JEWISH LEGALISM DID IT EXIST? DID PAUL OPPOSE IT? DID LUTHER DREAM IT UP? CAN WE REALLY KNOW FOR SURE?

JEWISH LEGALISM DID IT EXIST? DID PAUL OPPOSE IT? DID LUTHER DREAM IT UP? CAN WE REALLY KNOW FOR SURE?

SANDER S COVENANTAL NOMISM Jews get into covenant by grace Remain faithful to covenant by works of law (limited to certain badges of identity ) No legalism PAUL IN ROMANS AND GALATIANS Justification by faith vs. justification by works/law Judaizers teaching a perverted gospel of justification by law/works of law Legalism

TERMS Legalism Pelagius Pelagianism Proto-Pelagian

TERMS Legalism Pelagius Pelagianism Proto-Pelagian Pelagius was a well-educated British monk who opposed the popular doctrines of inherited guilt from original sin, rigid predestination, and infant baptism. He emphasized the grace of God, free will, and the ability of man to keep God s commandments. He was opposed by Augustine and Jerome, labeled as a heretic by leaders of the Catholic Church, and was condemned by several councils of Carthage between the years of AD 416-418.

TERMS Legalism Pelagius Pelagianism Proto-Pelagian Pelagianism is the belief that human nature has free will to choose good or evil. A person who denies original sin and believes that he has the ability to be righteous by the exercise of his free will would be identified as a pelagian.

TERMS Legalism Pelagius Pelagianism Proto-Pelagian Proto-Pelagian would refer to the earliest form of a pelagian attitude. The first century Jews have been described as protopelagian, that is, pelagian before Pelagius.

PELAGIUS It is instructive to recall Pelagius s response, at the Synod of Diospolis, to one of the principal charges brought against him by Jerome the belief that a man can be without sin, if he wishes. Pelagius answered: I did indeed say that a man can be without sin and keep the commandments of God, if he wishes, for this ability has been given to him by God. However, I did not say that any man can be found who has never sinned from his infancy up to his old age, but that, having been converted from his sins, he can be without sin by his own efforts and God s grace, yet not even by this means is he incapable of change for the future.

From this we see that Pelagius did not believe that any man had ever achieved a sinless life, so he did not advocate justification by works of the law which demanded perfect law-keeping as the Judaizing teachers advocated. Pelagius spoke of conversion from sin and the need for God s grace, which is what Paul preached, as well as the need to PELAGIUS While he live was a moral totally life in keeping committed God s to the possibility of commandments. He opposed the a completely Augustinian sinless (and later life, Calvinistic) Pelagius was thus reluctant doctrines to admit of original anyone sin, total had inherited ever achieved it. Despite depravity, the oft-cited predestination, charge and of infant his critics that he baptism. It can be concluded that denied the need for redeeming grace, Pelagius Pelagius teaching was not equal to the clearly Jewish emphasises[sic] legalism described its necessity in this for the moral life. The paper first and step the Scriptures. in the path Jewish to moral perfection is baptism, legalism which was is not a proto-pelagian, genuine rebirth. as our (Riada) Calvinist friends would insist.

PELAGIUS From this we see that Pelagius did not believe that any man had ever achieved a sinless life, so he did not advocate justification by works of the law which demanded perfect law-keeping as the Judaizing teachers advocated. Pelagius spoke of conversion from sin and the need for God s grace, which is what Paul preached, as well as the need to live a moral life in keeping God s commandments. He opposed the Augustinian (and later Calvinistic) doctrines of original sin, total inherited depravity, predestination, and infant baptism. It can be concluded that Pelagius teaching was not equal to the Jewish legalism as described in this paper and the Scriptures. Jewish legalism was not proto-pelagian, as our Calvinist friends would insist.

JEWISH LEGALISM??? A major issue is whether Jewish legalism existed in Second Temple Judaism and in the first century to any degree. The NPP must take the absolute position that it did not exist at all, or, at most, in only a small, insignificant amount. It simply cannot exist as a large enough mindset in first century Judaism to have any consequential effect. Objections were raised by Jewish reformer C. G. Montefiore as early as 1894 concerning the Reformed portrayal of Judaism in dark terms in comparison to Paul s theology. But it was E. P. Sander s influential work, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (1977) that really championed the position that first century Second Temple Judaism was not characterized by a legalistic mindset. This became a central point as the following quotes attest:

E. P. SANDERS Our analysis of Rabbinic and other Palestinian Jewish literature did not reveal the kind of religion best characterized as legalistic worksrighteousness. But more important for the present point is the observation that in any case that charge is not the heart of Paul s critique (p. 550)

N. T. WRIGHT The real problem is not legalism as usually conceived within traditional Protestant theology, but rather the question of whether one has to become a Jew in order to belong to the people of God (p. 173)

SHANE SCOTT The NP argues that Paul was not dealing with the questions that faced Luther in the 16th century, but with the questions facing the church in the first century particularly the issue of Gentile inclusion into the church the problem was not legalism, but exclusivism TUESDAY, MAY 19, 2009 An Introduction to the New Perspective

BLAMING LUTHER As noted in the last quote, the blame for this incorrect legalistic view of Judaism is laid at the feet of Martin Luther in the 16 th century, in that he misconstrued Judaism because of his objections to the works-righteousness of the Roman Catholic Church. He saw in Judaism the problems that he saw in Catholicism and (mis)interpreted Paul s controversy with the Judaism in those 16 th century terms. What the NPP claims to do is to correct this misunderstanding of Judaism, and consequently Paul s theology, by going back to the first century context of Judaism and restoring the proper interpretation to Paul s language and dispute with the Judaizers.

WHAT DID PAUL SAY? Sander s work has brought the question of the nature of Second Temple Judaism to the forefront. A better understanding of Judaism can aid scholars and Bible students. But, on the other hand, many questions remain as to exactly what those sources, rabbinic and otherwise, are telling us, and whether they truly represent majority thought among Jews of the first century. What Sander s research did show is that rabbinic scholars spoke of both the grace of God and keeping God s commandments as necessary in being found righteous before God. The question remains as to what Paul was saying and reacting to in his epistles. Was it just certain commandments that were viewed as badges of nationality that Paul called works of the law or was Paul contrasting justification by faith with a legalistic system of perfect law-keeping in order to obtain righteousness? Was there anything learned about Judaism that was not already known from the Scriptures themselves? SHALL WE LET PAUL SPEAK FOR PAUL?

DID PAUL OPPOSE JEWISH LEGALISM? Definition of legalism 1) Effort to earn righteousness by perfect law-keeping 2) Focus on and glorying in self 3) Boasting and pride which results from this effort and focus

RIGHTEOUSNESS THROUGH PERFECT LAW-KEEPING Works of the law? Galatians 2:16; 3:2, 5, 10 Romans 3:20, 28 Interchangeable with law Paul s argument: A man is not justified by the works of the law (Gal. 2:16) v. 21 righteousness coming through the law (parallel thought)

GALATIANS 2:16-21 16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified. 17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! 18 For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. 19 For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.

PAUL IN GALATIANS Works of the law Law

GALATIANS 3:5-14 5 Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 6 just as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. 7 Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, In you all the nations shall be blessed. 9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them. 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for the just shall live by faith. 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but the man who does them shall live by them. 13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree ), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

RIGHTEOUSNESS THROUGH PERFECT LAW-KEEPING Galatians 3:10 works of law = all things that are written in the book of the law v. 11 not justified by law (cp. 2:16 works of the law ) Curse of Deut. 27:26 and Gal. 3:10 not keep all things that are written in the book of the law Why make argument if no attempt by certain Jews to be justified by meritorious, perfect law-keeping?

RIGHTEOUSNESS THROUGH PERFECT LAW-KEEPING Galatians 3:10 If they were not trying to keep the whole law perfectly in order to be justified (legalism), then why would Paul parallel being of the works of the law with continuing in all things which are written in the book of the law as both being under the curse (of sin)? The attempt of justification by a system of perfect law-keeping, a righteousness that comes through the law, is the perverted gospel the Judaizing teachers were troubling the brethren with in the churches works of law = all things that are written in the book of the law v. 11 not justified by law (cp. 2:16 works of the law ) Curse of Deut. 27:26 and Gal. 3:10 not keep all things that are written in the book of the law Why make argument if no attempt by certain Jews to be justified by meritorious, perfect law-keeping? of Galatia (1:6-9).

PAUL IN GALATIANS Works of the law Law Works of the law All things that are written in the book of the law

ACTS 15:8-11 THE YOKE Peter stated at the Jerusalem conference that God had acknowledged the Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit just as He did to us (Jews), and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith (Acts 15:8-9). Then to those who said that it was necessary for the Gentiles to be circumcised and to command them to keep the law of Moses he pointedly asked, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? (v. 10)? What was this yoke that neither the Jewish fathers nor they were able to bear? Was it simply the Jewish badges of identity circumcision, sabbath, and food laws? No, the unbearable yoke was the demand that perfect-keeping of the Law of Moses was necessary to be saved (v. 5). The Jews were not able to bear this yoke because they had broken the law as sinners. The Judaizing teachers now wished to place this unbearable yoke of perfect law-keeping salvation on the Gentiles. Peter rejected this teaching, saying that we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we (Jews) shall be saved in the same manner as they (Gentiles) (v. 11).

ROMANS 3:21-31 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. 29 Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, 30 since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.

ROMANS 4:1-5 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,

PAUL AND ABRAHAM Paul s argument concerning Abraham in Romans 4 defeats any notion of obtaining righteousness by perfect law-keeping. Abraham would have had reason to boast had his justification been by works, that is, by perfect law-keeping in which wages would be counted as debt (vv. 2, 4). Instead, it was Abraham s faith that was accounted [imputed] to him for righteousness by a God who justifies the ungodly (vv. 3, 5). Paul quotes David in Psalm 32:1-2 to describe the blessedness of forgiveness of sin that is obtained by faith (vv. 6-8). This blessedness is for all, uncircumcised as well as circumcised, because Abraham s faith was accounted while he was uncircumcised (vv. 9-12; Gen. 15:6). The promise to Abraham that he would be heir of the world was through the righteousness of faith according to grace, not through the law. In hope Abraham believed, being fully convinced, and did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief (vv. 13-21). The fact that Abraham s faith was accounted to him for righteousness was written for us whose faith shall be accounted [imputed] to us for righteousness who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised because of our justification (vv. 22-25). This argument concerning Abraham confirms Paul s earlier points that by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight and that a man is justified by faith, apart from the deeds of the law (Rom. 3:20, 28).

PAUL IN GALATIANS AND ROMANS Works of the law Law Works of the law Law of works/ deeds of the law All things that are written in the book of the law Boasting/Wages counted as debt

YOKE ON THE NECK Acts 15:8-11 Covenantal nomism? NO! Seeking righteousness by a system of perfect-law keeping

YOKE ON THE NECK: JUSTIFICATION BY PERFECT LAW-KEEPING Peter stated at the Jerusalem conference that God had acknowledged the Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit just as He did to us (Jews), and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith (Acts 15:8-9). Then to those who said that it was necessary for the Gentiles to be circumcised and to command them to keep the law of Moses he pointedly asked, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? (v. 10)? What was this yoke that neither the Jewish fathers nor they were able to bear? Was it simply the Jewish badges of identity circumcision, sabbath, and food laws? No, the unbearable yoke was the demand that perfect-keeping of the Law of Moses was necessary to be saved (v. 5). The Jews were not able to bear this yoke because they had broken the law as sinners. The Judaizing teachers now wished to place this unbearable yoke of perfect law-keeping salvation on the Gentiles. Peter rejected this teaching, saying that we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we (Jews) shall be saved in the same manner as they (Gentiles) (v. 11).

GLORYING IN SELF The second aspect of legalism is the focus on and glorying in self. Paul emphasizes that salvation is by grace through faith and that not of yourselves not of works, lest anyone should boast (Eph. 2:8-9). It is not according to our works (2 Tim. 1:9) or by works of righteousness which we have done (Titus 3:5). Paul desired to be found by Christ, not having my own righteousness which is from the law (Phil. 3:9). The Jews erred by seeking to establish their own righteousness (Rom. 10:3). One can see the emphasis on what is our works or of yourselves, what we have done, and my own and their own righteousness. God s part is necessarily deemphasized while my efforts are highlighted. This opens a door for a boastful attitude.

BOASTING Prideful boasting is a part of this legalistic attitude, as already seen in Ephesians 2:9. It is mentioned in Romans 3:27-28 in connection to works of the law. If there was no problem with boasting, why would Paul insist that it was excluded? And it cannot be limited to just a nationalistic pride, but boasting in the personal accomplishment of such works.

JEWS INVOLVED? Having shown that Paul opposed legalism, the second part of the argument is whether Paul s opposition against legalism involved the Jews. The context of Galatians 2-3 deals with those who were of the works of the law and therefore would be of those under the curse stated in the Mosaic law itself (Deuteronomy 27:26). The law under consideration is the Mosaic Law and those who considered it vital to their salvation were the Jews. This certainly would not involve Gentiles, for they were aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise (Ephesians 2:12). Even those of the NPP agree that Paul s opponents in Galatians are the Judaizing teachers. Therefore, Paul s argument against legalism involved the Jews.

NPP CRUMBLES! Having shown from the Scriptures that Paul opposed legalism, and that this legalism involved the Jews, it has been proven that Paul opposed Jewish legalism, something that is denied by the NPP as a fundamental point supporting its paradigm. How widespread this legalistic attitude was we may never truly know, but it was a serious threat to the faith of brethren, both Jew and Gentile, in the Lord s church. With this major pillar crumbled, the rest of the NPP as a systematic theological template by which to interpret Paul and the rest of the New Testament is shown to be based on a faulty human premise. Jewish legalism was real it was a false teaching, a perverted gospel, which set aside the marvelous grace of God revealed in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Justification comes not by the deeds of the law, but by faith in God who justifies the ungodly by the blood of Christ which provides forgiveness of sins. What divine love and grace we have received so that we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation (Rom. 5:11)!

WAGES OF GRACE, OR WAGES OF LAW? 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt (Romans 4:4) >> Matthew 20:1-15 << But many who are first will be last, and the last first (19:30 and 20:16 - order set not by human merit, but by divine sovereign choice) Workers in vineyard all given same wage regardless of how long they had labored wages of grace, not law of works. First workers supposed it should be by debt, but it was all by grace, as the landowner decided to give. Through grace we are all equal as to our reward IF we labor faithfully in his vineyard (conditions of grace) Those who do all (law of works) are still unprofitable (Lk. 17:10 - because none are actually perfect) and must access grace to receive the reward

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? Secondary, extra-biblical literature and historical background studies has been raised to the level of a 67 th book of the Bible, and is used as the primary authority by which the Bible picture of Paul and Judaism is to be interpreted. Covenantal Nomism is the religious dogma that underlies all modern NPP assertions about Second Temple Judaism as non-legalistic even to the exclusion of the evidence of the Scriptures. Biblical terminology such as justification, the righteousness of God, works of the law, etc. has been redefined in accordance with NPP principles and all passages incorporating these terms have been forced through this interpretive template, or paradigm, to conform to the Covenantal Nomism dogma. Certain brethren have now freely availed themselves of varying amounts of this larger system reinterpreting Paul and Judaism while supposing that they will remain unaffected by the abundance of rank error found therein about Paul, his teachings, and the entire biblical evidence, and continue untouched by the Historical-Critical methodology of many of its advocates who have swept the truth aside. History has shown this to be a fraught with devilish danger. Brethren, we can judge this New Perspective tree by its cultivators and fruits! If Paul were here today, I firmly believe that he would see it for what it is and repeat the warning of 1 Timothy 6:20-21: Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and vain babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge by professing it, some have strayed concerning the faith!