NT2200-Week Two-Perspectives on Paul Paper
The “old perspective” or “traditional perspective” that Timothy G. Gombis presents in our textbook can be summed up as a human effort to make oneself righteous in the eyes of God through works of the law. According to Timothy G. Gombis (2010), “When Paul critiques “Law,” “works of the Law,” and “works,” he is opposing an implicit Jewish legalism; the assumption that one’s status before God is earned through merit gained through good deeds” (p. 83).
From this understanding of the Law, Jews took their religious beliefs seriously. They were devout in their efforts to obey the law religiously. They took the Mosaic Law and the Levitical laws given to them by God as a sign of being a chosen people, the …show more content…
I also want to point out that Timothy Gombis refers to Paul’s close encounter experience with Christ as a conversion. Several times throughout his commentary he refers to Paul’s …show more content…
Gombis (2010), “Stendahl argued that Protestants were interpreting Paul through the lens of the tortured introspective conscience in Western Christian theology, stemming from Augustine and running through Luther” (p. 88). Stendahl also opposes the perspective that Paul was against the legalistic system in Judaism.
A stronger argument against the old perspective came later in 1977 written by E. P. Sanders, who argues “that the Christian vision of Judaism as a religion of “works-righteousness” and legalism cannot be sustained from the Jewish literature of Paul’s day” (p. 88). This new perspective introduces a new thought and a new term which is ethnocentrism.
Ethnocentrism suggests Paul’s opposition is not legalism within Judaism but rather the idea that God’s salvation in Christ is exclusively for Jews, and Jewish proselytes only. The first century Christians were exclusively Jews and since the Jew was God’s elect, His salvation was to them alone. Paul wanted them to understand that God’s plan of salvation included the
The “old perspective” or “traditional perspective” that Timothy G. Gombis presents in our textbook can be summed up as a human effort to make oneself righteous in the eyes of God through works of the law. According to Timothy G. Gombis (2010), “When Paul critiques “Law,” “works of the Law,” and “works,” he is opposing an implicit Jewish legalism; the assumption that one’s status before God is earned through merit gained through good deeds” (p. 83).
From this understanding of the Law, Jews took their religious beliefs seriously. They were devout in their efforts to obey the law religiously. They took the Mosaic Law and the Levitical laws given to them by God as a sign of being a chosen people, the …show more content…
I also want to point out that Timothy Gombis refers to Paul’s close encounter experience with Christ as a conversion. Several times throughout his commentary he refers to Paul’s …show more content…
Gombis (2010), “Stendahl argued that Protestants were interpreting Paul through the lens of the tortured introspective conscience in Western Christian theology, stemming from Augustine and running through Luther” (p. 88). Stendahl also opposes the perspective that Paul was against the legalistic system in Judaism.
A stronger argument against the old perspective came later in 1977 written by E. P. Sanders, who argues “that the Christian vision of Judaism as a religion of “works-righteousness” and legalism cannot be sustained from the Jewish literature of Paul’s day” (p. 88). This new perspective introduces a new thought and a new term which is ethnocentrism.
Ethnocentrism suggests Paul’s opposition is not legalism within Judaism but rather the idea that God’s salvation in Christ is exclusively for Jews, and Jewish proselytes only. The first century Christians were exclusively Jews and since the Jew was God’s elect, His salvation was to them alone. Paul wanted them to understand that God’s plan of salvation included the