LIBERTY UNIVERSITY

LIBERTY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

PAUL AND THE LAW

A PAPER
SUBMITTED TO DR. RODNEY WOO
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE
NEW TESTAMENT ORIENTATION II
NBST 522

BY
BRIAN DOUGLAS AUNKST

MORRISON, COLORADO

DECEMBER 9, 2012

ii
CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

II. BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A. Decalogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B. Pentateuch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C. Intertestamental Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

D. The Law and Jesus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

III. THE LAW AND THE APOSTLE PAUL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A. Letter to the Galatians

.............................................

1. Justification by Faith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2. Purpose of the Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. Freedom in Christ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B. Letter to the Romans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1. Righteousness and the Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2. Sanctification and the Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. End of the Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

C. Other Letters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

1. 1 Corinthians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

2. Philippians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

IV. PAULS INTERPRETERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

A. Early Interpretations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

1. Church Fathers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

2. Augustine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12

3. Thomas Aquinas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13

iii

B. The Reformers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13

1. Martin Luther . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13

2. John Calvin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14

C. New Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

1. E. P. Sanders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

2. James D. G. Dunn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

3. N. T. Wright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17

C. Recent Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17

1. Thomas R. Schreiner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

18

2. Douglas Moo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

18

3. D. A. Carson, et al. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19

4. Frank Thielman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19

V. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20

VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21

INTRODUCTION
Most Christians are familiar with the story of Yahweh giving the Law to Moses on
Mount Sinai, (Exodus 20:1-17, 32:15-16). This Law defined the Jewish people and their
worship practices for over 1000 years. However, in his letters, the Apostle Paul claims that he
has died to the Law (Gal. 2:19) and is no longer under the Law (Gal. 5:18, Rom. 6:14) although
Pauls exact meaning has been debated by scholars. Some have argued that Pauls view of the
Law and its relationship to believers changed as his ministry continued, while others contend that
Paul consistently presented the role of the Law in the Christian life. This paper will demonstrate
how Pauls treatment of the Law, particularly in his letters to the Galatians and the Romans,
coherently argues that righteous from God comes by faith and not by works of the Law.
BACKGROUND
In order to understand how Paul viewed the Law, one must begin where he began, that is,
by understanding the Law as a first century AD Jew would have understood if. To do this, one
must review the roots of the Law and its original intent as found in the Old Testament (OT) of
the Christian Bible. An exhaustive analysis of this subject is beyond the scope of this paper;
however, a brief examination is necessary for a full understanding of the topic at hand.
Decalogue
Prior to their 400-year sojourn into the land of Egypt, Yahwehs people, the people of the
covenant, consisted only of Jacobs extended family, and there was no need for the codification
of any directives for living: Yahweh was their law. However, while in Egypt, Yahweh had
made Jacobs descendants, Israel, into a great nation, who upon their exodus from Egypt
required a set of rules to function as the people and nation of Yahweh. This He did at Mount
Sinai as recorded in Exodus 20:1-23:19, reestablishing His covenant with Israel with the Book of
1

2
the Covenant. 1 Most recognized of these covenantal rules is the Decalogue, or ten words,
which is commonly called the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:1-17, Deut. 5:6-21). These ten
words are the essential substance of all OT law. 2
Pentateuch
Large portions of the first five books of the OT, Pentateuch, are devoted to expansions of
the ten words. 3 These theological developments, many of them ordinances and covenant
obligations, were called the Torah, 4 which derives from the Hebrew verb yrh, meaning to
direct or point the way. 5 In a more general sense it means teaching; in a narrower sense,
law. 6 Also included in the Torah were the regulations concerning sacrifices and offerings,
which came to occupy a central importance in the life of Gods people, eventually to the
detriment of Torah itself. 7
Intertestamental Period
Thanks to the work of Ezra during the return of the exilic Jews, the rebuilding of
Jerusalem and the Temple, and the reinstatement of the sacrificial system, Judaism became
firmly established as a religion of separation unto its own law and its own God. 8 This period

Erwin Fahlbusch and Geoffrey William Bromiley, vol. 3, The Encyclopedia of Christianity (Grand
Rapids; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill, 1999-2003), 208.
2

D. R. W. Wood and I. Howard Marshall, New Bible Dictionary, 3rd ed. (Leicester, England; Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 673.
3

Chad Brand, Charles Draper, Archie England et al., eds., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, ed.
(Nashville, TN: Holman, 2003), 1016.
4

R. Alan Cole, Exodus: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 2, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1973), 157.
5

Paul J. Achtemeier, Harpers Bible Dictionary, 1st ed. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), 1083.

Fahlbusch and Bromiley, The Encyclopedia of Christianity, 509.

Stanley E. Porter and Craig A. Evans, Dictionary of New Testament Background: A Compendium of
Contemporary Biblical Scholarship, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2000).
8

Roger Beckwith, Intertestamental Judaism, Its Literature and Its Significance, Themelios 15, no. 3
(April 1990), 78.

3
also saw the development of several sects within Judaism, each with their own interpretation of
Torah. 9 One of sects was the Pharisees who were zealous observers of the law, prominent
among the people and especially concerned with ritual purity, tithing food according to [Old
Testament] law, and correct observance of Sabbath. 10
The Law and Jesus
As the fulfillment of the Law (nomos), Jesus attitude is best evidenced by His teaching
to His disciples in Matthew 5:17-18. While the purpose of the Law was fulfilled in the person of
Jesus Christ, but its legalistic conformity stood exposed and condemned. 11 The Gospels record
no instance of Jesus violating the Law; 12 however, He was critical of the intense legalism of the
Pharisees and their ritualistic practices (cf. Luke 11:53-54, Matthew 9:2-7, 12:1-2, Mark 2:22,
among many others). 13 He attended the synagogue regularly and yet did not hesitate to break
the purity laws (Mark 3:1317) or rigid interpretations of Sabbath law (Mark 3:16). 14 These
two specific areas continually caused conflict: observance of the Sabbath (Mark 2:27) and
personal defilement (Mark 7:14-23). 15 Jesus upheld the law not, however, by casuistry, but
by bringing it to its eschatological fruition, so that the intentions of God in creation and in the
Law and the Prophets are fulfilled. 16
9

Steven L. Cox and Kendell H. Easley, Holman Christian Standard Bible: Harmony of the Gospels
(Nashville: Holman, 2007), 245.
10

Achtemeier, Harpers Bible Dictionary, 782.

11

Walter A Elwell and Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Baker Reference
Library (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996). Logos eBook.
12

T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner, eds., New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Downers Grove,
IL: InterVarsity, 2001). Logos eBook.
13

Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight and I. Howard Marshall, eds., Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels,
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1992), 217.
14

Elwell and Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Logos eBook.

15

Alexander and Rosner, eds., New Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Logos eBook.

16

Geoffrey W. Bromiley, ed., The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised, vol. 2 (Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), 172.

4
THE LAW AND THE APOSTLE PAUL
One Pharisee who was brought up in Jerusalem (Acts 22:3), studied under the Rabbi
Gamaliel, and was trained in the strict manner of the law of our fathers (Acts 22:3), resulting
in him being zealous for God (Acts 22:3) was Saul of Tarsus. After his conversion, it was the
Apostle Pauls job to work out in theological terms the relationship of believers, both Jew and
Gentile, to the Mosaic law. 17 Unfortunately, Paul never wrote a comprehensive doctrinal
statement, so all that can be known about his concept of the Law must be gleaned from his
various epistles. Given the occasional nature of these letters, the interpreter must exercise
discernment and wisdom in order to properly understand Pauls way of thinking.
Letter to the Galatians
Pauls letter to the Galatians has been called the Magna Charta of evangelical
Christianity. 18 According to Longenecker, It is necessary, therefore, to understand Galatians
aright if we are to understand Paul and the rest of the [New Testament] NT aright. 19 Pauls
chief reason for writing to the church in Galatia was to ensure they did not forsake the only true
Gospel, as preached by him (Gal 1:6-10), and that Gospel is expressed in Galatians 2:16
(ESV), 20 We know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus
Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not
by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. 21

17

Alexander and Rosner, eds., New Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Logos eBook.

18

Maxie Dunnam, Galatians/Ephesians/Philippians/Colossians/Philemon, The Preachers Commentary

(Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982). Kindle eBook.
19

Richard N. Longenecker, vol. 41, Galatians, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated,
1998), xlixlii.
20

Unless otherwise noted, all Bible references are taken from The Holy Bible: English Standard Version
(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2001).
21

William Hendriksen and Simon J. Kistemaker, Exposition of Galatians, vol. 8, New Testament
Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-2001), 21.

5
Justification by Faith
Justification is the exculpation of guilt or the demonstration of the correctness of an act
or statement. 22 It is a judicial term used of God whereby He declares that a sinful person is
righteous, based on a belief and trust in Jesus Christ rather than in the persons own good works.
It is a change of state from guilt to righteousness. 23 Justification is the cornerstone of Pauls
theology. 24 The sole condition for being justified, according to Paul, is faith (2:16), a concept he
further defines in his letter to the Ephesians (Eph. 2:8).
This justification brings with it the righteousness of God, as Paul explains using
Abraham as his example (Gal. 3:6-18). Interestingly, English employs two word families
(righteousness/righteous and justify/ justification) to translate only one family of words in
Greekthe noun dikaiosyn, the adjective dikaios and the verb dikaio, 25 which Paul uses to
demonstrate their cooperative, interdependent relationship. Paul continues his argument in
Galatians 2:21 that Gods righteousness is not available through the Law; this belief nullifies the
work of Christ on the Cross.
Purpose of the Law
Since justification is not by the Law, Paul explains the purpose of the Law (Gal. 3:19-24).
The primary purpose of the Law is to reveal sin and the sinner for what they truly are in Gods
eyes (3:19). Gods Law provides the perfect standard by which all men are measured and fall
short (Romans 3:23). Paul also declares the Law was temporary until the offspring should

22

Achtemeier, Harpers Bible Dictionary, 520.

23

David S. Dockery, Trent C. Butler, Christopher L. Church, et al., Holman Bible Handbook (Nashville:
Holman, 1992), 679.
24

Martin H. Manser, Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical
Studies (London: Martin Manser, 1999).
25

Ralph P. Martin and Peter H. Davids, Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments,
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000). Logos eBook.

6
come to whom the promise had been made (3:19). This purpose of the Law ended with the
coming of Jesus Christ, who became mankinds new standard. 26
The other purpose of the Law was to be our guardian until Christ came (3:24), again
indicating the temporary nature of the Laws purpose. 27 Youngblood, et al., define a guardian as
a person legally responsible for the welfare and property of a minor. 28 Continuing with his
legal analogy, Paul compares those who lived before Christ as minors needing a guardian to look
after their best interests (cf. Gal. 4:2). 29 In this way, the Law enslaved those who were under its
jurisdiction until the coming of Jesus Christ, which freed them to walk in the Spirit as sons of
God.
Freedom in Christ
In Galatians 2:4, Paul introduces another contrast between slavery under the Law and
our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus. Having understood that the Galatians were being
misled into circumcision (and slavery to the Law), Paul continues this theme in chapters four and
five. He admonishes the Galatians for returning to slavery (4:1-11) and uses the illustration of
Hagar and Sarah to compare their former life of slavery to their present life of freedom (4:2131). In chapter five, Paul finishes by exhorting the Galatians to stand firm, and do not submit
again to the yoke of slavery (5:1) under the Law.

26

Thomas R. Schreiner, The Abolition and Fulfillment of the Law in Paul, Journal for the Study of the
New Testament 35 (1989): 55.
27

Max Anders, Galatians-Colossians, vol. 8, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Broadman
& Holman, 1999), 38.
28

Ronald F. Youngblood, F. F. Bruce, and R. K. Harrison, eds., Nelsons New Illustrated Bible Dictionary
(Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1995).
29

David J. Lull, The Law was our Pedagogue: A Study in Galatians 3:19-25, Journal of Biblical
Literature 105, no. 3 (1986): 488.

7
Letter to the Romans
Pauls epistle to the Romans is the longest and most complex of his letters. While
scholars debate the overall purpose or theme of Pauls letter to the church in Rome, what is
apparent is its position as the theological treatise on his view of the Law in relation to
believers. 30 While Pauls epistle to the Galatians is the first complete statement of Gentile
Christian theology, 31 his epistle to the Romans is best understood as a more carefully
articulated account of some of [those] major themes. 32 In fact, Romans and Galatians cover so
much of the same material that some scholars believe they were composed together; however,
Pauls arguments in Romans are more thoroughly developed and better articulated than those in
Galatians. 33
Righteousness and the Law
Just as in his letter to the Galatians, Paul expresses his theology as his Gospel, which he
articulates in Romans 1:16-17 asserting, For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from
faith for faith, as it is written The righteous shall live by faith. Paul uses the various forms of
the noun righteousness (dikaiosyn), its related adjective righteous (dikaios), and the verb to
justify, to pronounce/treat as righteous or put right (dikaio) over 100 times in his letters, 34
demonstrating its significance in his theology, and it is a central concept in Romans, where it
appears 33 times. 35 The righteousness of God accentuates the deplorable condition of mankinds

30

Brand, Draper, England et al., eds., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 1410.

31

Achtemeier, Harpers Bible Dictionary, 327.

32

John William Drane, Introducing the New Testament, (Oxford: Lion, 2000), 338.

33

Ibid.

34

Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin and Daniel G. Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993), 830.
35

Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI;
Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press, 1988), 100-01.

8
sinfulness; both the Jews who had Gods Law and the Gentiles who did not (Romans 1:18-3:20)
stand equally condemned by a righteous God. According to Paul, No one will be declared
righteous in Gods sight by keeping the law. 36
Having painted this bleak picture of mankinds present situation, Paul returns to his
opening theme and offers the hope of righteousness apart from the lawthrough faith in Jesus
Christ for all who believe (Romans 3:21-22); 37 this, in fact, according to Paul is the only way
for them to be brought into a right standing with God. 38 In verse 23, Paul advises that all have
sinned and fall short of Gods righteousness, but that righteousness is granted to all thoseand
only thosewho put this faith into practice. 39 He completes this part of his argument asserting
that rather than overthrowing the Law, those of faith uphold the Law, which emphasizes that his
argument is not against the Law as such, but against the presumptuous attitude of those to whom
God had entrusted it. 40
To illustrate the inability of the Law to justify, Paul uses the example of Abraham, the
father not only of the Jews, but also of many nations (4:17, cf. Gen. 17:5). He correctly
observes that Abraham was declared righteous before he was circumcised, which Paul explains
sealed the righteousness he had received by faith (4:11), thus opposing the view that fulfilling the
Law through circumcision brought righteousness. 41 Following the argument to its conclusion,

36

Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman,
1995), 114-115.
37

James R. Edwards, Romans, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011),

38

Mounce, Romans, 113.

97.
39

William Hendriksen and Simon J. Kistemaker, Exposition of Paul's Epistle to the Romans, vol. 12, New
Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981), 127.
40
41

James D. G. Dunn, Romans 18, vol. 38A, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, 1998), 161.

C. E. B. Cranfield, The Epistle to the Romans, vol. 1, International Critical Commentary (New York;
London: T&T Clark, 1975), 224-225.

9
Paul extrapolates to his offspringnot the offspring of his flesh through the Law, but the
offspring of his spirit through faith. 42
Sanctification and the Law
Anticipating some to misunderstand their newfound freedom from the Law as
sanctioning antinomianism, Paul abruptly addresses that possibility in Romans 6:2: By no
means! has a believer been issued a license to sin by Jesus Christ. On the contrary, Paul urges
believers to not allow sin to have dominion over [them], since [they] are not under the Law but
under grace (Rom. 6:14). Paul spends the next three chapters clarifying the continuing role of
the Law for the believer 43 and exhorting them to live by the Spirit in a way that is pleasing to
God. 44
This section confuses many because on one hand Paul seems to suggest that the Law has
been superseded for Christians, while on the other hand proposing there is an ongoing
relationship between them; however, Paul makes several key points concerning the Law. First,
the believer can no longer be condemned by the Law (7:1-6). Second, the believer, as well as the
unbeliever, is convicted of sin by the Law (7:7-13). Third, the believer cannot be delivered from
sin by the Law (7:14-25). 45 Paul also details how the Gospel delivers believers from
condemnation under the Law (7:4-6), thus freeing them to fulfill the Laws requirements through
Jesus Christ (8:4) since the law of the Spirit has freed them from the law of sin and death
(8:2).

42

Douglas Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 286-288.
43

Dunn, Romans 18, 301.

44

Morris, The Epistle to the Romans, 243.

45

John MacArthur, Romans: Grace, Truth, and Redemption, MacArthur Bible Studies (Nashville, TN: W
Publishing Group, 2000), 50.

10
End of the Law
Finally, in Romans 10:4, Paul affirms that Jesus Christ is the end of the law for
righteousness to everyone who believes. Again, Paul here is proclaiming an end to the Law as a
means of salvation, 46 having been fulfilled by Jesus Christ (Matt. 5:17-18, Rom. 13:10). Christ
was and has always been the intended end of the Law (cf. Gal. 3:24). 47 His fulfillment thus
terminated the need for sinful mankinds futile efforts to obey the Law and thereby achieve
righteousness. 48
Other Letters
While it is beyond the scope of this paper to perform an in-depth analysis of the subject
of the Law in other Pauline epistles, a cursory review is instructive to demonstrate the unity and
coherence of Pauls view of the Law throughout his ministry.
1 & 2 Corinthians
While the word Law (nomos) is used only nine times in this letter, Pauls view of its role
in the sanctity and ethics of believers can be seen clearly. 49 In 1Corinthians, Paul clearly tells his
readers that Christian freedom and its attendant responsibilities are not based on law, but on love
(cf. Rom. 13:10). 50 He explains to the Corinthians that since he is no longer under the Law (1
Cor. 9:20), All things are lawful to [him], but not all things are helpful (1 Cor. 6:12), especially
when doing them causes another to stumble in his walk with the Lord (1 Cor. 8:13). His further

46

Thomas Schreiner, Pauls View of the Law in Romans 10: 4-5, Westminster Journal of Theology 55
(1993): 115.
47

John Peter Lange, Philip Schaff, F. R. Fay et al., A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Romans
(Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 342.
48

Kenneth Boa and William Kruidenier, Romans, vol. 6, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville:
Broadman & Holman, 2000), 309.
49

Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 535.

50

Drane, Introducing the New Testament, 383-384.

11
urging against the slavery of circumcision echoes back to his arguments against the Law and
legalism in Galatians and Romans (cf. Gal. 6:15, Rom. 2:29). 51
Philippians
Again in Philippians 3, Paul is forced to warn yet another church to beware of those who
would enslave them to the law through mutilat[ing] the flesh in circumcision (3:2-3), once
again recalling his contentions made in Galatians and Romans (cf. Gal. 2:12, Rom. 2:29). 52
Despite his superior confidence in the flesh, Paul pronounces his own inability to become
righteous under the Law, despite claiming to be blameless under its tenets (Phil. 3:4-9). 53 On
the contrary, Pauls righteousness comes through faith in Jesus Christ (cf. Gal. 2:20).
PAULS INTERPRETERS
Early Interpretations
The first interpreters of Pauls letters were obviously their original recipients; however,
no records of those are extant. Even in his own day, Paul was controversial; however, as one of
the earliest interpreters of Christ, Paul held great influence among Christians from his own time
to this day, and his works have been interpreted from that day to this one, although the
interpretations have varied widely over that time.
Church Fathers
The earliest known interpreter of any of the Pauline epistles is Clement of Rome
(Clement I) who was a presbyter in the Roman church in the late first century (died AD 100). In

51

Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 314.

52

Ibid., 539.

53

Anders, Galatians-Colossians, 243.

12
1 Clement 32.4, he mentions Pauls term justification by faith. 54 Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch
in Syria (died AD 107) was also heavily influenced by Pauls writings, as evidenced by his own
Letter to the Romans in which he sharply contrasts Christianity and Judaism. 55 Additionally,
Paul influenced the theology of Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Barth, and scores
of other theologians to the present time. 56
Augustine
Universally acknowledged as one of the worlds greatest theologians, Augustine, the
Bishop of Hippo in Latin Africa, became the theologian who revived Pauls gospel of grace in
the fourth century AD. 57 After a youth spent in wanton lasciviousness, Augustine was inspired
to read Pauls letter to the Romans and converted to Christianity, and the great mind was
liberated for the glory of god and the good of mankind. 58 Augustines theology began with the
universal sin of mankind through Adam and their likewise universal inability to save themselves
(cf. Rom. 2:1), thus necessitating salvation through Gods grace, which Augustine scripted
systematically and deeply in his Confessions. 59 Moreover, like Paul, Augustine believed that the
Law had been supplanted, and that under Christ, love was the supreme law. 60 Augustines
philosophy dominated Christian thinking for nearly 1000 years.

54

Ralph P. Martin and Peter H. Davids, Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments,
electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000).
55

Ibid.

56

Thomas R. Schreiner, Interpreting the Pauline Epistles, Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 3 (1991):

57

Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 690.

4.
58

D. Stuart Briscoe, Romans, The Preacher's Commentary Series (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982),
locations 210436-210441. Kindle eBook.
59
60

Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 690.

Norman L. Geisler and Ralph E. MacKenzie, Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and
Differences (Grand Rapids, Baker, 1995), 118-19.

13
Thomas Aquinas
In the thirteenth century, Thomas Aquinas, an Italian theologian and Dominican preacher
began emphasizing a return to the Gospel and academic learning. He employed Aristotelian
philosophy, emphasized human reason, and, like Augustine, believed that faith was based in
Gods revelation in Scripture. 61 In addition to Aquinas masterwork, Summa theologiae, his
commentary on Romans reveals how deeply he [Aquinas] was committed to the Pauline
doctrine of justification by faith, gratuity of grace, predestination, merit, good works, and the
doctrine of original sin. 62 In the sixteenth century, long after Aquinas death, the Catholic
Church, faced with the rise of Protestantism across Europe, used Aquinas work in drafting the
decrees of the Council of Trent (1545-1563). 63
The Reformers
While Augustine and Aquinas both believed in the Pauline doctrines of justification by
faith and the freedom of grace, the late Renaissance Roman Catholic Church had slipped into the
belief that justification was a cooperative effort between grace and works that the Church
expressed as the merit of the saints, against which an Augustinian monk named Martin Luther
dissented in 1517.
Martin Luther
As Martin Luther prepared a series of lectures on Pauls epistle to the Romans, he
grasped for the first time what he called the righteousness by which through grace and sheer

61

Elwell and Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Logos eBook.

62

J. Weisheipl, Friar Thomas dAquino. 2d ed. Catholic University of America Press, 1983, quoted in
Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Craig G. Bartholomew, Daniel J.
Treier and N. T. Wright (London; Grand Rapids, MI: SPCK; Baker Academic, 2005), 800.
63

Kevin A. Miller, ed., Christian History Magazine-Issue 28: The 100 Most Important Events in Church
History (Carol Stream, IL: Christianity Today, 1990). Logos eBook.

14
mercy God justified us through faith. 64 This realization that Gods grace was unmerited and
separate from any works of the Law launched the Protestant Reformation in Europe. Contrary to
the view espoused by the Roman Catholic Church at the time, Luther held that the Law and the
Gospel were antithetical, which is how he interpreted Paul. 65
Luther believed that Judaism during Pauls life was a merit-based religion 66 and
interpreted Pauls struggle with salvation through works under Jewish Law in the same light as
his own struggle with Roman Catholicism. 67 This distinction between the Law and the Gospel is
foundational to Lutheran theology. 68 Luther and his colleague Melanchthon identified three
ways that God used the Law, which distinguished it from the Gospel. First, the Law guides
society, thus promoting civil righteousness. Second, the Law convicts sinners, producing
repentance and driving them to Christ. Third, the Law helps the believer recognize and confront
any sin remaining in him. 69
John Calvin
John Calvin followed Luther in the early development of the Reformation. He too
believed that the purpose of the Law was not to secure worshippers for itself, but to conduct
them unto Christ. 70 Unlike Luther, Calvin did not believe that the Law and the Gospel stood
opposed to one another; rather, he believed that the two worked together in producing the

64

Briscoe, Romans, locations 210441-210446. Kindle eBook.

65

Dennis Ngien, Theology of Preaching in Martin Luther, Themelios 28, no. 2 (Spring 2003), 34.

66

John D. Barry and Lazarus Wentz, eds., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible
Software, 2012). Logos eBook.
67

Ibid.

68

Sinclair B. Ferguson and J.I. Packer, New Dictionary of Theology, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2000), 379.
69

Ibid.

70

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 1997).

15
Christian life. 71 Calvin taught that the abolition of the Law referred to freeing of the conscience
and to discontinuing the ancient Jewish ceremonies, which meant that while part of the Law
had ended, the Ten Commandments were still binding on the Church. 72 Calvins Reformed
theology drew a clear Law-Gospel distinction between the covenant of works and the covenant
of grace. 73
New Perspectives
While not entirely unchallenged, the Reformers view of Paul and the Law was dominant
for over 500 years. In the late 19th century, Jewish scholar C. G. Montefiore disputed the
interpretation that Pauls view of the role of the Law in Rabbinic Judaism. According to
Montefiore, Pauline opposition of works and faith, and of merit and grace, is inapplicable to the
Rabbinic religion. 74 Montefiores view went virtually unnoticed for seventy years, when the
publication of Paul and Palestinian Judaism by E. P. Sanders attacked the distorted view of
Judaism which Lutheran scholarship, and those under its influence, had produced. 75
E. P. Sanders
The 1977 publication by Sanders changed the course of Pauline scholarship. In it
Sanders espoused the view that first century Palestinian Judaism was not legalistic, in many
ways echoing Montefiores assessment. 76 On the contrary, according to Sanders, Judaisms
teaching was what Sanders called covenantal nomism, which he described as the view that
ones place in Gods plan is established on the basis of the covenant and that covenant requires
71

Fahlbusch and Bromiley, vol. 3, The Encyclopedia of Christianity, 218.

72

Charles C. Ryrie, The End of the Law, Bibliotheca Sacra 124 (July 1967): 245.

73

Ferguson and Packer, New Dictionary of Theology, 379.

74

C. G. Montefiore, Judaism and the Epistles of Paul, The Jewish Quarterly Review 13, no. 2 (January
1901): 183.
75

Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 531.

76

Ibid., 673.

16
as the proper response of man his obedience to its commandments, while providing means of
atonement for transgression. 77 According to his interpretation, Sanders sees Pauls critique of
Judaism not as an attack against legalism, but as a denouncing of his former religion. 78 He
denies Pauls argument in Galatians and Romans is against righteousness by works of the Law,
claiming instead that Paul is simply saying that one cannot achieve the right kind of
righteousness in this way. 79
Despite its adopted name, New Perspective on Paul, Sanders argument has more to do
with Luthers interpretation of Paul, than it does with Pauls misunderstanding of Rabbinic
Judaism.80 The impact of Sanders work was not because of its originality but because of its
comprehensive and systematic coverage of the topic of first century Judaism. 81 Additionally,
Sanders work has reinvigorated the study of Jewish beliefs and practices in Palestine. 82
James D. G. Dunn
One of Sanders most ardent supporters has been James D. G. Dunn, who augments
Sanders definition of covenantal nomism as a covenant relationshipregulated by the law,
not as a way of entering the covenant, or of gaining merit, but as the way of living within the
covenant; and that included the provision of sacrifice and atonement for those who confessed
their sins and thus repented. 83 Dunn coined the phrase New Perspective on Paul in 1983 later

77

E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion (Philadelphia:

Fortress, 1977), 75.
78

Preston M. Sprinkle, The Old Perspective on the New Perspective: A Review of Some Pre-Sanders
Thinkers, Themelios 30, no. 2 (Spring 2005), 31.
79

Veronica Koperski, What Are They Saying About (WATSA) Paul and the Law? (New York: Paulist Press,

2001), 22.
80

Ibid., 518.

81

Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 673.

82

Koperski, What Are They Saying About (WATSA) Paul and the Law? 2.

83

Dunn, Romans 1-8, lxv.

17
publishing a book with that title. 84 Additionally, Dunn understands Pauls polemic against
Palestinian Judaism as being against its use of the Law as an identity marker and boundary,
such as circumcision, which kept Jewish Christians separate from Gentile Christians. 85
N. T. Wright
The most conservative supporter of Sanders has been N. T. Wright who brought the
debate to a wider, more evangelical audience. Like Dunn, Wright believes Pauls doctrine of
justification by faith as in direct opposition to Judaisms manifestation of national primacy and
individuality, 86 which Wright calls national righteousness. 87 Wright adds his belief that first
century Palestinian Jews were still in exile since they continued to be in subjugation and
defilement by Gentile invaders. 88 Wright contends that the traditional Reformed teaching on
justification is wrong, insisting that justification is a covenant term that means to be recognized
as a member of the covenant. 89
Recent Responses
The New Perspective on Paul has not been accepted universally by Pauline scholars. On
the contrary, while numerous scholars have embraced this view, many others have challenged it
as being unsound. Some scholars still support the traditional Lutheran interpretation of Paul,
while others acknowledge the faults with both the Lutheran view and the New Perspective. 90

84

Barry and Wentz, eds., The Lexham Bible Dictionary, Logos eBook.

85

Dunn, Romans 1-8, lxix.

86

Tim Chester, The Northern Training Institute Papers No 12: March 2008: Justification, Ecclesiology
and the New Perspective in Themelios 30, no. 2 (Spring 2005), 5.
87

Dunn, Romans 1-8, lxxi.

88

Ibid.

89

Jeffery Smith,An Overview and Critique of the New Perspective of Pauls Doctrine of Justification (Part
One: The New Perspective Identified, Reformed Baptist Theological Review 3, no. 1 (Spring 2006), 89.
90

Le Donne, Paul, Logos eBook.

18
Thomas R. Schreiner
Among the recent responses to the New Perspective, Thomas Schreiner argues for the
traditional view and the consistency of Pauls view of the Law throughout his writings. 91
Schreiner criticizes Sanders covenantal nomism as being too simplistic and failing to
adequately explain Pauline theology. 92 He disagrees with Dunns assessment of Luther,
contending that Luther was substantially correct regarding both the meaning of works of the
law and the presence of legalism in Judaism. 93 He opposes Sanders, affirming Pauls
consistent teaching not only that justification cannot be obtained via law because no one can
keep the law perfectly, but also that redemption could only be obtained through belief in Jesus
Christ. 94
Douglas Moo
In his recent commentary on Romans, Douglas Moo advocates a modified Lutheran
view, 95 observing a consistent understanding of the Law across the Pauline corpus regarding
justification as a strictly forensic term that points to a legal reality. 96 Just as Luther did, Moo
also sees the Pauline law/gospel antithesis, discerning that Sanders approach raises serious
questions concerning its validity. 97 Moo defines three ways for believers to understand the Law:

91

Koperski, What Are They Saying About (WATSA) Paul and the Law? 55.

92

Thomas Schreiner, An Old Perspective on the New Perspective. Concordia Journal 35, no. 2 (Spring
2009): 151.
93

Thomas Schreiner, Was Luther Right? Paper. Fifth Annual Theological Symposium from Concordia
Seminary, St. Louis, MO, May 3, 1995, 10.
94

Thomas Schreiner, Paul and Perfect Obedience to the Law: An Evaluation of the View of E. P.
Sanders, Westminster Theological Journal 47, no. 2 (Fall 1985), 278.
95

Stanley N. Gundry, ed., Five Views on Law and Gospel, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996). Kindle

96

Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 28-29.

eBook.
97

Douglas Moo, Law, Works of the Law, and Legalism in Paul, Westminster Theological Journal.
45. (1983): 100.

19
the Law is no longer binding on the Christian; the Law continues to fill out and explain basic
concepts within old and new covenant law; and the Law should be read as a witness to Gods
plan fulfilled in Jesus Christ. 98
D. A. Carson, et al.
Justification and Variegated Nomism, Volumes 1 and 2, a collection of essays edited by
D. A. Carson, Peter OBrien, and Mark Seifrid, represents a comprehensive examination of the
Jewish literature readily extant in first century Palestine in order to test Sanders claim about
Judaism in Israel at that time. 99 As implied by the title, Carson, et al., contend that first century
Judaism was not itself unified in its view of the Law; rather, it was divided into various parties or
sects, each holding a different view of the Law. 100 Carson, et al., observe this one significant
problem with Sanders covenantal nomism, which is its tendency to over generalize these
varied sects in Palestinian Judaism and minimize their differences. 101
Frank Thielman
Frank Thielman agrees with the New Perspectives idea of approaching Pauls view of
the Law from the standpoint of first century Palestinian Judaism, which he affirms is simply
sound hermeneutical practice. 102 However, he disagrees with Sanders contention that Paul
argued about the Law from solution to plight, but rather from plight to solution, thus maintaining
Pauls continuity with first century Judaism. 103 He notes while there is an undeniable element of

98

Gundry, Five Views on Law and Gospel, Kindle eBook.

99

John M G. Barclay, "Justification and variegated nomism. Volume 1, The complexities of Second
Temple Judaism." Biblical Interpretation 13, no. 1 (January 1, 2005): 91-93.
100

Barry and Wentz, eds., The Lexham Bible Dictionary, Logos eBook.

101

Charles A. Gieschen, "Justification and variegated nomism. Volume 1, The complexities of Second
Temple Judaism." Concordia Theological Quarterly 72, no. 1 (January 1, 2008): 96-318.
102

Frank Thielman, Philippians, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 181.

103

Koperski, What Are They Saying About (WATSA) Paul and the Law? 41.

20
discontinuity in Pauls view of the Law, it has been overstressed by Sanders. 104 Thielman
concludes that Paul held a consistent and well-reasoned view of the Law throughout his epistles,
which bears the marks of a complex and carefully considered position, worthy of the most
painstaking study and of the deepest theological reflection. 105
CONCLUSION
As has been demonstrated, there is a multiplicity of interpretations of Pauls view of the
Law, and there has been since early in Church history. Many theologians and scholars have
endeavored to deduce and understand the intricacies of Pauls carefully worked out theology,
however, most often obscuring rather than clarifying Pauls intended meaning. Certainly the
debate will continue, but the superior weight of evidence points to Pauls belief that justification
came by faith in Jesus Christ, which the Law of the Jews was powerless to accomplish.

104

Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 542.

105

Ibid.

21
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Achtemeier, Paul J. Harper's Bible Dictionary, 1st ed. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985.
Alexander, T. Desmond and Brian S. Rosner, eds. New Dictionary of Biblical Theology.
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001. Logos eBook.
Anders, Max. Galatians-Colossians. Vol. 8, Holman New Testament Commentary. Nashville:
Broadman & Holman, 1999.
Barclay, John M G. "Justification and variegated nomism. Volume 1, The complexities of
Second Temple Judaism." Biblical Interpretation 13, no. 1 (January 1, 2005): 91-93.
Barry, John D. and Lazarus Wentz, eds. The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Logos
Bible Software, 2012. Logos eBook.
Beckwith, Roger. "Intertestamental Judaism, Its Literature and Its Significance." In, Themelios
15, no. 3 (April 1990): 77-81.
Boa, Kenneth and William Kruidenier. Romans. Vol. 6, Holman New Testament Commentary.
Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000.
Brand, Chad, Charles Draper, Archie England et al., eds. Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary.
Nashville: Holman, 2003.
Briscoe, D. Stuart. Romans. The Preacher's Commentary Series. Nashville: Thomas Nelson,
1982. Kindle eBook.
Bromiley, Geoffrey W., ed. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised. Wm. B.
Eerdmans, 1988.
Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software,
1997. Logos eBook.
Chester, Tim. The Northern Training Institute Papers No 12: March 2008: Justification,
Ecclesiology and the New Perspective. In Themelios 30, no. 2 (Spring 2005): 1-14.
Cole, R. Alan. Exodus: An Introduction and Commentary. Vol. 2, Tyndale Old Testament
Commentaries. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1973.
Cox, Steven L. and Kendell H. Easley. Holman Christian Standard Bible: Harmony of the
Gospels. Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers, 2007.
Cranfield, C. E. B. The Epistle to the Romans. Vol. 1, International Critical Commentary. New
York; London: T&T Clark, 1975.

22
Dockery, David S. Trent C. Butler, Christopher L. Church, et al. Holman Bible Handbook.
Nashville: Holman, 1992.
Drane, John William. Introducing the New Testament. Oxford: Lion, 2000.
Dunn, James D. G. Romans 18, vol. 38A, Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, 1998.
Dunnam, Maxie. Galatians/Ephesians/Philippians/Colossians/Philemon. The Preachers
Commentary. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982. Kindle eBook.
Edwards, James R. Romans. Understanding the Bible Commentary Series. Grand Rapids:
Baker, 2011.
Elwell, Walter A and Walter A. Elwell. Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Baker
Reference Library. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996. Logos eBook.
Fahlbusch, Erwin and Geoffrey William Bromiley. The Encyclopedia of Christianity. Grand
Rapids; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill, 1999-2003.
Ferguson, Sinclair B. and J.I. Packer. New Dictionary of Theology. Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2000. Logos eBook.
Geisler, Norman L. and Ralph E. MacKenzie. Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements
and Differences. Grand Rapids, Baker, 1995.
Gieschen, Charles A. "Justification and variegated nomism. Volume 1, The complexities of
Second Temple Judaism." Concordia Theological Quarterly 72, no. 1 (January 1, 2008):
96-318.
Green, Joel B., Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall, eds. Dictionary of Jesus and the
Gospels. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992.
Gundry, Stanley N., ed. Five Views on Law and Gospel. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.
Kindle eBook.
Hawthorne, Gerald F., Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid. Dictionary of Paul and His Letters.
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993.
Hendriksen, William and Simon J. Kistemaker. Exposition of Galatians. Vol. 8, New Testament
Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1968.
________. Exposition of Pauls Epistle to the Romans. Vol. 12, New Testament Commentary.
Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981.
Koperski, Veronica. What Are They Saying About (WATSA) Paul and the Law? New York:
Paulist Press, 2001.
Lange, John Peter, Philip Schaff, F. R. Fay et al. A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures:
Romans. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008.

23
Longenecker, Richard N. vol. 41, Galatians, Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word,
Incorporated, 1998.
Lull, David J. The Law was our Pedagogue: A Study in Galatians 3:19-25. Journal of
Biblical Literature. 105, no. 3. (1986): 481-498.
MacArthur, John. Romans: Grace, Truth, and Redemption. MacArthur Bible Studies.
Nashville: W Publishing, 2000.
Manser, Martin H. Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for
Topical Studies. London: Martin Manser, 1999.
Martin, Ralph P. and Peter H. Davids. Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its
Developments. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000. Logos eBook.
Miller, Kevin A. ed. Christian History Magazine-Issue 28: The 100 Most Important Events in
Church History. Carol Stream, IL: Christianity Today, 1990. Logos eBook.
Montefiore, C. G. Judaism and the Epistles of Paul. The Jewish Quarterly Review 13, no. 2
(January 1901): 161-217.
Moo, Douglas. The Epistle to the Romans. The New International Commentary on the New
Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.
________. Law, Works of the Law, and Legalism in Paul. Westminster Theological
Journal. 45. (1983): 73-100.
Morris, Leon. Romans. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. D. A. Carson, ed. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.
Mounce, Robert H. Romans. The New American Commentary, Vol. 27. Nashville: Broadman
& Holman, 1995.
Ngien, Dennis. Theology of Preaching in Martin Luther. Themelios 28, No. 2 (Spring 2003):
28-49.
Porter, Stanley E. and Craig A. Evans. Dictionary of New Testament Background: A
Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 2000. Logos eBook.
Ryrie, Charles C., The End of the Law. Bibliotheca Sacra 124 (July 1967): 239-247.
Sanders, E. P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion.
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977.
Schreiner, Thomas R. The Abolition and Fulfillment of the Law in Paul. Journal for the
Study of the New Testament. 35 (1989): 47-74.

24
________. Interpreting the Pauline Epistles. Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 3 (1991):
4-21.
________. Law of Christ. In Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Gerald F. Hawthorne,
Ralph P. Martin and Daniel G. Reid, eds. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993.
________. An Old Perspective on the New Perspective. Concordia Journal 35, no. 2 (Spring
2009): 140-155.
________. Paul and Perfect Obedience to the Law: An Evaluation of the View of E. P.
Sanders. Westminster Theological Journal 47, no. 2 (Fall 1985): 245-278.
________. Pauls View of the Law in Romans 10: 4-5. Westminster Journal of Theology 55
(1993): 113-135.
________. Romans. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids:
Baker, 1998.
________. Was Luther Right? Paper. Fifth Annual Theological Symposium from Concordia
Seminary, St. Louis, MO, May 3, 1995.
Smith, Jeffery. An Overview and Critique of the New Perspective of Pauls Doctrine of
Justification (Part One: The New Perspective Identified. Reformed Baptist Theological
Review. Vol. 3, No. 1 (Spring 2006): 77-108.
Sprinkle, Preston M. The Old Perspective on the New Perspective: A Review of Some PreSanders Thinkers. Themelios 30, no. 2 (Spring 2005): 29-32.
Thielman, Frank. Philippians. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1995.
Vanhoozer, Kevin J., Craig G. Bartholomew, Daniel J. Treier, and N. T. Wright, eds. Dictionary
for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. London; Grand Rapids, MI: SPCK; Baker
Academic, 2005.
Weisheipl, J. Friar Thomas dAquino. 2d ed. Catholic University of America Press, 1983, quoted
in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Craig
G. Bartholomew, Daniel J. Treier and N. T. Wright (London; Grand Rapids, MI: SPCK;
Baker Academic, 2005), 800.
Wood, D. R. W. and I. Howard Marshall. New Bible Dictionary, 3rd ed. Leicester, England;
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996.
Youngblood, Ronald F., F. F. Bruce, and R. K. Harrison, eds. Nelsons New Illustrated Bible
Dictionary. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1995.