Paul & the Law: A Contextual Approach [Paperback]

Frank Thielman (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: November 14, 1995

No issue in contemporary Pauline studies is more contested than Paul's view of the law. Headline proponents of the "new perspective" on Paul, such as E.P. Sanders and J.D.G. Dunn, have maintained that the Reformational readings of Paul have led to distorted understandings of first-century Judaism, of Paul and particularly of Paul's diagnosis of the Jewish situation under the law. Others have responded by arguing that while our understanding of Paul needs to be tuned to the clearer sounds now emanating from Jewish texts of the apostle's day, the basic Reformational insight into Paul's analysis of the human plight remains true to the apostle. Paul was opposing works righteousness. Paul & The Law is a careful attempt to assault this crucial interpretive problem with a new strategy. Rather than taking a systematic, topical approach, Frank Thielman examines Paul's view of the law in context: the context of each letter's language and argument. While many studies have focused on Paul's explicit statements about the law, Thielman goes further in investigating those contexts where Paul's language is allusive and his view implied. The result is an illuminating and significant contribution to Pauline studies. Paul & the Law clarifies our understanding of Paul's perspective on the law in the light of his gospel of Jesus Christ, and it reaffirms the coherence and integrity of Pauline theology as it relates to this pivotal axis of his thought.

Product Details

• Paperback: 336 pages
• Publisher: IVP Academic (November 14, 1995)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0830818545
• ISBN-13: 978-0830818549
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #194,423 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Frank Thielman (PhD, Duke University) is Presbyterian professor of divinity at Beeson Divinity School, Samford University, in Birmingham, Alabama. He is the author of Philippians in the NIV Application Commentary series.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

13 of 13 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent work on Paul and the law, December 9, 1999

By 

Justin Taylor - See all my reviews

This review is from: Paul & the Law: A Contextual Approach (Paperback)

Thielman's book is one of the most helpful treatments on this crucial area of biblical studies. His introduction, wherein he gives a thorough and concise treatment on the history of the debates, is alone worth the price of the book. He then takes the reader through all of the Pauline letters, examining their background, presuppositions, and arguments as it relates to Paul's both positive and negative view of the law. Thielman is a master at arguing convincingly for his position without wasting ink--and he is almost always a sure-footed guide through much rocky terrain. In my opinion, this is the best book available today on Paul's view of the law (with Tom Schreiner's _The Law and Its Fulfillment_ as a close second).

11 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars An interesting look at Paul's view of the Mosaic Law, July 29, 2003

By 

theologicalresearcher "theologicalresearcher" (Canada) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Paul & the Law: A Contextual Approach (Paperback)

One of the perennial problems of Pauline studies for students and scholars alike is Paul's seemingly inconsistent statements on the Law. Thielman attempts to solve this inconsistency in Paul by combining traditional Protestant interpretations with recent interpretations of Paul. In chapter one, Thielman goes over the varied interpretations of Paul's view of the Law since Aquinas. Anyone wanting a good background on this debate should consult this chapter. In chapter two, Thielman argues that Paul approached his view of the Law through his first century Jewish background. He argues that the Jews (with references from intertestamental writings, Josephus, and the Gospels) during the Second Temple period believed that they were still receiving the covenant curses for disobedience--which is exile under Roman domination (N. T. Wright). This is a provocative thesis considering that most Protestant scholars believe that the Jews of that time did not hold to this view (the Jews thought they were "right" with God again). Chapters 3-10 deal with Paul's view of the Law in his epistles (1 and 2 Thessalonians [3], 1 and 2 Corinthians [4-5], Galatians [6], Philippians [7], Romans [8-9], and the later epistles [10]). Thielman argues that in all these epistles--though written with different situations to deal with--there are common themes that run underneath about the Law: 1) that the Mosaic Law was given to the Israelites out of God's grace and is gracious in character; 2) that the Mosaic Law is now obsolete and cannot confer salvation because ALL have transgressed its demands for PERFECT obedience; 3) that the ritualistic aspects of the Mosaic Law that separated Jews from Gentiles are abrogated in Christ; 4) and that the new covenant community is required to obey the moral aspects of the Mosaic Law to separate themselves from the pagan world (or as a means of sanctification). Thielman nicely wraps up his discussion with summarizing conclusions in chapter eleven.

However, some of Thielman's points may not sit well with advocates of the traditional Protestant view of the Law. Thielman follows too closely with the "letter-Spirit" approach to the Law (Daniel Fuller). He argues that the Pauline antithesis between Law and Gospel should not be understood as a fundamental antithesis between works and faith. Works are good and even required under the new covenant. In fact, according to Thielman, Paul's gospel has the same structure of promise-demand as the Mosaic covenant. One of the main differences between the two covenants is that in the new covenant the believer is enabled to obey the Law through the Spirit. Thus, the issue of Law vs. Gospel is merely a salvation-historical issue. Thielman argues this point based on the renewal-prophetic passages in Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Though it is true that the Law will be written in the hearts of believers as prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31-34, Thielman does not discuss in detail what the implications of this is. Does it mean that redeemed people will obey God's Law because they are justified (Luther, Calvin, the Puritans, etc.)? Or is this new obedience to the Law a requirement for final justification alongside Christ's righteousness (New Perspective)? Thielman should have spent some time (perhaps several pages) discussing how his approach to the Law coincides with justification by faith and Christ's righteousness imputed to believers. In fact, one gets the impression that Thielman removes the wall between the Law and Gospel, a wall that traditional Protestants have always kept in place. Overall, though, this book is worth reading. Many students of Paul's theology will find this book quite interesting and resourceful.

6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The best book on the relationship of Paul to the Law, August 3, 2003

By 

Shawn W. Gillogly "DenSem Grad" (Denver, CO United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Paul & the Law: A Contextual Approach (Paperback)

Many people would prefer Schreiner's work on this subject. But I would say that Thielmann's approach is far more convincing, IMHO. Because he starts by studying Paul's usages in the works that are less frequently examined, or less controversial, and then builds towards the most unusual usages, one can see what Paul's 'normal' practice is.

This is important because it makes an interpreter less likely to punt to a theological assertion if one has seriously examined the exegetical base Paul has built first. Thielmann's interaction with the so-called "new" view of Paul and the Law is also helpful. He does not automatically reject everything it offers. But neither does he uncritically assume (as many scholars today do) that everything before Sanders is to be forgotten.

All in all, even if one doesn't entirely agree with the author in the end (and on this subject, it's almost impossible to find an author one 'entirely' agrees with), IMHO, he does a better job than anyone else currently in print of both interacting with the relevant scholarship and defining a workable view.