Review of Rudolph's and Willitts' Introduction to Messianic Judaism

Introduction to Messianic Judaism: Its Ecclesial Contextand Biblical Foundations. Edited by David J. Rudolph and Joel Willitts. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2013, 335 pp., $26.99. 

David Rudolph and Joel Willitts have put together an important collection of essays addressing a contemporary religious movement (Messianic Judaism) that many are unaware of and a contemporary hermeneutical shift (post-supersessionism) that is beginning to take hold in some quarters of the biblical studies world. The book begins, after an important introduction by Rudolph, with 13 essays written by self-identified Messianic Jews and then 14 essays written by several leading NT scholars and theologians. It concludes with an extensive summary of each essay written by Willitts and an integrative conclusion pointing out the contemporary significance with regard to the book’s topic. This volume brings together authors who share a general outlook with regard to the continuing covenantal identity for Jews and represents an excellent model of cross-communal dialogue. The highly recommended book would be useful as a supplemental text in New Testament and theology courses, especially graduate seminars focused on ecclesiology and hermeneutics. It is written at a scholarly but accessible level and the short chapters keep the arguments moving forward while directing the reader to locations for more extensive coverage of the topic being discussed.  

It would be unwise to cover all 28 chapters in this brief review and Willitts’ chapter already does this. So, I will focus my comments on four chapters from each part, those that highlight several issues I found particularly probative, especially since I write and research from a similar post-supersessionist perspective. In chapter 1, Rudolph defines what he means by Messianic Judaism, “we are referring to a religious tradition in which Jews have claimed to follow Yeshua (Jesus) as the Messiah of Israel while continuing to live within the orbit of Judaism” (p. 21). This distinguishes the approach put forth in Part 1 from those who align more closely with Messianic Judaism as a sub-group identity within Protestant Evangelicalism. Rudolph notes that Jewish followers of Jesus continued for the first four centuries of our era and only disappeared under the threat of Constantine's sword and canon law (p. 25). It emerged again during the 18^th century and continues today in rather diverse expressions. The diversity evident among Messianic Jews is expressed in several important ways, e.g., Stuart Dauermann’s essay on “Messianic Jewish Outreach” is indicative of a critical debate over evangelism or, as Dauermann prefers, the not-synonymous-term “outreach” (p. 94). Outreach does proclaim that Jesus is the Messiah but the social implications of this message go beyond the individualistic discourse often associated with evangelism. It finds itself more closely aligned with the wider Jewish community in the way discipleship is expressed. The most intriguing aspect of Dauermann’s essay is the idea that gentile and Jewish repentance differs (p. 95). This insight is very important and sets a framework for a Torah-informed repentance that is oftentimes overlooked (see Rom 2:12; p. 96).  

Another area in which diversity is expressed is found in Mark Kinzer’s essay, one whose influence is found throughout the first part of this book. Kinzer’s concern is the liminal state Messianic Jews find themselves with regard to Evangelical Protestantism on the one hand and the wider Jewish community on the other. His essay describes the way Hashivenu and the UMJC have sought to carve out a place for Messianic Judaism within the contemporary expressions of Judaism. This is clearly a hotly debated but intriguing development. Most of the debates relate to “the evangelical theological tenets of biblical and soteriological exclusivism” (p. 128). Kinzer’s broader influence has been felt in the publication of Postmissionary Messianic Judaism, the term “postmissionary” was chosen to make an ecclesial point: “Messianic Jews are not called to be representatives of the Christian community operating within another religious community (i.e., the Jewish people) but to be fully part of the Jewish world in both religious and national terms. In fact, they are to represent the Jewish community in relation to the Church, rather than the reverse” (p. 132). What Kinzer’s work does is to allow the church to think through the social implications of what it means to be part of the commonwealth of Israel (Eph 2:12). While the debates over a more inclusivist soteriology will undoubtedly continue, Kinzer’s “bilateral ecclesiology” should not be lost in the discussion for the way the church could relate to the Jewish people (p. 137). One final area of diversity should be noted, Daniel Juster’s essay brings to the fore the debates over the way Messianic Jews relate to the broader gentile Christian world. Here the debates over supersessionism and the sordid history of anti-Judaism create significant communal tensions. The idea of one body of Messiah that is expressed in two different ways is crucial for the continuation of “unity with distinction? (pp. 137, 142). This is seen as Jews are encouraged to continue to relate to God as Jews and, with the exception of the “One Law” movement, gentiles are encouraged to relate to God as gentiles, all in a relationship of “interdependence” and “mutual blessing” (p. 142; see further on this Tucker, Remain in Your Calling, pp. 115-35).  

In Part 2 the essays focus on the church and Messianic Judaism. I will highlight four of these essays, all of which are crucial for the development of a post-supersessionist approach to the NT. William S.Campbell’s essay “The Relationship between Israel and the Church” provides a post-supersessionist reading of Romans 9-11. This programmatic essay provides several interpretive trajectories for future scholars thinking about issues of supersessionism. For example, Campbell in reflecting on the purpose of Romans and the interdependence between gentiles and Jews in Christ concludes that “Israel is not merely a historical antecedent to the church, and the church has not replaced, and cannot displace, her in the divine purpose. Israel belongs to the present and future of the church and not merely to her inception” (p. 204). Anders Runesson’s essay “Paul’s Rule in All the Ekklēsiai” discusses 1 Cor 7:17-24 and argues that this passage provides scholars with a potential center for Paul’s theologizing. Runesson understands Paul’s rule to include the view that “socioethnic differences between the two groups [Jews and gentiles] ‘in Christ’” was expected by Paul and that the way each obeyed God’s commandments will look different based on this pattern of thought (p. 218). Also, Runesson is undoubtedly correct in noting that the use of ekklēsia by Paul should be understand as pointing to the idea that the Pauline movement was still within the broader synagogue community at this point (rather than disconnected from it) (p. 220). 

Justin Hardin’s essay addresses whether Gal 3:28 and Ephesians 2:14-18 should be understood to indicate that Paul sought to collapse ethnicity. He concludes, with regard to Gal 3:28 that Paul does not seek to obliterate ethnic identities: “On the contrary in this verse Paul announced the glorious universal reality that through faith in the Messiah, there is equality as children of Abraham across ethnic (as well as gender and social) boundaries” (pp. 228-29). In a similar way, Eph 2:14-18 does not erase ethnicity in the creation of the “one new humanity”; rather, it is a metaphor of “oneness” used by Paul to address the nature of the peace given in Christ (p. 231). Thus, those who claim that Paul develops a “race-less people” have overstated their position (p. 232). The idea that existing identities continue in Christ is a theme that is developed in Campbell, Runesson, and Hardin; however, Joel Willitts’ essay develops this further and in a way that provides an eschatological rationale for the continuation of ethnicity in Christ. Willitts researches Revelation 19-22 from a Jewish context (e.g., the bride imagery and Isaiah) and concludes that the New Heavens and New Earth are patterned on a Davidic city. Thus, Israel’s identity is never superseded and that “John teaches that Israel’s distinctive role in God’s administration of creation continues eternally” (p. 253). This interpretive approach provides a challenge to aspects of both amillennialism and premillenialism. Israel’s distinctive purposes are never supplanted (p. 246). 

Rudolph and Willitts are to be commended for putting together such a substantial volume. This book deserves wide attention from scholars, pastors, seminary students, and obviously those within the Messianic Jewish movement. It provides insights into the religious diversity evident in our contemporary context as well as alerting the reader to the emergence of a new paradigm for New Testament interpretation, i.e., post-supersessionism.

Review of Paul as Missionary

Paul as Missionary: Identity,Activity, Theology, and Practice. Edited by Trevor J. Burke and Brian S. Rosner. Library of New Testament Studies 420.  London: T&T Clark, 2011, xi+276 pp., $130.00, hardcover.

Trevor J. Burke, Professor of Bible at Moody Bible Institute, and Brian S. Rosner, Senior Lecturer in New Testament and Ethics at Moore Theological College, contend that while Paul’s missionary activity has been the focus of scholarly attention, this focus is normally directed towards Acts. This collection of essays looks at what Paul thought about his own missionary activity and identity. Part 1, which focuses on Paul’s identity, begins with Seyoon Kim’s essay on Paul as an eschatological herald. Kim argues that Paul sees himself as one who fulfills the eschatological pilgrimage texts in his gentile mission; the Jerusalem collection is the most explicit expression of this identity. James Thompson lays out points of contact between Acts and Paul’s letters with regard to Paul’s missionary identity. However, he concludes that focusing primarily on the letters brings out Paul’s distinct pastoral concern with the spiritual growth and development of his congregations. James Thompson’s essay argues that Paul’s mission involves continual pastoral care. Though the term pastor is not used to describe Paul’s identity, his activities and his concern for the transformation of the Christ-followers suggest that Paul could be described as a missionary pastor. James Miller’s essay on Paul and ethnicity contends that the binary categories of continuity and discontinuity do not fully account for Paul’s complex and situationally-specific approach to ethnicity. He claims that Paul did not leave his Jewish ethnic identity in the past once he was in Christ; rather, the various comments about his Jewish identity reflect the normal negotiation and contextualization that contemporary ethnicity studies indicate are part of the identity-forming process. Richard Gibson contends that Paul, in Rom 15:16, presents himself as a Levitical priest as described in Isa 61:6. This understanding clarifies Paul’s role as subordinate to the Servant-Christ, even as he seeks to extend the Servant’s mission through the agency of the same Spirit (cf. Isa 49:6; 61:6; Rom 15:8-21).

Part 2 covers Paul’s missionary activity. It begins with Beverly Roberts Gaventa resituating Paul’s missionary activity within God’s mission. She brings to the fore the agency of others within the Christ-movement and concludes that God’s own mission of rescuing the new humanity from the power of Sin and Death must be accounted for. Daniel Hays provides a third ethnicity reading of Paul’s activity. He argues that Paul sought to form a new ethnicity for those in Christ, an identity that replaces existing ethnic identities. This, Hays contends, allows for unity within the Christ-movement. Ayodeji Adewuya’s contribution looks at the centrality of suffering in Paul’s theology and mission. Building on the rhetoric of 2 Corinthians, Adewuya sees Paul’s sufferings re-deployed in the text for the benefit the Corinthians. Paul Barnett argues that Paul’s use of the phrase “righteousness of God” coheres quite closely with Jesus’ teaching on the “kingdom of God.” This provides a conceptual bridge between Paul and Jesus, in that both of these phrases were “grace-based and ritual-free” (p. 111).

Part 3 discusses Paul’s mission theology, beginning with Arland Hultgren’s contention that Paul’s Christophany at his commissioning accounts for much of Paul’s gentile mission. The content of this revelation includes the following elements: (1) Jesus is the universal messiah who moves beyond the law of Moses; (2) Jesus of Nazareth is the same as the risen Christ, the one who was known to minister to those not Torah-observant. While some of latter could have come from his pre-apostolic past, Hultgren concludes that the eschatological pilgrimage texts did come from that experience and serve as a key to Paul’s vocation as an apostle to the gentiles. Karl Olav Sandnes argues that 1 Cor 9:19-23 is an example of Paul’s asymmetrical approach to accommodation in the context of seeking to win Jews and gentiles. His adaptability applies, however, only to sub-identities (e.g., gender, ethnicity, culture) and not to what he viewed as one’s primary identity—being in Christ. Trevor Burke contends that the work of the Spirit is central to Paul’s mission and that the Spirit’s agency is often overlooked by scholars. Burke surveys 1 Thessalonians to show the way the Spirit functioned by empowering, converting, energizing, sanctifying, instructing, and directing the worship life of the community. Burke concludes that Paul’s mission activity cannot be fully understood without an appropriate appreciation for the work of the Spirit within his communities. Brian Rosner maintains that the glory of God is central to Paul’s mission theology. This is often a discounted subject among scholars, but building on Romans 15 and its use of Isaiah 66, Rosner views the glory of God as the final aim in Paul’s missionary endeavors. Stanley Porter outlines a key aspect of Paul’s highly contextualized missionary theology—the message of reconciliation. It serves as the basis for Christian proclamation in 2 Cor 5:18-21 and provides its essential component in Rom 5:8-11. Roy Ciampa navigates the difficulties of distilling Paul’s theology of the gospel and describes it thus: “God has acted and is acting through Christ’s life, death, resurrection/exaltation and present reign as Lord over all creation to set all things right to the glory of his name” (p. 190). This message is central to Paul’s missionary identity and allows for contextualization among diverse gentile audiences.

Part 4 discusses Paul’s missionary practice. It begins with William S. Campbell’s essay that argues that universalism and particularism are both present in Paul’s missionary practice. In fact, the coordination of the two is central to his vision and activity. Thus, Paul is not seen as one who seeks to obliterate Jewish identity. In Christ, Jews relate to God as Jews, and gentiles relate to God as gentiles, although they are not included in God’s covenant, which remains with Israel (p. 202 n. 25). James Ware contends that Paul’s gospel was one of resurrection, and that he expected the Philippians to be involved in an active mission of holding forth the word of life (Phil 2:15-16). Steven Walton argues that Paul’s differing financial dealings with the Philippians and the Corinthians are examples of the way he sought to revise existing patronage structures. Michael Barram asks whether Paul expected the Corinthians to be involved in mission. He suggests that Paul’s missonal goal for the Corinthians was to live with a “salvific intentionality” (p. 243). Randolph Richards discusses the misunderstandings of cultural translation in Paul’s original mission (1 Cor 5:9-13) and suggests that many contemporary western readings of Paul have likewise misread him because of their frames of reference.

Burke and Rosner have done both Pauline and missiological studies a great service in gathering these essays. Additional instructive essay(s) might have considered in a more overt manner the material remains as a context for Paul’s mission. This is only a slight criticism; Burke and Rosner themselves note the need to include more (p. 6); however, these would have provided a more concrete context for Paul and his mission.  Nevertheless, Burke and Rosner provide a nuanced and even-handed reading of Paul, with the essays by Miller, Sandnes, and Campbell deserving special attention for moving forward the traditional understanding of Paul’s approach to missional formation. This collection is recommended for missions, intercultural, and Pauline theology courses and is accessible to upper-level undergraduates and seminary students

Initial Thoughts on Sergio Nebreda's Christ Identity

Sergio Rosell Nebreda, Christ Identity: A Social-Scientific Reading of Philippians 2.5-11. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011. ISBN 9783525532546 $138.

Sergio Rosell Nebreda, Professor of Sacred Scripture, Seminario Evangélico Unido de Teología, claims that Paul desires to form the social identity of the Christ-followers in Philippi on the basis of the Christ-hymn in Philippians 2:5-11. He suggests a new approach to Philippians 2:6-11, one that focuses “on its function as a vehicle for social communication, part and parcel of its social milieu, but aiming at transforming the Christ-following community, in search for an identity which ultimately derives from Jesus the Christ as described in the hymn” (Nebreda 2011: 27). Nebreda’s goal for his study “is to assess the apostle’s implicit strategies as well as to recognise his aims of creating a social identity based on Christ-orientation as displayed in Phil 2.6-11, which Paul himself affirms he follows (3.12-13)” (Nebreda 2011: 28). He sees “self-giving and self-humiliation as a paradigm of Christ-like identity” and this serves as a competing social identification to one that “was based on privilege and the search for honour” (Nebreda 2011: 28).

Nebreda begins by providing a thorough description of Tajfel and Turner’s social identity theory, which lays the foundation for his approach to identity formation. Next he provides an anthropological and sociological analysis of the Mediterranean basin in the first century. Here the influence of the Context Group is evident. Following this analysis, he provides a low-level abstraction of Philippi as a Roman colony and delineates a model of romanisation. Chapter 5 uncovers Paul’s identity with regard to suffering and slavery. In doing this, he brings to the fore ancient viewpoints concerning suffering and slavery. What emerges from this discussion is the centrality of suffering to Paul’s mission and identity. This reinforces the alternative nature of the Christ-like identity. The next chapter addresses key scholarly issues related to Philippians and specifically the hymn itself. The final chapter provides a thorough analysis of Philippians 2:5-11 and the way it functions in the formation of a distinct social identity in contrast to first century Mediterranean society. For Nebreda, the central point of contention is the differing social conceptions of “humility” (tapeinophrosunē) (Phil. 2:3). While, this final chapter is the primary one that focuses on the text in question, this is appropriate in that Nebreda’s primary concern is with the way “the community that received the letter would have understood the apostle’s words” (Nebreda 2011: 33).

Nebreda’s approach to identity formation emphasizes an element of discontinuity. The Christ-like identity is formed in contrast to existing cultural identities (but not completely so, see (Nebreda 2011: 345) and his recognition of a discourse of comparison). For example, he concludes that “this Christ-identity Paul proposes is based on the Christ-event, the narrative that gives birth to a new people no longer defined in ethnic origin or social merit terms” (Nebreda 2011: 344). I would suggest rather no new people are being birthed and that the Christ-movement is described in the context of their existing ethnic and social identities (Tucker 2011: 62-88). Nebreda’s stance is based on his reading of Philippians 3:5-8 and the way it seems to call into question any meaningful continuation of Paul’s Jewish identity. What I find interesting is his use of William S. Campbell’s approach. Nebreda, while recognizing Campbell’s view of the “relativization of all things in Christ” (Campbell 2008: 89), seems to not fully integrate an equally important point from Campbell, that Paul cannot serve as a model for gentile identity in Christ. Nebreda (2011: 345) quotes Campbell in order to support the view that in Philippians 3:5-8, Paul’s past in Judaism is negated and that Paul serves as a model for both Jews and gentiles in Christ. Campbell’s specific claims move in the opposite direction: (1) Paul continues to be Torah-observant and within the boundaries of Judaism; and (2) Paul does not serve as a good model for gentiles in Christ. Campbell concludes, “Paul is the paradigm for Jewish Christ-identity but not for gentile” (Campbell 2008: 156). As an intercultural mediator, Paul’s approach to identity formation builds on existing identity nodes, rather than subverting these, this is one area where I would like to see Nebreda’s work developed further. This small difference aside, Nebreda’s monograph is an important and useful work that advances the way social identity theory may be applied to Paul’s letters and his emphasis on the centrality of suffering in the formation of Christ-movement social identity echoes the fine work of Kar Yong Lim, Lecturer in New Testament Studies, Director of Postgraduate Studies, Seminari Theoloji Malaysia, Seremban, Malaysia and deserves further attention by New Testament scholars.

References:

Campbell, William S. Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity. London: T & T Clark, 2008.

Lim, Kar Yong. "The Sufferings of Christ Are Abundant in Us" (2 Corinthians 1:5) A Narrative-Dynamics Investigation of Paul's Sufferings in 2 Corinthians. London: T & T Clark, 2009.

Tucker, J. Brian. Remain in Your Calling: Paul and the Continuation of Social Identities in 1 Corinthians. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Review of Peoples of the NT World

Peoples of the New Testament World: An Illustrated Guide. By William A. Simmons. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2008, 352 pp., $37.95, hardcover.

William A. Simmons, professor of New Testament at Lee University, seeks to describe the characteristics of the groups evident in the New Testament and how these groups interacted and influenced one another. Simmons begins with a series of defining moments in the survival of Jewish identity from the Babylonian period to the early Roman empire. He argues that Jewish identity during this period was constructed in opposition to the various occupying powers. The varying responses to imperialism, however, contributed to the fragmentation of Jewish identity that resulted in identity-based groups evident in the New Testament. Simmons gives full attention to the impact of empire and insightfully recognizes that political, social, and religious factions contributed to communal destabilization within the Christ-movement.

Jewish groups are the focus of chapters two through five. Simmons plausibly traces the beginnings of the Pharisees to the reforms of Ezra whilst noting that a concern for the survival of Jewish identity informed the Pharisees’ commitment to following the law. The Sadducees are presented as possibly being associated with the Zadokites and are seen as having similar approaches to cultural assimilation as a means of negotiating Jewish identity in the context of imperialism. The social and political power of the scribes is discussed by Simmons who notes that in Israel, the scribes were central to the discursive formation of Jewish identity. The Zealots are presented as a group that is understood in a binary relationship to the emerging ethos of the early Christ-movement.

Marginalized groups associated with Judea are the focus of chapters six through nine. Simmons rightly notes the association of the tax-collectors with the occupying power of Rome but he also contends that their marginalization had a moral basis associated with it (102). Simmons’ exegetical and historical insight emerges clearly in his understanding of “sinners” as an identifiable social group who were not only “ritually unclean” but “moral profligates” who had cast aside “their religious heritage” (108). This marginalized group, however, is one in which Jesus shares table fellowship. This act of social identification, argues Simmons, provides a theological framework for the social practice of the emerging Christ-movement. The social stratification evident in the Roman empire is clearly seen in the discussion of “the people of the land”, a marginalized group that existed in a constant state of liminality. The significance of ethnic identity is clear in the discussion of the Samaritans. Simmons argues that in the ministry of Jesus “ethnic and racial barriers were being transcended in the name of God” (131). Whist true salvifically, William S. Campbell has argued that ethnic identity continues to be relevant in the Christ-movement but in a reprioritized manner (Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity. [London: T&T Clark, 2008: 6-8]).

Chapters ten through twelve introduce social groups associated with the earliest Christ-movement. The followers of John the Baptist are discussed and John is understood as the key transitional figure within the existing religious climate in Judea and that of the emerging Jesus-movement (134). Simmons builds on Jacob Jervell’s idea of the mighty minority in his description of “the Hebrews” as an identifiable social group within the New Testament. The next chapter discusses “the Hellenists” as a similarly constructed social group. Simmons notes that issues related to Jewish and gentile identity emerged quite early on in the Christ-movement, as early as Acts 6. However, it may be better to see the ‘parting of the ways’ that was to occur as a result of the Temple tax, the destruction of the Temple, and the Bar Kokhba revolt. It was not a result of an ongoing ideological battle between the Christ-movement and Judaism or between “the Hellenists” and “the Hebrews” within the Christ-movement. This supposed ideological battle forms the framework of Simmons’ argument in these two chapters. W.D. Davies rightly noted, however, that “in Christ Jews remain Jews and Greeks remain Greeks. Ethnic peculiarities are honoured” (‘Paul and the People of Israel’, NTS 24 1978: 23). Thus, Simmons may be too stark with regard to this ideological battle.

The Roman context is discussed beginning with a highly informative chapter on syncretism and magic. Magic as an ordering principle is often overlooked in New Testament introductions and Simmons’ work makes a significant contribution in this regard. The next chapter describes “the Herodians” as transitional client figures between the Jewish and Roman world (204, 223). Chapter fifteen provides an uneven summary of the Roman emperors and the provincial governors. Also, a discussion of the imperial cult and ideology would have made this chapter more useful. Roman centurions are researched in the next chapter. Simmons argues that these extensions of Roman imperialism are presented in a positive light within the New Testament and that they contributed to the furtherance of the gentile mission (273).

Chapters seventeen through nineteen consider the significance of other key ordering principles within the Roman empire. First, patronage is discussed and the stratified nature of the empire is understood as the means in which the empire could be maintained. Simmons rightly notes the presence of a transformed understanding of patronage within the early Christ-movement (290). Second, the philosophical context of the New Testament is uncovered. Simmons provides helpful introductions to Epicureanism and Stoicism. Third, slavery is overviewed and he understands some of the New Testament documents to contain “the seeds of emancipation” for slaves that would emerge in later revisions of Roman law (321).

This book is highly recommended for general survey courses and those seeking to understand the cultural context of the New Testament. Simmons has produced a richly illustrated and extensively researched monograph that deserves to take its place among the existing handbooks on the New Testament. Slight editorial slippages (e.g. 36-37, 53, 182-83) should be addressed in future editions so that this helpful work will be given the attention is rightly deserves.

A slightly different version of this review originally appeared as:
Review of Williams A. Simmons, Peoples of the New Testament World: An Illustrated Guide. (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008). Criswell Theological Review, N.S. volume 7, no. 1 (Fall 2009): 108-10.

Reading Paul in Context Book Notice

After coming home from our seminary graduation, I came by the Continuum website and they have published the notice concerning the Festschrift Kathy Ehrensperger and I edited in honor of William S. Campbell. If interested in seeing the chapters in the book, click here (link will take you to the Continuum website). I'll talk more about the book throughout the next few months.

The University of Wales, Lampeter

I completed my PhD at the University of Wales Lampeter under the supervision of William S. Campbell and Kathy Ehrensperger. I thought I'd show you a little bit of the campus and the town.

Here is the University of Wales, Lampeter Quad.

Here is the inside of the Quad.

Here is where I stayed whilst on campus, Lloyd Thomas Hall.

Main street in Lampeter. Click here to see a picture of my favourite place to eat in Lampeter.

Here I am in New Quay celebrating after my successful viva. I am with my supervisor William S. Campbell, external examiner Andrew Clarke, and my internal examiner Paul Middleton.

And finally, here is the five day forecast for Lampeter area in case you are visiting there this week.


Here is a brief promo video for those interested.

William S. Campbell: Paul and Christian Identity, Part 3

This is the final part of my extensive review of William S. Campbell's book Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity. Part 1 is available here, whilst part 2 may be located here. Campbell reviews Paul’s use of terms describing Israel and concludes that gentile Christ-followers are not to be confused with Israel. In chapter eight he unpacks the implications of his preferred model, earlier referenced in chapter six, which questioned the views that gentile Christ-followers were either Israel, New Israel, or Israel redefined. Instead, God offers an inclusive salvation to “Jews as Jews and gentiles as gentiles.” (p. 127) The covenant was given to Israel and the gentile Christ-followers may share in the blessings of the covenant through Christ; however, in Campbell’s view it would be incorrect to propose a separate covenant for gentiles. The imagery of the olive tree found in Romans 11:17-18 serves as an integrative metaphor for Campbell through his discussion of Paul’s understanding of Jewish identity, for example: “Only with Israel can gentiles share the richness of the olive-tree.” (p. 137) This chapter provides the reader with a clear understanding of the reasons for needing to maintain separate identities for Jews and gentiles and Campbell provides a cogent analysis of the arguments on both sides of this issue, though often finding himself differing with other eminent Pauline scholars (e.g., E. P. Sanders on covenant, N.T. Wright on redefining Israel, C.H. Dodd on the transfer of election, James J. D. Dunn on gentiles needing to see themselves as Israel, M. Zetterholm concerning the fluidity of ethnicity, and various nuances with Käsemann’s approach throughout the chapter).

Chapter nine serves the purpose of defining the essence of Campbell’s approach to identity formation. Christ-defined identity is one in which an individual’s previous identity is not eradicated but becomes a sub-set or nested identity with the preeminent identity being that which is Christ-defined. This chapter addresses many of the questions and implications that arise from the previous chapters. The key to understanding Campbell’s approach is “the retention of one’s particularity in Christ, whether Jew or gentile.” (p. 156) Because of this approach Campbell realizes that this impinges on Paul’s mission and he notes “Paul therefore is the paradigm for Jewish Christ-identity but not for gentile.” (p. 156) Paul, therefore may not serve as the universal model for all Christians, one can see how this statement could have contributed to some of the problems in the Pauline communities, if he is urging them to imitate him (1 Cor 4:16) and the communities are attempting to do that from a different social location and nested identities, confusion and misunderstanding could have arisen (c.f. 1 Cor 5:9-11). He shares being in Christ but because of ethnic and cultural differentiation Paul remains an Israelite and the Corinthians are not, and this creates a situation where differing identities may be operative in the life of Paul’s community. Campbell is sensitive to his understanding of new creation theologizing and argues for an understanding of 2 Cor 5:17 that allows for continuity with one’s former life and identity, the model for that becomes transformation – which is the topic of the final chapter of the book.

Chapter ten explicates the significance of Paul’s transformational theologizing in which the past is transformed but not obliterated. He rightly notes that the universalizing tendency within systematic theology relates to the decontextualization of Paul’s theologizing. Paul was not developing abstract philosophical-doctrinal statements and to use Paul this way guarantees that one will misunderstand the nature of Paul’s theologizing which was “designed to change people, to transform communal life and to create a Christ-like pattern of life within his communities.” (p. 161) Thus, the concrete social situation is Paul’s starting point, not the development of creedal formulations. Because of this understanding the fronting of Roman imperial ideology is vital to comprehending Paul’s rhetorical intent, that is, what Paul was attempting to do to his auditors/readers. Campbell’s description of the rhetorical function of Paul’s letters may be described as resocialization: “one’s previous life, its culture and its social context are viewed by Paul as the raw material of a transformed existence.” (p. 166) So, for Paul, resocialization serves as the vehicle for new creation identity formation. Paul theologizes from within the symbolic universe of Israel and his communities are thus structured within that universe. Campbell makes a strong case for maintaining a separate identity for Israel and gentiles, recognizing that these two groups are interacting in new ways because of the Christ-event, he concludes that “Christ-following Israelites are the link between the church and Israel” (p. 170). This, in fact, became Paul’s role as he formed his alternative communities throughout the Roman Empire.

Campbell’s work concludes with a bibliography, indices of ancient sources, and modern writers. His work opens up fruitful avenues for further research in the area of identity formation and early Christian origins. This book should be read by Pauline scholars, especially those working in Romans. Campbell’s creativity and ability to sustain an argument makes this work well worth the time invested and provides a much needed perspective in the current debate on identity formation in early Christianity.

My original book review for this work appeared in CTR. So, after reading this, what are some of the weaknesses in Campbell's approach? If his approach is accepted does it call into question historic Paulinism? What scriptural evidence could be marshaled to weaken his argument?

William S. Campbell: Paul and Christian Identity, Part 2

This post continues the review of William S. Campbell's Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity which I began in the previous post. Chapter three evaluates Paul’s perspective of other missionary movements within the early Christ-movement. He argues for the concept of mutuality between the various leaders of the movement and understands Paul’s challenges to be related to halakhic interpretative differences rather than theological disputes. The Antioch incident is central to Campbell’s argument in this chapter in which he asserts “that in Paul Jewish identity per se is not seen to be in opposition to Christ.” (p. 42) As he reflects upon the Antioch incident a key question emerges concerning the process of identity formation: does theology produce or precede identity formation? Campbell does not follow the contours of Dunn’s argument concerning the ensuing and oppositional mission that emerged after the Antioch incident. Rather, he concludes that the halakhic issues that were discussed in Antioch directly impacted Paul’s future approach to mission and the character of this fledging movement. Campbell next sets out to deconstruct the scholarly image of Paul as a sectarian. He concludes, rather that Paul was a reformer seeking “the renewal of his own people in the new era dawning in Christ.” (p. 47) Based on this conclusion, he argues that Paul never confuses Israel and gentile followers of Christ: both groups remain intact. The image of the olive tree serves as the Pauline metaphor for the new reality in Christ. Campbell further concludes that Paul’s Jewish identity precedes the concept of Christian identity and that “historically and theologically there is no need to locate anti-Judaism in Paul nor to attribute the parting of the ways to his explicit instigation.” (p. 51) His answer to the key question referred to earlier is “identity precedes theology and that in fact theological constructions emerge to solve the problem of identity rather than to create it.” (p. 52) In this chapter Campbell argues for diversity within the early Christ-movement and recognizes that Peter and Paul were not engaged in competing missions and that Paul’s ultimate opponent was Rome and not Judaism.

Paul’s problem in creating gentile identity in Christ was his insistence on their association with Israel and Abraham, while at the same time retaining the status as gentiles, is addressed in chapter four. Paul’s communities often found themselves in-between communities, not fully accepted by the Jewish community nor the broader Greco-Roman society. Campbell’s argument is that there was significant continuity between those cultures and Paul’s communities. For example, these communities still maintained some contact with the synagogue, most likely under the model of the righteous gentile. The scriptures of Israel played a vital role in the development of the Pauline community’s social identity. This opened up the liminal communities of Paul to varying halakahic interpretations. Paul envisioned his communities participating in the Jewish symbolic universe in which the process of resocialization of these gentiles would develop with the identity forming concept of being in Christ. Paul was seeking to transform their Greco-Roman identity, not in “contradistinction” (p. 67) to either Judaism or the broader Roman imperial ideology but with an awareness of what it means to live in Christ and remain gentile.

The Roman imperial context, in chapter five, serves as a corrective to the traditional view that the primary focal point of conflict in the early Christ-movement was between the Jews, Jewish-Christians, and Paul’s communities. The conflicts that existed emerged from the interplay between those categories. Campbell does an excellent job developing a middle-path between the approach of Horsley and his comprehensive political reading of Paul and the historically inaccurate view that Paul’s conflict was primarily with the Jewish community. This chapter relies on the work of Mikael Tellbe and Magnus Zetterholm at various points and Campbell agrees with the findings of these two scholars except on a few key points: for example, Tellbe’s lack of “recognition that the Pauline communities did not constitute the whole of the Christ-movement.” (p. 71) and Zetterholm’s lack of appreciation for the “one-sided” use of Paul in the eventual struggle for separation. (p. 83) This chapter does a fine job in recontextualizing Paul and establishes the significant role that Roman imperial ideology played in the identity formation of the early Christ-followers.

In chapter six Campbell discourages the understanding of Paul being depicted as “the architect of the whole church.” (p. 87) The universalizing tendency in Pauline studies contributes to this faulty understanding; however, Paul’s ethics should be understood as predominately particular in its orientation and not universal. This chapter makes a case for the transformation and relativization of one’s previous identity because of newness in Christ and not its eradication and removal. From this perspective he develops an antithesis between the model of new creation versus his model of transformation and within this model “Paul is the paradigm only for those whose former life was in Judaism rather than for gentile Christ-followers.” (p. 89) Campbell builds his exegetical case from 1 Corinthians 7 and follows, with a few correctives, the work of Anthony Thiselton and is in agreement with him concerning the presence of over-realized eschatology in the Corinthian correspondence. Campbell then shifts his focus to the significance of ethnicity for Paul. He rules out the view that in Paul Jewish identity was considered obsolete for those in Christ. (p. 93) Applying the principles of group formation he argues for the communal nature of identity formation and concludes that several identities were nested among the early Christ-followers. The concept of “one undifferentiated identity” (p. 95) must be rejected at this early stage in the Pauline communities. Based on this conclusion, Campbell evaluates four models for Paul concerning the design of his communities. First, the church as a third race (i.e., not Jew, not Greek, but a new race) is presented and summarily rejected as a model for Christian identity. Next, the church as new Israel which argues that the church has replaced Israel as God’s people is also rejected by Campbell. Different types of displacement theologies reflect poorly on God’s character and credibility. While recognizing that new creation theology is inherent in Paul’s theologizing one must maintain a focus on the role transformation plays in Paul’s theology, as well. The church as redefined Israel is the next model discussed. This view includes gentile believers and faithful Jews as constituting Israel. Campbell’s concern with this view is that it is ultimately “un-Pauline in that he was always careful to distinguish Israel and the nations.” (p. 99) The final view is the one that Campbell will argue in chapter 8: “the church and Israel are related but separate entities which should not be dissolved or merged in such a way that the sub-group identity of the one is lost or unrecognized.” (p. 101)

In chapter seven Campbell seeks to clarify his position on the rhetorical situation and addressees in Romans and begin to apply insights from his study of identity in a concrete way to the book of Romans. He understands Romans to be written to “a mainly gentile Christ-movement [that] was split over the issue of residual patterns of a Jewish way of life.” (p. 105) So, these individuals had been or were still functioning in the Roman-Jewish community. This interaction evidently required a reassessment of their identity and Romans was written to assist these individuals in their evaluation of this situation. In Romans 2:1-16 Campbell follows Esler and concludes that a non-Jew is in view here and Paul is not introducing a negative stereotype of Jews in this passage nor in the broader letter in general and also concludes that there were not problems with judaizers in Rome. The problems in Romans 14-15 were more along the lines of those that naturally arose in a multi-ethnic community, such as Rome, and Campbell concludes that the differences that emerge because of these various identities are to be accepted by the strong without discrimination or distinction because who they are in Christ does not dissolve the other nested identities.

The next post will complete this review of Campbell's work.

William S. Campbell: Paul and Christian Identity, Part 1

Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity. By William S. Campbell. London/New York: T & T Clark, 2006 [2008], 224 pp., $120.00, cloth; [$39.95, paperback].

In Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity, William S. Campbell, Reader in Biblical Studies at the University of Wales, Lampeter, has produced a wide-ranging and insightful work on Paul’s role in the formation of Christian identity in the earliest period of the Christ-movement. He interacts with the concept of universal Christian identity and concludes this concept is not sufficiently nuanced and argues that particularized identity is more reflective of the realities of the early Christ-movement. The book is well-structured and readable and provides a nice overview of Pauline scholarship as it relates to Paul’s mission and strategy while providing scholars with the necessary material for furthering the discussion. Campbell, editor of the Journal of Beliefs and Values, has reflected and written on the topic of identity formation since the early 1990s in, for example, his monograph Paul’s Gospel in Inter-Cultural Context. His insights are reflective of a seasoned-scholar who does not attempt to over-reach in his conclusions but allows the strength of his arguments and the biblical material to direct the reader to a more precise understanding concerning the nature of early Christ-follower identity. The main text of the book is without typographical errors, though I did note a few omissions in the bibliography. These, however, are extremely minor quibbles in an otherwise well-researched and well-written book that fills a void in the current literature on identity formation.

Campbell immediately narrows the focus of this book to the identity of Jewish people in the first century of the Common Era. He begins by interacting with the constructivist approaches to ethnicity of Jonathan Hall, Fredrick Barth, and Philip Esler, while finding much to commend in their work he opts for a stronger component for the “primordial aspects of ethnicity” (p. 5) when reconstructing their identity because of their status as a minority group and the constitutive role that Roman imperial ideology played on their self-understanding. Campbell understands Paul to be an individual who was not looking to eradicate ethnic distinctions nor encourage gentiles to become Jews. His strategy and mission, however, required “a transformation in the symbolic universe of these peoples in the light of the Christ-event.” (p. 8) This was a proposition, sadly, that was ultimately rejected and that rejection led to two very different paths throughout history. He sees Paul as establishing community within the context of difference. He questions the scholarly consensus concerning equality and the elimination of difference in Christ. Building on the work of Iris Young he calls for an approach that emphasizes “the politics of difference in the contextuality of existence” which ultimately produces “a paradigm very different from historic Paulinism.” (p. 10) This is an apt description of what Campbell is attempting to do in Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity. As he proceeds with his study he limits himself to issues directly related to identity and ethnicity. His aim in this work “is not only to consider historical and social aspects of identity, ethnicity, and difference in the first century but to include, in association with these, Paul’s theologizing and the outcome of this in the formation of Christian identity.” (p. 11)

Chapter two evaluates the contemporary scene of Pauline studies as it relates to Jew and gentile relations broadly, and identity formation specifically. He argues that F.C. Baur’s antithetical approach established the trajectory for Pauline studies which led to the vilification of Judaism when compared to Christianity. Campbell sees in W.D. Davies’ comparison of Rabbinic and New Testament documents a more positive understanding of Judaism and an approach which relocated Paul within his Jewish context. Johannes Munck’s work is likewise presented as a reaction to F.C. Baur’s. Campbell notes that one of the main contributions of Munck’s work was the rediscovery of the missionary-eschatological perspective of Paul and his Jewish background, a perspective that was furthered through the work of Krister Stendahl. Next he summarizes the teachings of his former teacher Ernst Käsemann who attempted to modify the Bultmannian understanding of justification in existential terms. He sees Käsemann’s work within a dialectic relationship with Stendahl and provides an informative comparison and contrast of their two views. Käsemann is understood to be defending the Pauline consensus as it relates to justification by faith, even though it is recognized that he has developed and thus emphasized the communal aspects of this doctrine. Sanders and Dunn are discussed in the context of the “New Perspective” on Paul and Campbell while affirming their basic reconstruction of first century Judaism concludes that to a certain degree their work does not really remove the Jewish antithesis from within Christianity and elevates faith in Christ as the primary marker of identity as compared with circumcision, food laws, and Sabbath: which in reality renders these identity markers “superfluous.” (p. 29) Campbell offers a short criticism of the “New Perspective” in the areas of the diversity of first century Judaism, the proper use of parallels from Second Temple literature (e.g., 4QMMT), a reminder concerning the nature of inner-Christian community debates as compared to inner-Jewish community debates, and an important reminder concerning how the history of interpretation of Scripture may adversely impact one’s understanding of the universality of Christianity and the presence of diversity within the early Christ-followers. Campbell’s solution for this dilemma is to re-contextualize Paul’s letters while avoiding unnecessary theologizing and focuses on the actual “realities of Israel and the nations in relation to God” and finally grapples with “the place of Judaism in Christian identity” which, in his mind has not been properly evaluated and researched. (p. 32)

This is part 1 of 3 that will provide a comprehensive review of Campbell's approach to Paul and the formation of Christian identity.

Kathy Ehrensperger: Power and Identity Formation

The vital interaction of identity and power is central to the work of Kathy Ehrensperger (2007). The agency of Paul, which is expressed primarily in his teaching role, emerges as he seeks ‘consciously to shape their identity’(2007: 15, 123). Identity formation, for Paul, was not an optional add-on to his teaching but was central to his work among the nations (193). Ehrensperger argues that Paul was in a ‘transformative power relationship’ with the communities he founded, such as the one in Corinth. She argues, however that he exercised power ‘in a differentiated way which cannot be subsumed under’ a Weberian or Foucaultian concept of ‘power-over in the vein of a command-obedience structure’ (155). Ehrensperger builds on the work of Wartenberg who understands transformative power to include both supportive guidance and temporally limited asymmetry; and Arendt’s concept of communicative power as a ‘web of interdependency’ within the correctives provided by both Habermas and Allen (178; cf. 18-9). She understands Paul’s letters to be attempts to empower his communities to ‘act in concert’ with their calling ‘for the enhancement of all’ and shows Paul interacting with them in a way similar to the ‘domination-free communication’ found in the contemporary writings of Wartenberg, Arendt, Habermas, and Allen (178). The program that Ehrensperger lays out is one in which scholars are encouraged ‘to move beyond the command-obedience paradigms of power’ to a more differentiated understanding of the positive dynamics of power in Paul and his writings, that is to say empowerment (178).

Two overarching presuppositions in Ehrensperger’s work on power and its impact on identity formation include Paul’s thorough embeddedness in Judaism and its Scriptures and the all-pervading influence of the Roman Empire (4-11). The implications of these presuppositions include the secondary use of Greco-Roman sources for understanding or explaining Paul’s line of argument (125). Likewise, the realization of the pervasive and pretentious inclination for power and domination within the Roman Empire is understood as the reason for Paul’s desire not to ‘lord it over’ the gentiles (cf. 2 Cor 1:24; Mat 20:25-26a). In her earlier work (2004) she notes in this regard that Paul ‘was teaching in small groups and wrote letters to tiny marginalized communities, thereby using his gospel implicitly to oppose the Roman imperial order’ (141, 157). She concludes, concerning ‘Judaism, with its exclusive loyalty to the one and only God of Israel and the identity-shaping dimension this loyalty had for their way of life, was actually incompatible with these goals of Roman imperial policy’ (2007: 9-10). Paul, however, was no revolutionary; he worked within the Roman system to stabilize his Christ-following communities throughout the Mediterranean basin, while recognizing that because of Christ their doom is sealed (1 Cor 2:6-8).

Ehrensperger follows very closely the particularized understanding of identity evident in the work of William S. Campbell. In critiquing the work of Sandnes she rightly concludes ‘Paul’s and his colleagues’ perception of the gospel did not bypass or in any way obliterate Israel’s identity or future’ (2007: 96; Campbell 2006: 144). She also rejects any notion ‘of Paul as ‘stealing’ the identity of the Jews as God’s people and transferring it to the church’ (2007: 158-59). At the same time, she emphasizes the importance of kinship language and connects it with Paul’s approach to identity formation in a manner similar to Jewish family education rather than seeing analogs within Greco-Roman education approaches (47-48). Also, her approach to gender identity is slightly less-essentialist than Campbell’s general understanding of Jewish identity (2007: 28; 2004: 97-110; Campbell 2006: 5).

In terms of the methodological debate between Philip Esler and David Horrell on the use of models, Ehrensperger aligns more closely with Horrell’s approach. She recognizes themes that emerge from her exegesis and then turns to contemporary political or social theories to which provide the language resources from which to discuss important issues relating to identity, power, and biblical studies. Thus her work does not, overtly apply social identity theory, it resonates with many of the concerns addressed by feminist, postcolonial, and social-scientific scholars.

References:

Kathy Ehrensperger, (2007) Paul and the Dynamics of Power: Communication and Interaction in the Early Christ-Movement. London, New York: T&T Clark.

Kathy Ehrensperger, (2004) That We May Be Mutually Encouraged: Feminism and the New Perspective on Paul. London,UK, New York: T&T Clark International.

William S. Campbell, (2006) Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity. London, New York: T&T Clark.

Anders Runesson: Apostolic Judaism

Anders Runesson rightly recognizes ‘the inseparability of ethnic, cultural, national, and religious aspects of identity in antiquity’ (2008: 71). He follows William S. Campbell and Mark Nanos in arguing that, early on, the Christ-movement remained within Judaism, and he suggests that the term ‘Apostolic Judaism to indicate a common religio-cultural and ethnic focus’ may be employed to describe the movement which ‘included various Jewish groups; Christ-fearers [who] accept Apostolic Jewish authority and theology about their place within the people of God but are not part of the Ioudaioi’ (72-74). Runesson also follows Campbell in arguing that, for Paul, ‘non-Jews remain non-Jews with regard to ritual and cultural behaviour’ (77; Campbell 2008: 127) but differs somewhat from him with regard to Paul’s role in the establishment of a religion (cf. Runesson 2008: 79, 88; Campbell 2008: 51-52). Runesson’s correct conclusion concerning Paul’s view of the ‘law and faith, is that all people must remain in the condition in which they were when they were called’ and that to be ‘“in Christ” reflects an eschatological worldview in which Jews and non-Jews…together form the people of God’ with ‘the basic difference within the people of God between Jews and non-Jews’ being ‘along the lines of ethnic-cultural identity’ where both groups are urged ‘to accept this difference and keep the peace (1 Cor 7:17-20; Rom 15:7-12)’ (2008: 81-82). Far from the abstract, non-ethnic understanding of later ‘Christianity’, Runesson rightly understands Paul as one who defined the early Christ-movement in the context of kinship and ethnicity and not in the absence of these vital markers of community life.

References:

Campbell, W.S. 2008 Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity (London: T&T Clark).

Runesson, A. 2000 ‘Particularistic Judaism and Universalistic Christianity? Some Critical Remarks on Terminology and Theology’, Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism, 1: 120-44.

Runesson, A. 2008 ‘Inventing Christian Identity: Paul, Ignatius, and Theodosius I’, in B. Holmberg (ed.) 2008: 59-92.

Holmberg, B. (ed.) 2008 Exploring Early Christian Identity (WUNT, 226; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).

Halvor Moxnes: The Cultural Identity of the Christ-movement

The formation of early Christ-movement identity emerged within the nexus of Judaism and the broader Roman world. How this occurred is one of the chief research interests in the work of Halvor Moxnes who focuses primarily on ‘the cultural stuff’ of the earliest Christ-movement (2005: 266-67). Moxnes understands ‘ethnicity and the formation of boundaries’ as ‘integral’ to ‘the cultural assumptions’ of ‘early Christian writers’, as well as ‘family and kinship relations’ (267-68). This implies that passages traditionally understood as containing significant abstract doctrinal content are to be reinterpreted as focusing on the concrete dimensions of ‘identity formation’ (268). Moxnes may be over-reaching here. There is a tendency to ‘downplay’ the theological content of the New Testament writings in favour of other preferred readings; however, the concept of theologizing provides a better corrective than the almost complete dismissal of theological content. Campbell notes concerning the theologizing of Paul: it ‘is an activity rather than simply an acquired mode of thought…and ongoing and dynamic process’ (2006: 159). Paul is empowering his audience to live together in community; his theologizing is his primary means to form the identity of his communities. Moxnes’ otherwise fine approach may be too bold on this point.

Moxnes argues that one can ‘read Paul’s letters as attempts to create and maintain an identity for the new and emerging groups that were established through his and others’ missions’ (2005: 271). This reading, according to Moxnes, foregrounds the presence of boundary marking language and ‘descent and consent language in the construction of [that] identity’ (270). Moxnes’ work emphasizes the importance of ritual in forming identity and understands baptism as a boundary crossing event within the Pauline communities that is informed by consent and descent language (Gal 3:27-29). Though Moxnes’ work recognizes that previous identity is not obliterated, his approach subsumes it too much under the new identity which resulted from ‘putting on Christ’ (273). Moxnes argument is weakened if one considers 1 Cor 12:13 in which the gender binary is missing. His argument for Abraham as the focus of identity, while evident in Romans, is understood differently in Galatians and is missing from 1 Cor. It does not follow, however, that Paul is not inventing a field of descent for his communities that is directly related to Judaism. He clearly does this.

Moxnes understands Paul’s identity forming strategy in 1 Cor as the establishment of a social identity ‘within the daily life and social contacts of a Greco-Roman city’ (2005: 276; Moxnes 2003: 3-29). Paul’s boundary marking in 1 Cor, according to Moxnes, is pre-eminently applied to the body (2008: 168-71; see 1 Cor 5; 6:12-20; 10:20-22; 12). The body becomes the focal point for identity formation both individually and corporately, Moxnes’ concludes ‘his [males in Corinth] body tells him that his identity is always determined by his relationships’ (2008: 171). Moxnes’ research in 1 Cor 6 is a stark reminder of the cultural distance between contemporary interpreters and first century Christ-followers and he provides an important corrective concerning the processual nature of ‘the construction and maintenance of boundaries’ in identity formation (2005: 279; 2008: 168). He also doubts the general usefulness of Paul’s letters in developing an ethical framework for contemporary society, except within ‘the form of a dialogue with Paul, rather than a normative application of his specific views’ (2005: 281). While I am in agreement with Moxnes that Paul was writing in order to form the social identity of his communities, it does not follow that one cannot hope to apply Paul’s teaching in contemporary society. Moxnes conception of New Testament Theology may be too stark on this point and my research seeks to combine the identity and theological understanding of Paul into a coherent whole.

References:

Campbell, W.S. 2006 Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity (LNTS, 322; London; T&T Clark).

Holmberg, B., and Winninge, M. (eds.) 2008 Identity Formation in the New Testament (WUNT, 227; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).

Moxnes, H. 2003 ‘Asceticism and Christian Identity in Antiquity: A Dialogue with Foucault and Paul’, JSNT 26.1: 3-29.

2005 ‘From Theology to Identity: The Problem of Constructing Early Christianity’, in T. Penner and C. Vander Stichele (eds.) 2005: 264-281.

2008 ‘Body, Gender, and Social Space’, in B. Holmberg and M. Winninge (eds.) 2008: 163-81.

Penner, T. and C. Vander Stichele (eds.) 2005 Moving Beyond New Testament Theology?: Essays in Conversation with Heikki Räisänen (Helsinki: Finnish Exegetical Society).