is to explain why this binary
relationship is mistaken and what has caused NT scholars to be influenced by
it. He traces an incipient anti-Judaism from the original intra-Jewish polemic
in 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15, to Ignatius and Justin, then to Augustine and
Luther, and through to the Tübingen school whose discourse mixed with contemporaneous
geo-political discourses that resulted in a Western orientation of opposition
to Jews and Judaism. E.P. Sanders brought about a change in the traditional
reception of Paul by going back to the Jewish sources. This was followed up by
James D.G. Dunn and extended by several other contemporary scholars, one of the
most important being William S. Campbell (2013). Zetterholm concludes the
chapter with a discussion of Christianity as a third race. This view is one of
the foundational elements of the traditional understanding of Paul as against
Judaism, and Zetterholm offers several ideas in this section as ways forward
for rediscovering a more historically-situated Paul, one who thought ‘he
represented the perfection of Judaism’
such that ‘Jewish identity’ was not problematic for the movement (51, emphasis
original).
Anders Runesson, in chapter 2, contends that
existing scholarship has not attended closely enough to the terminology used to
describe the earliest Christ-movement. His concerns relate primarily to the
terms ‘Christians’, ‘Christianity’, and ‘church’. He sees these as
anachronistic and too ideologically laden to be of much heuristic value.
Furthermore, they reinforce a binary relationship with ‘Jews’, ‘Judaism’, and
the ‘synagogue’ (54-55). This is not merely an esoteric, methodological
discussion but one that, according to Runesson, influences the scholar’s
ability to conceive of different categories or schemas: ‘the words we use tend
to control the way we think’ (57). Runesson, along with Nanos, suggests ‘Apostolic
Judaism’ as a more proper term to describe this alternative vision of Judaism
followed by those for whom Jesus is ‘a central figure in their symbolic
universe’ and ‘a key for the interpretation of what it meant for them to adhere
to Judaism’ (67-68). In a similar fashion, ‘church’ is deemed problematic.
Runesson, rightly I think, points out that ekklēsia
could refer to various ‘synagogue institutions’, and to translate it as
‘church’ implicitly argues for an early parting of the ways between
Christianity and Judaism. Ekklēsia was,
rather, Jewish sacred (and institutional) space (69 n. 32). Runesson, in many
ways, sees problems similar to those brought to the fore in Zetterholm’s
chapter, those related to the contemporary context. The terms he critiques
reinforce separate identities and non-overlapping institutional settings;
however, these same terms did not have such implications in the first century.
If interpreters follow Runesson’s suggestion they open the possibility ‘to
understand Paul as practicing and proclaiming a minority form of Judaism that
existed in the first century’ (77).
Chapter 3, written by Karin Hedner Zetterholm,
addresses the all-too-often misunderstood category of Torah observance in the
first century. Hedner Zetterholm rightly notes that the idea that Paul
continued to be Torah observant is a hallmark of the Paul-within-Judaism
paradigm and rejected by the traditional perspective on Paul. However, she
points out that what is needed on both sides of this debate is ‘a more nuanced’
understanding of ‘what it meant to be a Torah observant Jew in the first
century’ (80). Halakic debates were an integral part of first century Jewish
life since the general nature of biblical commandments required situationally
specific interpretations and applications (cf. debates concerning work on the
Sabbath, Exod. 20:8-11; m. Shabb. 7:2).
Hedner Zetterholm further points out that we actually know very little about
the nature of ‘halakic observance in the first century’ (91). Thus, it is
rather difficult to determine what was considered a violation and what was
acceptable. She highlights Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 8-10 and brings it
into dialogue with Avodah Zarah in
order to determine if this is a good example of ‘Jewish Diaspora halakah for
Jesus-oriented gentiles’ rather than a violation of Jewish law (92). By highlighting attitude and intention,
Hedner Zetterholm places Paul well within the ongoing debates among Jews
dealing with how to balance living among the nations whilst seeking to follow
Jewish law in the context of ‘theological and ethical general principles’
(103).
Mark D. Nanos wrestles with the difficult
question of Paul and circumcision. He provides interpretive insights through
his understanding of Josephus’s portrayal of King Izates and his advisors’
direction concerning his situationally-specific non-circumcision (see Jos. Ant. 20). Nanos contends that Paul’s
rhetoric concerning circumcision, faith, and works should likewise be treated as
situationally-specific and not extrapolated out for Jewish Christ-followers or
even other non-Jewish Christ-followers in different circumstances. Nanos,
further, addresses the longstanding debate concerning the ‘works of the law’.
He offers a new way forward suggesting the phrase refers to the works
associated with proselyte conversion. In many ways, he narrows the focus to
circumcision. Also, this chapter provides further terminological nuances
crucial for those seeking to understand Paul within Judaism, especially as related
to these very Jewish-acting non-Jews (135). Nanos’s voice has been influential
in much of these debates, and that is evident throughout this collection of
essays. His nuanced arguments warrant extensive engagement by traditional
Pauline scholars.
Chapter 5, written by Caroline Johnson Hodge,
discusses the crucial issue of the transformation of gentile identity within
the Pauline communities and the way these ‘gentiles-in-Christ’ relate to Israel
without becoming Jews (153). She begins by discussing the liminal existence of
these in-Christ non-Jews and makes some connections with previous Jewish
authors who describe a group of non-Jewish sympathizers, those who lived among
Jews but did not convert. Whether these are best described as righteous gentiles
or god-fearers, Johnson Hodge has already alerted us to the way a group could
be described and uniquely identified within the broader Jewish community. However,
the traditional way of understanding ethnē
is problematic for Johnson Hodge. These atypical gentiles are in-between in
terms of their identity, a sort of hybrid that Paul seems to negotiate through
his writings, including them as the seed of Abraham. The imposition of
hybridity has been rightly challenged by Kathy Ehrensperger (2013), but Johnson Hodge has
alerted interpreters to the problems associated with Paul’s formation of
gentiles-in-Christ, though her argument crucially keeps his identity work well
within the bounds of Judaism as part of Israel’s continuing story (167).
Chapter 6, written by Paula Fredriksen, takes
on the critical question of worship and the conceptions of ritual life that
differed between Jews and non-Jews. Paul calls gentiles to cease engaging in
the cultic expressions of provincial civic life. Since this was not a
requirement for gentile sympathizers to Judaism prior to this time, why the
change? For Fredriksen, it was because of Paul’s eschatology and the role the
nations played in the redemption of Israel (187). Thus, Jewish restoration
theology was constitutive in the formation of ethnē identity
in Christ. They enter the kingdom as ethnē
and not as Jews; thus the culturally accepted connection between ‘ethnicity and cult’ was ‘severed’ (188, emphasis original). For
the social crisis thus created, Paul offers a very Jewish understanding of dikaiosynē ek pisteōs (RSV:
justification by faith) that Fredriksen, building on the Law’s Second Table, describes
as ‘right behavior according to the Law on account of steadfast attachment to
the gospel’ (194). This provides these ethnē
who have believed the gospel with a way to express their newfound pistis/fides (steadfastness, conviction, or loyalty; 193). She concludes
the chapter with a reading of ‘all Israel’ in Romans 11:25-26 and contends that existing
identities continue to be salient in what Fredriksen describes as ‘God’s
universalism’ which ‘is a very Jewish universalism’. The details of her reading
aside, she has provided a strong set of arguments for the eschatological
continuation of existing identities in God’s ‘particular universalism’ (198).
Neil Elliott, in chapter 7, addresses the question
of politics and situates Paul as a Diaspora Jew under the Roman empire. For
Elliott, the traditional readings of Paul are labelled ‘Christianizing’
interpretations in which Judaism may serve as a background for Paul but his
revelation of Jesus serves as his foreground (204). These are evident in the
work of Malina and Pilch, Frey, and Barclay who all receive significant
critique (his engagement with Barclay is particularly noteworthy). One of the keen
insights from Elliott is that ultimately Christianizing interpreters resist
political readings of Paul because they align him too closely with his Jewish
identity (242). At a more fundamental level, Elliott thinks that a prior
commitment to essentialism has led interpreters astray when it comes to understanding
Paul within Judaism. When this misguided framework is set aside and a more
complex, embodied Diaspora Jewish identity under the Roman empire is allowed to
emerge, Paul is no longer seen as an anomalous Jew but as one among other Jews
negotiating local expressions of Roman culture and ideology through his
writings to his anxious in-Christ non-Jews (236).
Kathy Ehrensperger addresses the question of
gender and relocates Paul in relation to Judaism in chapter 8. She argues that
Paul’s instructions concerning women in 1 Corinthians 11 and 14 presuppose an
institutional setting similar to the mixed gender synagogues. Further, Paul’s
teaching coheres closely with what some think may be discerned concerning
Pharisaic halakah in t. Demai 2:16-17.
In this way, Ehrensperger and Hedner Zetterholm’s reading of 1 Corinthians
reveals a halakically oriented teacher of non-Jews. With regard to a
gender-sensitive reading of Paul, Ehrensperger contends that feminist scholars
have not paid enough attention to the implications of seeing Paul within
Judaism. Rather, these scholars tend to uncritically follow male-stream
interpreters relying on problematic notions such as Hellenistic Judaism and
universalism. She brings out the idea that if Paul thought existing ethnic identities
were erased in Christ, then the same logic would apply to gender identities.
This conclusion would be untenable for feminist scholars, and thus Ehrensperger
contends that those approaching the text within this hermeneutical frame could
benefit from relocating Paul as one who envisions the continuation of
difference in the midst of the unity of Israel and the nations.
Chapter 9 provides a substantial response by
Terence Donaldson who has identified quite closely with the New Perspective on
Paul. He offers two primary critiques of the authors. First, Donaldson thinks
there is an over-reliance on Jewish restoration theology with regard to the
inclusion of non-Jews within Judaism. Second, he is not convinced by the
various proposals that have been put forth concerning the liminal or anomalous
nature of non-Jewish identity, the ‘ethnē-in-Christ’,
especially as it relates to the social implications of describing them as ‘the
seed of Abraham’, since, Donaldson notes, Paul in other places actually
blurs the distinction between Jews and the ethnē
in his argument (298; cf. Rom. 3:21; 10:12; Gal. 3:28; but see Campbell
2014: 74, 99). Donaldson’s
concerns, though somewhat overgeneralized, are well taken. The real
question here, as noted by Campbell, is why does Paul feel the need to make
in-Christ gentiles the seed of Abraham? Donaldson’s thoughtful response provides several areas for further
research for those engaged in this area of study and several cautions for those
reading Paul within Judaism.
Nanos and Zetterholm are to be commended for
bringing together such a collection. This highly recommended work represents an
important step forward in repositioning Paul within Judaism. It is not the last
word, especially as it relates to the role of Jewish restoration
theology and the implications of the seed of Abraham, but it raises questions that will require engagement
from traditional interpreters of Paul. A number of these essays came into the
collection as conference papers, a format that does not allow for the extended
exegetical engagement needed to dislodge some of the existing perspectives, so
further clarification is still needed. For identity and ethnicity issues, the T&T Clark Handbook to Social Identity in
the New Testament provides more resources. Several of the Pauline letter
entries there are written from a non-supersessionist point of view and thus
align quite nicely with the volume under review. Further discussion on these
important issues will go forward from here, but these debates remind us that
foundational difficulties often arise because our questions and Paul’s
questions are not the same.
References:
Campbell, William S.
2014. Unity and Diversity in Christ:
Interpreting Paul in Context. Eugene, OR: Cascade.
Ehrensperger, Kathy.
2013. Paul at the Crossroads of Cultures: Theologizing in the Space-Between.
London: T & T Clark.
Tucker, J. Brian, and
Coleman A. Baker, editors. 2014. T &
T Clark Handbook to Social Identity in the New Testament. London: T & T
Clark/Bloomsbury.
