Justification and Variegated Nomism. Vol. 1: The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism

Trinity Journal, Spring 2004 by Dunn, James D G

D. A. Carson, P. T. O'Brien, and M. A. Seifrid, eds. Justification and Variegated Nomism. Vol. 1: The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism. WUNT 2/140. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001. xiii 619 pp.

This volume is the first part of a major reassessment of what has become known as "the new perspective on Paul." The "new perspective" itself has two main aspects: first, a new perspective on Second Temple Judaism; and second, the new perspective on Paul consequent upon that reevaluation of the Judaism which nurtured him. The second will be more the subject of the projected second volume. The first volume focuses entirely on the new perspective on Second Temple Judaism.

This new perspective was required by E. P. Sanders's now famously polemical challenge to the traditional (Protestant) view of Judaism as legalistic and dominated by merit theology, in contrast to which, it was traditionally assumed, Paul had formulated the Christian doctrine of justification by faith. In contrast, Sanders in his epochal Paul and Palestinian Judaism (London: SCM, 1977) characterized Second Temple Judaism by the phrase "covenantal nomism." The tension or balance indicated by the two words was intentional and important. Whereas the Judaism of Paul's time was traditionally characterized solely in terms of the law ("nomism"), Sanders's close study of a substantial range of post-biblical Jewish writings indicated that a fundamental element in the Jewish "pattern of religion" could appropriately be characterized by the former term, "covenant." The word gave proper attention to the foundational fact of Judaism that its starling point was God's choice of Israel to be his people, based on the covenant promise he made to Abraham and the other patriarchs and enacted in the deliverance from Egypt and the settlement of the promised land. This divine initiative on behalf of Israel and commitment to Israel means that the starting point for Judaism as a religious system was/is divine grace and not human merit. And this essential insight was reinforced, Sanders pointed out, by God's equally gracious provision of atonement for the repentant sinner as central to Israel's ongoing worship and life.

However, it is important to note again that Sanders did not characterize Judaism solely as a "covenantal" religion. The key phrase he chose was the double emphasis, "covenantal nomism." And Sanders made clear that the second emphasis was not to be neglected. The Torah/Law was given to Israel to be obeyed, an integral part of the covenant relationship, and that obedience was necessary if Israel's covenant status was to be maintained. Even if obedience did not earn God's grace as such, was not a means to "get into" the covenant, obedience was necessary to maintain one's position in the covenant, to "stay in" the covenant. So defined, Deuteronomy can be seen as the most fundamental statement of Israel's "covenantal nomism." Given the traditional emphasis on Judaism's "nomism" it is hardly surprising that Sanders should have placed greater emphasis on the "covenantal" element in the twin emphasis. But in his central summary statements he clearly recognized that both emphases were integral to Judaism's self-understanding.

Even so, such a firm push of an out-of-true pendulum back towards its proper balance-point was bound to set the pendulum swinging and it will take some time for the pendulum to find its true alignment. And though the main impact of Sanders's contribution has been on the second phase "new perspective on Paul," that second phase depends so heavily on Sanders's "new perspective on Second Temple Judaism" that any thorough rethink of the whole issue must in the first place focus intensively on Sanders's "covenantal nomism" and examine its appropriateness as a summary description of the widely diverse literature of Second Temple Judaism. This is the task undertaken by Carson, O'Brien, and Seifrid in the present volume. It is somewhat surprising that the task had not been undertaken prior to this, twenty-four years after Sanders's volume first appeared. John Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem (New York: Crossroad, 1983), noted that the pattern was not consistent throughout Diaspora literature. In contrast, Don Garlington ('The Obedience of Faith": A Pauline Phrase in Historical Context [WUNT 2/38; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991]) found the pattern consistent throughout the Apocrypha; unfortunately Garlington's work was missed by the contributors. And Friedrich Avemarie (Tora und Leben [Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996]) dealt comprehensively with the Tarmaitic literature, also noting the inconsistency of the rabbinic texts. But no comprehensive attempt had been made to review afresh the whole gamut of Second Temple Literature. The editors of the volume are therefore to be warmly congratulated on conceiving the need and in meeting it so well.

The volume consists in a sequence of essays on the various genres of Second Temple literature-Prayers and Psalms, Apocalypses, Testaments, Wisdom, Josephus, Philo, etc. - but also essays on "Righteousness Language" by Seifrid and on the Pharisees by Roland Deines. There is some overlap and some gaps (Markus Bockmuehl focuses only on 1QS in the Dead Sea Scrolls). And several of the essays broaden out their discussion well beyond Sanders's "covenantal nomism" thesis and are to that extent less valuable for the purposes of the volume.