Pauline Theology Research Articles

Scripture in Pauline Theology: How Far Down Does It Go?

Abstract Paul's scriptural interpretation is fundamentally important for the development of Christian readings of (what would come to be called) the "Old Testament." The question is how important scripture really is for his own theology; a long tradition of Pauline interpreters have regarded its importance as fairly minimal. This essay presents a critique of the "minimalist" case, which argues, first, that scriptural citation is for Paul merely a rhetorical strategy intended to reinforce his own apostolic authority; second, that he cites proof texts with little regard for their original contexts; and third, that his scriptural interpretation is predetermined by his own prior theological convictions. In opposition to these claims, it is argued here that the rhetorical dimension of citation is compatible with issues of theological substance; that individual citations can serve to represent larger blocks of scriptural material; and that Paul's theological convictions are themselves codetermined by his scriptural interpretation. Even as an apostle, Paul learns things from scripture that he would not know without it.

Scripture in Pauline Theology: How Far Down Does It Go?

Abstract Paul's scriptural interpretation is fundamentally important for the development of Christian readings of (what would come to be called) the "Old Testament." The question is how important scripture really is for his own theology; a long tradition of Pauline interpreters have regarded its importance as fairly minimal. This essay presents a critique of the "minimalist" case, which argues, first, that scriptural citation is for Paul merely a rhetorical strategy intended to reinforce his own apostolic authority; second, that he cites proof texts with little regard for their original contexts; and third, that his scriptural interpretation is predetermined by his own prior theological convictions. In opposition to these claims, it is argued here that the rhetorical dimension of citation is compatible with issues of theological substance; that individual citations can serve to represent larger blocks of scriptural material; and that Paul's theological convictions are themselves codetermined by his scriptural interpretation. Even as an apostle, Paul learns things from scripture that he would not know without it.

Reflection and the Aesthetics of Grace in Villette

This article is a reading of the aesthetics of grace through the Pauline theology in Villette. Divine grace is given as a gift and is fulfilled only in death. I discuss the Pauline theology which underlies the novel and argue that the structures of giving and withholding are central to Lucy's sense of her own salvation. I explore the connection between surveillance and the Pauline idea of ‘seeing through a glass darkly’ and argue that the aesthetics of grace are ultimately tied to the book's status as a reflected narrative.

A Certain Rectitude of Order: Jesus and Justification According to Aquinas

The Thomist 72 (2008): 45-66 A CERTAIN RECTITUDE OF ORDER: JESUS AND JUSTIFICATION ACCORDING TO AQUINAS J. MARK ARMITAGE Durham, United Kingdom BRIAN DAVIES OBSERVES that justification, for Aquinas, "is a matter of God making us more godly."1 But how exactly does Aquinas understand this process of "making us more godly"? The key concept in Aquinas's teaching on justification is that justification denotes a movement towards "rectitude of order": Justice is so-called inasmuch as it implies a certain rectitude of order [rectitudo ordinis] in the interior disposition of a human being, in so far as what is highest in humans is subject to God, and the inferior powers of the soul are subject to the superior, i.e. to the reason; and this disposition the Philosopher calls 'justice metaphorically speaking'.2 In this article I wish to explore the Christological and soteriological significance of Aquinas's understanding of justice as "a certain rectitude of order in the interior disposition of a human being." Firstly, I intend to examine his treatment of original justice and original sin, especially in so far as these denote a relation to "ordinateness." Secondly, in the light of the close connection between the questions of law and justification in Pauline theology, I intend to explain why it is for Aquinas that the 1 Brian Davies, O.P., The Thought ofThomas Aquinas (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), 337. 2 STh I-II, q. 113, a. 1. All quotations from the Summa Theologiae are taken, with appropriate adaptations, from the translation by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province, (London: Burns, Oates & Washbourne, 1920-25). 45 46 J. MARK ARMITAGE Old Law is incapable of justifying-that is, of producing "a certain rectitude of order in the interior disposition of a human being." Finally, I intend to show how the justice of Christ-Christ's own personal justification and interior rectitude of order-is the ground for all human redemption and justification. Although this study is expository rather than speculative, I do not plan to offer either a detailed account of the relevant question from the Summa Theologiae (STh 1-11, q. 113) or an assessment of whether or not Aquinas's argument there is successful.3 Neither do I intend to discuss in great depth the twin issues of justification by faith and of the relationship of grace and justification.4 In the light of the Reformation, these issues have become, together with the debate as to whether justification is imputed (Lutheranism) or imparted (Catholicism), central to the discussion of justification whether this is conceived polemically or ecumenically, and they are, understandably, issues that feature prominently in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church.5 However, there has emerged over the last thirty years or so (primarily in the Englishspeaking world) a current of thinking in contemporary Pauline scholarship to the effect that Paul's teaching on justification needs to be interpreted not along the customary post-Reformation lines, but in the light of his understanding of Old Testament covenant theology and of the shape of biblical narrative.6 This "new 3 For an analysis of Aquinas's synthesis, see Eleonore Stump, "Atonement and Justification," in Ronald J. Feenstra and Cornelius Plantinga, Jr., eds., Trinity, Incarnation, andAtonement: Philosophicaland Theological Essays (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1989), 178-209. 4 The classic themes of justification through faith, justificati_on and grace, and justification as forgiveness are beyond the scope of this study. For a good introduction, see Davies, The Thought of Thomas Aquinas, 335-39; Daniel A. Keating, "Justification, Sanctification and Divinization in Thomas Aquinas," in Thomas Weinandy, Daniel Keating, and John Yocum, eds., Aquinas on Doctrine: A Critical Introduction (London: T. & T. Clark, 2004), 139-58. 5 Available on the Vatican web site (www.vatican.va) under the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. 6 See especially N. T. Wright, Paul: Fresh Perspectives (London: SPCK, 2005); also N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People ofGod (London: SPCK, 1992); Ben Witherington III, The Paul Quest: The Renewed Search for the Jew of Tarsus (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1998), 230-62. JESUS AND...

Paul, the Community, and Progressive Sanctification. An Exploration into Community-Based Transformation within Pauline Theology

Paul, the Community, and Progressive Sanctification. An Exploration into Community-Based Transformation within Pauline Theology

Father and Son in Confucianism and Christianity: A Comparative Study of Xunzi and Paul by Yanxia Zhao (review)

208 Journal of Chinese Religions Father and Son in Confucianism and Christianity: A Comparative Study of Xunzi and Paul YANXIA ZHAO. Brighton and Portland: Sussex Academic Press, 2007. xiii, 245 pages. ISBN 978-1-84519-161-0. US$67.50, ₤49.50, hardcover. This is a revision of Zhao’s doctoral dissertation done under Xinzhong Yao. She writes quite clearly and without “dissertation-ese,” though with repetition of some material. An Introduction and Conclusion frame the book’s six main chapters on 1) the Origin of Xunzi’s Secular Father-Son Relationship; 2) Sources and Background of the Pauline Divine FatherSon Relationship; 3) Classification of the Father-Son Relationship; 4) The Pauline Ethical Divine Father-Son Relationship; 5) Xunzi’s Ethical Father-Son Relationship; and 6) Ethical Issues Concerning the Father-Son Relationship. The Father-Son relationship “provides a metaphor that can cover nearly all human relationships, including those which are variously familial, social, political and religious or spiritual, in both Confucian and Christian societies” (p. 2). Xunzi and Paul were both rooted in their respective traditions, yet were “revolutionary figures” who sought to place “their traditions on a practical platform” which in turn transformed these traditions (pp. 12-15). Zhao gives a very good reading of Xunzi’s main concepts, peppered with short textual references that illuminate a thinker who is too often overlooked or dismissed in favor of others in the Confucian pantheon. Though the focus of the study is on a comparison of Xunzi and Paul, Zhao also brings in Confucius and other key Chinese figures, so the reader gets a clearer understanding of Xunzi within that philosophical tradition. The Pauline material is also by and large well done, though with a bit less familiarity, breadth, and confidence than the author brings to the Chinese thinkers. Particularly insightful is the distinction Zhao draws between Paul’s goal of inner peace and Xunxi’s goal of harmony, and how this affects their respective understandings of ethical development and proper Father-Son relationship (pp. 175-78). One problematic area is Zhao’s imprecise use of certain philosophical terms such as “utilitarian,” “consequentialism,” and “teleological,” such that her intended point is not always clear. E.g., most Western ethicists would not accept the assertion that “it is a general practice to divide moral theory into consequentialism and non-consequentialism” (p. 162). A detailed comparison, to be successful, requires both a great number and breadth of shared philosophical or religious traditions. While we can legitimately compare Xunzi with another post-Confucian thinker, or Paul with John, past attempts at comparing Confucian and Christian traditions often result in either superficial, glittering generalities or, if one aims at a more thorough investigation (as Zhao admirably does), some inevitable overlooking or skewing of some key aspects of one or both thinkers. While Zhao was not entirely successful in avoiding these pitfalls, this critique should not be seen as a nullification of her investigation project itself. Quite the opposite. This book was quite good at discerning resemblances and some cultural commonalities and has brought this level of cross-cultural inquiry indisputably Book Reviews 209 to a deeper level. Zhao maps similarities of Paul onto Xunzi better than the reverse, probably because of some significant overlooked or underdeveloped aspects of Pauline theology. Space does not permit a full such listing, but perhaps the following points could be helpful to ongoing work from other scholars in the area of further dialogue between Chinese and Christian traditions. Some areas of Christian (and Pauline) thought that need to be better probed in relation to Xunzi’s thought are differing understandings of just how each tradition understands sin and personal salvation (soteriology) and the ultimate “end” of human nature in union with the divine. Zhao asserts a supposed commonality between Xunzi and Paul, holding that both believe human nature to be evil. I believe this is a real misunderstanding of Paul, who holds instead that the original nature of humans was good, not sinful, though fallen and marred by sin. Another important difference that merits closer attention is that the “divine” for Paul is a monotheistic personal God, and not the somewhat ambiguous “Heaven” of the Chinese tradition. This theology...

Renewing the Mind: The Role of Cognition Language in Pauline Theology and Ethics

A dissertation examining the role of cognition language in Paul’s theological and ethical arguments, analysing the use of the noun φρόνημα and its cognates within Romans and Philippians.

바울 신학에 기초한 로마서 8:10의 번역과 해설

초록·키워드 목차 오류제보하기 등록된 정보가 없습니다. 1. 문제 제기2. 로마서 8:10의 한글과 영어 번역의 예들과 분석3. 바울 신학에서 몸(σωμα)과 영(πνευμα)4. 로마서 8:10의 번역과 해설5. 결론〈참고문헌〉〈Abstract〉

Romans 5:12–21 against the Background of Torah-Theology and Hebrew Usage

Paul was an original thinker, and his epistles are full of novel, at times paradoxical, ideas. Christology stands at the center of Paul's system, and his Christological teaching is unique among Jewish writings of the Second Temple period. Some, especially non-Christological, elements of Pauline theology do, however, have illuminating parallels in earlier Jewish teachings, which seem to have been modified and adapted by Paul to fit his own revolutionary thought. While Paul's theology cannot be reduced to these elements, they might help to explain (at least partly) its emergence. After all, even the ideas of the most original thinkers owe their emergence to prevailing conceptions of the culture in which those thinkers operated, taking some of them for granted and incorporating them naturally into their thought, while struggling with and reacting to others. In Paul's case, Jewish concepts played a significant role in shaping some central features of his theology. Thus, reading Paul in the light of the Dead Sea scrolls and rabbinic writings is important both for understanding Paul as well as for dating and interpreting rabbinic parallels.

Three Views on Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism (review)

Reviewed by: Three Views on Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism Stephen Goodwin James Stamoolis (ed.). 2004. Three Views on Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, pp. 294, Pb, £8.99. The collapse of communism in Europe allowed the iron curtain to be drawn back on the lands and peoples of Eastern Orthodox Christianity and ushered in a new era of global encounter between Eastern and Western Christians. The meeting has not always been amicable, but it has forced both parties toward discovery and self-examination. This book, Three Views on Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism is part of the publisher's Counterpoints series, which seeks to enhance the mutual interaction by bringing together advocates of divergent theological positions. The editors of this volume attempt a kind of symmetry in form with one author each from the Orthodox and Evangelical camp putting forward the case for compatibility, against compatibility or for possible compatibility. In this way the book is arranged into five chapters, as no evangelical affirming compatibility is represented in the volume. After a major essay for each position, the other authors then give their response, allowing for interchange, correction, or clarification. The primary author is then given the final word of response to the challenges of the others. One of the difficulties of the book is in defining what or who an evangelical is. Editor James Stamoolis, who has made a spiritual pil-grimage from Orthodoxy to Evangelicalism, gives a largely historical account of the American evangelical movement, tracing its roots from a rejection of theological liberalism as first expressed by the 'Fundamentalists'. This movement later grew less reactionary and gained self-awareness with its own expression of social engagement in the world. In his own essay, Orthodox Bradley Nassif notes that 'the theological features of evangelicalism today embraces a wide array of denominations and churches, ranging from Reformed to Wesleyan, charismatic to Pentecostal, Baptist to Catholic, thus revealing evangelicalism as a transdenominational, transnational movement' (p. 35). Ultimately Nassif focuses his own essay on criteria based on four central themes suggested by evangelicals themselves, '1) the centrality of the cross – crucicentrism; 2) the centrality of the Bible – biblicism; 3) the centrality of conversion – conversionism; [End Page 193] 4) the centrality of evangelism – activism' (p. 33). Readers will sense that these definitions are essentialist in theology and limited to American cultural expression, but will nevertheless sympathise with the difficulty of adequately defining evangelicalism today. Each author makes a useful contribution to the book, although Nassif's essay (Orthodox perspective, asserting compatibility), demonstrating an impressive conversance in Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism honed by years of inter-faith dialogue, stands head and shoulders above those of the other contributors. His thorough and nuanced arguments will bring insights for both camps toward compatibility. Michael Horton's contribution (evangelical, incompatible) makes ample reference to the creeds, Church Fathers, and Reformers and thereby refutes the general criticism that Evangelical theology suffers from historical amnesia, but one gathers the impression that he is more at home with confessional Protestantism of the sixteenth century than with contem-orary expressions of evangelicalism. This notwithstanding, Horton is able to address contentious issues such as the nature and pervasiveness of sin, justification vs. theosis, and the place of Scripture and Tradition in ecclesiastical authority. Horton is also willing to admit that evangelicals can learn from the Orthodox Church, especially in its emphasis on the convergence of eschatology and ontology toward cosmic redemption and restoration in Pauline theology. Father Vladimir Berzonsky's contribution (Orthodox, incompatible)is important in that it reflects a long tradition of allegorical and meta-phorical hermeneutical method, which is consistent with the more traditional expressions of the Orthodox churches of Europe. Berzonsky consistently demonstrates how a text may be understood variously. However, he uncritically accepts the interpretations of the Church Fathers without sufficient emphasis on the importance of understanding the hermeneutical presuppositions and criteria that support a particular theological view. In one particularly enlightening exchange, Berzonsky asserts that 'Church as building becomes a temple, set apart to be made holy – prelude and paradigm of the world become church. The structure is cruciform – using the Hagia Sophia as a...

The "Works of the Law" in Romans and Galatians: A New Defense of the Subjective Genitive

The emphasis in this turn of phrase would then lie not so much on human failure fully to obey (though that is implied) as on Law's own inability (owing to gripping power of sin) to produce in people that can survive before bar of God's judgment. The issue is precisely whether Jewish people are right to place their confidence in provided by (Rom 2:17-18; Phil 3:9; cf. Bar 4:4; 2 Bar. 48:22). In this essay, I will explore possibility that this third proposal has considerable merit and is based on more reliable exegetical basis than any of other options. I. DEFINING JUSTIFICATION In this article, I use word justify and its cognates repeatedly. It is not practical to define in each and every instance what I mean by terminology, so I will state at outset what I understand to mean in Pauline theology (with particular regard to Romans and Galatians). Romans 1:16-17 is very instructive in this regard. For Paul, reveals righteousness of to those who have To be is to receive soteriological benefit of of What it means to receive soteriological benefit (the power of God to salvation) of of God can be determined by 1:18- 32, where Paul describes consequences of revelation of the wrath of God. The gospel is opposite ofthat. Whereas revelation of God's wrath brings darkened heart (1:21), giving over to enslaving power of (1:24, 26, 28), and judgment that one deserves death (1:32), justification offered in gospel illumines heart (cf. 2 Cor 3:16), frees from power of (Rom 6:7), and reconciles ungodly to God (Rom 4:5; 5:1; 8:1). To be justified is simply to be accepted into family of God (Gal 3:24-26), and so to have God's condemning judgment removed- judgment that includes bondage to power of (Rom 6:14-23). II. THE PRIMARY TEXTS The Works of Law in Romans Romans 3:20 Paul's argument throughout 3:1-18 is that God's have not ultimately benefited nation to whom they were entrusted. Israel failed to believe God's word (3:3), failed to live righteously before God (3:5), and ultimately failed to carry out will of God in world with any greater success than Gentiles (3:10-18). This is why Paul - speaking in prophetic manner- believed that his Jewish people stood condemned before bar of divine judgment, alongside rest of humanity. Paul drives this point home in 3:19-20. What he insists is that has failed to produce in Israel in midst of world. What, then, has accomplished? Paul answers that what has done is close every mouth (3:19b) and put whole world in position of needing to give an account of its sinful actions before bar of divine judgment (3:19c). In short, what has done is to provide the knowledge of sin to Israel (3:20b).10 The issue at stake here is precisely question of what has, and has not, been able to do for Israel. What most exegetes continue to overlook is that in this context Paul is not even addressing question: What works must person perform in order to be justified?11 If one looks back at preceding context, it is clear that he is instead asking question: What benefit have of God provided to Jewish people? The issue at stake in 3:20 is historical evidence (as witnessed by Israel's conduct) of effectiveness of God's words (contained in Law) in dealing with problem of sin, not existential question of how many works person must perform to be accepted before Romans 3:28 Paul then insists that scheme he has just presented excludes human boasting (3:27). Boasting is said to be excluded by a law of faith. In other words, boasting is excluded when one comes to understand that true purpose of (for elect; see Rom 1 1:7) was not to enable Jew to earn his own righteous status before God by means of personal merit;13 rather, Paul's scheme insists that purpose of is to promote faith in God's righteousness, which was displayed in soteric mission of his Son Jesus (cf. …

A Symposium in Rom. 14:17? A Note on Paul's Terminology

The present paper aims at contributing to a better understanding of the Pauline interaction with meal etiquette and thus with the contemporary discourse on symposiastic ideology. In the discussion about this, most atten tion is commonly given to 1 Cor. 8, 10, 11:17-34, and Rom. 14:1-23. Of these texts, 1 Cor. 8, 10 and Rom. 14:1-23 deal with the question of eating sacrificial foodstuffs (especially meat) and 1 Cor. 11:17-34 deals with the etiquette,* or, for that matter, liturgy, of the Corinthian ?eupiaic?v 8e?7tvov (1 Cor. 11:20). The overarching interest of all four texts is similar: securing the unity and order of the respective communities expressed as it is in their communal meals: the weak' should not be outplayed by the 'strong as soon as it comes to eating foodstuffs sacrificed to 'idols' (1 Cor. 8, 10, Rom. 14) and class differences should play no role at the celebration of the Eucharist (see 1 Cor. 11:17-34, compare Jas. 2:2-5). As the title indicates, here the focus will be on Pauls characterization of ti fiaoiXeia xox> 6eo? as it surfaces within his discussion of the Roman Christians' diet (Rom. 14:17). Commonly, this vs. is interpreted within the context of Pauline theology,1 in which the concepts of ?iKaioawn,,2 eipfivn,3 and xap?4 are, in descending order of importance, anything but insignificant

The theological centre of Pauline theology as it relates to the Holy Spirit

The issue as to what constitutes the “heart of Pauline theology” is a contentious one in academic debates. The traditional view is the one fostered by the Reformers and perpetuated by generations of Protestants namely that “justification by faith” is the key to Paul’s theology. Unfortunately, upon careful reading of Paul’s letters, the inadequacy of such a view becomes apparent as such a focus would fail to cast the net broadly enough to capture all of Paul’s theological concerns. In saying this and without denying the presence of other determining factors, especially Christology and eschatology, shape the framework of Paul’s pneumatology. There is no doubt that in their eschatological significance, the death and resurrection of Christ control Paul’s teaching on the work of the Spirit within the lives of believers. It could then be argued that as part of the fundamental core of Paul’s understanding of the Gospel, the Spirit is rather close to the centre of things.

Celebrating Romans: Template for Pauline Theology – Edited by Sheila McGinn

Celebrating Romans: Template for Pauline Theology – Edited by Sheila McGinn

Der Lohn der guten Tat Der Lohn der guten Tat

A study of Mt. 6:1-6, 16-18 in particular proves Matthew's interest not only in the question of what the believer has to do but also of the intention of the believer's actions. This cor-responds to fundamentalinsights of the Pauline theology of justification.

Cohesion and Structure in the Pastoral Epistles. By RAY VAN NESTE.

In the past twenty five years or so, the ‘Pastoral Epistles’ have been subjected to numerous tests of background, exegesis, and theology in the effort to prove, improve or disprove the adequacy of their interpretation which has come to be the scholarly consensus. This consensus is of course shaped by decisions about pseudonymity, post-apostolic setting, ethics, developments or diminishment in Pauline theology, etc., but the structure of the letters, as such, has more often been relegated to commentary introductions, so Dr Van Neste's thorough discourse-analytical examination of the coherence and structure of each letter is an important contribution to filling a noticeable gap in the research. Although in the latest reconstructions, the issue of the letters’ coherence has not figured as prominently as it did in Dibelius's day (J. D. Miller 1997 is the main exception), the related literary issue of the individuality of the three letters has now come fully to the fore. And in this respect too, the present monograph will help facilitate a reading/hearing of these epistles that acknowledges them as independent messages. Cohesion and Structure is a revised dissertation (written under Prof. I. H. Marshall's supervision at the University of Aberdeen); with Scripture and Author indexes and one Appendix (‘Cohesion Shift Analysis of the Pastoral Epistles’). The clarity and effectiveness of presentation and argument are commendable.

The Gospel of John: A Commentary. 2 volumes. By Craig S. Keener. Pp. xlviii + 1636. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2003. isbn 1 56563 378 4. £57.95

This is a massive commentary on John's Gospel, in length rivalling Schnackenburg's magnum opus on this subject and outdoing Raymond Brown's. Its author, Craig S. Keener (Professor of New Testament at Eastern Seminary, Philadelphia), will be known to many readers for his work on Matthew, Revelation, and aspects of Pauline theology. He writes from a conservative viewpoint, while paying attention to other critical approaches and citing from a wide range of primary and secondary literature. At times I felt conservative views were overemphasized and radical ones too lightly dismissed. The Introduction (330 pp., with 424 footnotes) could have been a book in itself. It covers most of the standard critical issues, notably genre, sources, relationship of John to the Synoptics, historical value, form-critical matters (role of oral traditions, discourses, controversy forms), authorship, date, provenance, social context, relation to Judaism, Christology, and other select topics, including revelatory motifs, visions, miracles, and signs. History of interpretation, textual criticism, and feminist, liberationist, narrative-critical, postmodern, and reader-response criticisms are dealt with minimally, though the commentary makes use of some insights from rhetorical and narrative criticism. Language and style receive only a short discussion; patristic interpretation is rarely mentioned except on authorship.

Book Review: Paul among the Postliberals: Pauline Theology beyond Christendom and Modernity

Book Review: Paul among the Postliberals: Pauline Theology beyond Christendom and Modernity

Pauline Theology and Ancient Slavery:1 Does the Former Support or Subvert the Latter?

Pauline Theology and Ancient Slavery:1 Does the Former Support or Subvert the Latter?

Perceptions of Compatibility Between Christianity and Judaism in Pauline Interpretation

AbstractContemporary interpretation of Paul is heir to a tradition of Paulinism in which Paul's gospel is almost universally viewed as being in opposition to Judaism. Even the advent of the New Perspective on Paul has not yet succeeded in convincing the majority of scholars that there is no basic incompatibility between Paul and Judaism. One reason for a negative response to the New Perspective is that the acceptance of this viewpoint seems (necessarily) to imply that the great Reformers were somewhat deficient in their understanding of Paul. Their own basic principle of 'reformed and always being reformed' demands, however, a critique of all traditions, including this one. Moreover, inasmuch as modern Pauline scholarship is dependent upon the 19th century invention of the theory of legalism as a pejorative description of Jewish religion, there is a resultant failure to view the Judaism that nurtured Paul, and in which he was continuously in dialogue, other than apologetically or polemically. This is because Christian Pauline interpretation tends to involve a concern for self-understanding and identity that necessarily differentiates the modern agenda from that of Paul, since this concern springs from Enlightenment categories and is therefore foreign to the Apostle. It is the contention of this essay that Paul's letters demonstrate that he was no sectarian, vilifying Judaism for the promotion of a new religion. Since Paul's identity, even after his vision of Christ, remained distinctly Jewish, scholars cannot justifiably use Judaism as a negative foil for Christian self-understanding. Christian faith as such demands neither the denigration of Judaism nor the subversion of Pauline theology into a subjective search for identity.