Item description for Paul, the Law, and the Covenant by A. Andrew Das...
Overview Taking issue with the understanding of "covenantal nomism" popular in today's academia, Das offers a new perspective on Paul's attitude toward the Law, based on a careful analysis of Second Temple Jewish writings and Pauline literature. Chapters include "Would Paul the Apostle Affirm Covenantal Nomism's Old Covenant?"; "The Necessity of Perfect Obedience"; and "Life Under the Law According to Philippians 3:2--9 and Romans 7."
Promise Angels is dedicated to bringing you great books at great prices. Whether you read for entertainment, to learn, or for literacy - you will find what you want at promiseangels.com!
Studio: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.
Est. Packaging Dimensions: Length: 8.38" Width: 5.74" Height: 0.88" Weight: 1.13 lbs.
Release Date Jun 30, 2001
Publisher Hendrickson Publishers
ISBN 1565634632 ISBN13 9781565634633
Availability 0 units.
More About A. Andrew Das
A. Andrew Das is Niebuhr Distinguished Chair and professor of religious studies at Elmhurst College in Illinois. He is the author of several books, including Paul and the Jews.
A. Andrew Das currently resides in the state of Illinois.
A. Andrew Das has published or released items in the following series...
Reviews - What do customers think about Paul, the Law, and the Covenant?
A needed book... Apr 19, 2005
For those who have been caught up and influenced by the New Perspective should definitely read this book. Das' book is very scholarly and indepth. He challenges the growing idea in Biblical scholarly circles that Second Temple Judaism was primarily a gracious religion rather than a works-righteousness one. Though Das doesn't totally agree with the traditional Protestant understanding of the Law and Gospel (he agrees, to a certain extent, with the New Perspective that Paul's criticisms against the Law were also against ethnic boundary-markers), he still maintains his course on the straight and narrow by positing that the fundamental disagreement of Paul with Second Temple Judaism was final justification by law-keeping. In chapters 1 and 2, Das does an excellent job showing us that early Judaism did advocate final justification by strict law-keeping mixed with a supposed grace (he refers to statements in the Jubilees, Philo's writings, the Tannaim sect, 4 Ezra, 2 and 3 Baruch, 2 Enoch, and the Testament of Abraham). The rest of the eight chapters (3-10) is a discussion of Paul's view on the relationship between the Law, the covenant, and justification. In chapters 3-5, Das does a good job showing that Paul would have disapproved of the OT covenantal nomistic system by examining various passages (Gal 3:10, 15-17; 4:21-31; 2 Cor 3:1-8; Romans 1-4, 7, 9-11; Phil 3:2-9). Chapters 6-10 are discussions on various key Pauline passages that deal with the Law. One of the key highlights of the book is Das' discussion of Galatians 3:10 (chapter six). He effectively critiques James Dunn's view that "works of the Law" refer to "ethnic boundary markers" (pp. 155-160) and Daniel Fuller's view that it refers to "legalistic misuse of the Law" (pp. 161-3), and convincingly argues that the verse is about the requirement of perfect obedience to the law (a view held by noted evangelical scholars like F. F. Bruce, Colin Kruse, George Ladd, Douglas Moo, and Stephen Westerholm). Thus, according to Gal 3:10, Paul opposes the Law because it couldn't/cannot bring salvation to those who obey it (or try to obey it). Chapters 7-10 deal with various passages in Romans. Though challenging some of the traditional Protestant assumptions of Second Temple Judaism, Das still maintains that Luther and Calvin essentially got it right when they interpreted Paul as combating the Second Temple Jewish idea that people were justified by keeping the Law. Overall, Das does a good job demonstrating that Paul's opposition to the Law was due to the fact that it was antithetical to justification by faith in Christ. It is apparent that there is a clear contradiction between justification by law-keeping (whether meritorious or Spirit-driven) and justification by faith alone. Unfortunately, some evangelical scholars and laymen cannot see that clear truth--the cause of so much confusion regarding on how one is justified before God these days. Das clears up the air on this issue. Historic Protestants have always been right: one cannot mix Law and Gospel together and one cannot claim to hold to sola fide and still maintain that the Law must be fulfilled in order to be justified at the eschaton. It is contradictory and illogical to hold to such a view to say the least.