For the last couple of months, we have been discussing on IO the subject of Jesus claiming to be God
due to a general article on the original website.
@RJM Corbet and probably others are getting pretty fed up with it by now
The "new perspective" was started with E. P. Sanders' 1977 work Paul and Palestinian Judaism.
Protestantism has never denied that there is a place for good and faithful works, but has always excluded them from justification, which Protestants argue is through faith alone, and to which good deeds do not contribute.
According to Christopher Rowland, "Pauline Christianity" is the development of thinking about Jesus in a gentile missionary context. Rowland contends that, "the extent of his influence on Christian thought has been overestimated," concluding that Paul did not materially alter the teachings of Jesus.
I personally agree with Christopher. Paul has no "blame" for why we all believe different
interpretations of what Jesus taught.
Discuss?
due to a general article on the original website.
@RJM Corbet and probably others are getting pretty fed up with it by now
The "new perspective" was started with E. P. Sanders' 1977 work Paul and Palestinian Judaism.
According to Sanders, Paul does not address good works in general, but instead questions only observances such as circumcision, dietary laws, and Sabbath laws, which were the "boundary markers" that set the Jews apart from the other nations. According to Sanders, first-century Palestinian Judaism was not a "legalistic community," nor was it oriented to "salvation by works." Being God's chosen people, they were under his covenant. Contrary to what the Protestants thought, keeping the Law was not a way of entering the covenant, but of staying within the covenant
Protestantism has never denied that there is a place for good and faithful works, but has always excluded them from justification, which Protestants argue is through faith alone, and to which good deeds do not contribute.
According to Christopher Rowland, "Pauline Christianity" is the development of thinking about Jesus in a gentile missionary context. Rowland contends that, "the extent of his influence on Christian thought has been overestimated," concluding that Paul did not materially alter the teachings of Jesus.
I personally agree with Christopher. Paul has no "blame" for why we all believe different
interpretations of what Jesus taught.
Discuss?
Last edited: