The Development of the New Perspective on Paul -- Stendahl, Sanders, and Dunn
Thursday, January 4, 2007 at 06:08PM 
In light of the very important debate over the Federal Vision (FV) going on at Scott Clark's Heidelblog (Click here: http://www.oceansideurc.org/ - The Heidelblog (Scott Clark), I thought it might be useful to post a paper which has been mentioned by several of those engaged in the debate.
The paper is entitled, "Reformed Confessionalism and the New Perspective on Paul." Although now badly outdated--I originally wrote this paper for a Ph.D. seminar with D. A. Hagner way back in 1996--the paper does deal with the formation of what is now called the New Perspective on Paul (NPP) or better, "New Perspectives" on Paul, since there are significant differences among its key adherents.
"Reformed Confessionalism" was written before N. T. Wright burst upon the public scene, and well before the Federal Vision was a gleam in its Auburn Avenue fathers' eyes. Unlike several of the versions of this essay posted on-line, this particular version is not abridged and contains all the original footnotes.
"Reformed Confessionalism and the New Perspective" deals with an important aspect of the New Perspective, namely the shift away from the earlier Bultmannian reading of Paul, largely through the efforts of Krister Stendahl (pictured above). Stendahl's distinctive interpretation of Paul is often overlooked, but cannot be underestimated. To some degree, it is Stendahl's attack upon the "Lutheran Paul," which paves the way for Sanders, Dunn, and Wright.
Understanding the transition in argument from Stendahl, to E. P. Sanders, to James D. G. Dunn, will help the reader see the highly idiosyncratic interpretation of Paul and selective use of Palestinian sources by these men, as well as demonstrate that the NPP collides with several very important Pauline texts--namely Galatians 2:16, Romans 4:5 and Philippians 3:9.
I hope this essay will provide some light, if not on the current debate over NPP and FV, on the history of New Testament studies and the development of the Stendahl-Sanders-Dunn trajectory and its subsequent modification by N. T. Wright.
To read the essay, click here
Reader Comments (8)
http://inmediasrespodcast.blogspot.com/
Here is an intriguing evaluation from a Roman Catholic on NT Wrights's "What St. Paul Really Said"
"... Wright's common sense adherence to the Pauline texts is what enables him to escape the absurdities of so many other Pauline scholars. Wright fortunately makes clear what many an ordinary Christian would affirm in the face of generations of scholarly confusion: we are not saved by the doctrine of "justification" but rather by Jesus Christ who died for us and rose again. Wright demolishes the great Lutheran cul-de-sac of "justification" as the way Christians are saved. Instead, Wright argues that "justification" is more about ecclesiology, that is, about the community that results after we are saved by Messiah Jesus (see pp. 122,133). Remarkably, Wright's reworking of the much abused notions of "justification" and "righteousness," reminds me of the insightful and passionate writings of Fr. Rainero Cantalamessa, the current preacher to the papal household, even though it must be said that their approaches do differ (see p. 164). It seems to me that Luther dropped the ball on justification. We are still recovering from the effects of that grand and highly influential diversion from Paul's real focus."
Best regards,
Chuck