Abstract
This book is both the lightly revised version of a doctoral thesis written at the University of Oxford, and a reprinted version of book first published by Mohr Siebeck in 2018. Along with the addition of a foreword by Alister McGrath (pp. xi-xiii) and a preface to the new edition (pp. xv-xviii), the pagination also differs. This will no doubt cause issues when references are given in future works! However, the reprinting of the book so soon after its initial publication is at least to some degree a measure of the volumes significance.
The phrase ‘works of the law’ has been hotly debated in Pauline studies. From the Reformation onwards there was a strand of thinking that saw the phrase as encompassing all human endeavour that sought to be made right with God through deeds carried out by an individual. While this understanding had been challenged earlier, it was the seminal work of E.P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (1977) that made the sustained case that the phrase denoted something more specific. He argued that the expression ‘works of the law’ specifically designated observance of the Jewish boundary marking practices of circumcision, keeping of Sabbath, and observance of food laws. These were seen as the practices that distinguished Jews from gentiles. Thomas seeks to shed further light on this debate by showing how second-century authors, writing soon after Paul, understood his use of the phrase. The book also offers more than that. It reveals much about the theological concerns of second-century Christian writers, and how their thought displays both connection with, and development from earlier ideas expressed in the Pauline writings.
The book is set out in four parts and twelve chapters. The first part is the introductory chapter (pp. 3-26). Here the methodology and the scope of the study are set out. In part two, comprising two chapters, Thomas describes the so-called ‘old’ and ‘new’ perspectives on the phrase ‘works of the law.’ In the first of these chapters he presents the views of Luther, Calvin, Bultmann, and Moo as representatives of the old perspective. In the following chapter the discussion focuses on the views of Sanders, Dunn, and Wright as proponents of the new perspective. The heart of the book is to be found in section three, where Thomas sets out and discusses the views of second-century texts and authors. These sources are categorised on an A-B-C scale. Those given the A rating directly make use of those Pauline verses were the term ‘works of the law’ occurs. The B rating designates texts that discuss the epistles (Romans and Galatians) in which the phrase is found, but without directly discussing the phrase itself. Finally the C rating designates writing with minimal or unclear Pauline dependence, which nonetheless engage in disputes with Jewish parties that are similar to those found in Paul’s letters. Thus in eight chapters and two excurses he surveys what he considers to be the most significant evidence. The major writings and figures discussed are the Didache (category C; pp. 79-84), the Epistle of Barnabas (category C; pp. 85-104), two of Ignatius’ letters – addressed to the Magnesians and Philadelphians (category B; pp. 104-125), the Epistle to Diognetus (category B; pp. 137-157), the Apology of Aristides (category B; pp. 158-169), Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho (category A; pp. 186-224), Melito of Sardis’ Peri Pascha (category B; pp. 225-238), and various writings of Irenaeus (category A; pp. 239-262).
The conclusions are presented in the final chapter which constitutes part four. The conclusions especially drawing on the evidence of category A and B sources. While Thomas notes differences in these perspectives, he does find ‘a striking degree of coherence among these early witnesses’ (p. 271). His striking conclusion is that the early perspective displayed in these second-century writings aligns with the reading of Paul to be found in the so-called new perspective. Thus he states, ‘one can regard the “new” perspective as, in reality, the old perspective, while what we identify as the “old” perspective represents a genuine theological novum in relation to early Christian tradition’ (p. 285).
The conclusion at which Thomas arrives is clearly argued, it is based on a wealth of primary evidence from the second-century, and he successful builds a coherent case. At times he appeals (in passing) to the concept of ‘living memory’, to create a closer connection between the second-century writers under discussion and the figure of Paul. However, it is not clear that this is either necessary or persuasive. The power of the argument is to be found in the meaning of the texts under discussion. As early readers of Paul and being immersed in Christian debates of the period, it seems that these Greek speaking authors simply read Paul aright, regardless of any close connection or memorialised reminiscences. The argument here presents another reason that the so-called new perspective should be understood as a more accurate interpretation of what Paul meant by the vexed phrase ‘works of the law’. Perhaps with grateful thanks to Thomas, it is now possible to move on to other topics.