Sprinkle: Paul & Judaism Revisited. Convivium Assisiense 16 (2014): 155–60

Preston M. SPRINKLE, Paul & Judaism Revisited. A Study of Divine and Human Agency in Salvation, foreword by Stephen Westerholm, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL 2013, pp. 256. Recent biblical scholarship has strongly stressed the Jewish matrix of the apostle Paul, demonstrating that it is essential to contextualize Pauline literature within Jewish culture in order to understand its references and argumentation. However, while there is general agreement as to the Jewishness of Paul’s letters, scholars still debate, sometimes fiercely, about the true nature of Paul’s relation to the religious foundations of Second Temple Judaism. In his latest book, Preston M. Sprinkle undertakes a reconsideration of this discussion, incorporating recent data from the study of the Dead Sea scrolls. Sprinkle’s research arises from the challenges to Pauline exegesis raised by the “New Perspective on Paul” (hereafter, NPP)1 and In 1977, E. P. Sanders vigorously challenged the well-established Lutheran interpretation of justification in Paul. According to Sanders’s reading of first century Palestinian Judaism, the aim of legal observance was not the achievement of salvation by means of meritorious actions–the legalism criticized by Lutheran theologians–but the appropriate response to God’s unconditional gift of the covenant (E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion, Fortress, Philadelphia, PA 1977). In this context, if Paul opposes legalism as Lutherans assumed, he is fighting a religious vision that did not exist at time– implicitly, the NPP reduces the Lutheran interpretation to a projection of anti-Catholic polemic on Paul’s letters. James D. G. Dunn, who also created the key expression of this movement: “The New Perspective on Paul,” deduced the consequences of Sanders’s new reading for the interpretation of Paul. According to Dunn, the Pauline phrase “the works of the law” (Galatians 2:16; 3:2.5.10; Romans 3:20.28) refers not to an alleged Jewish legalism but to a series of religious practices aimed at setting apart Jews from Gentiles, especially circumcision, dietary norms, and the Sabbath (James D. G. Dunn, The New Perspective on Paul Revisited Edition, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI 2008). In Dunn’s opinion, Paul’s main concern about Judaism is not soteriological–that legal observance cannot achieve salvation–but ethnic–that Gentiles are excluded from the covenant or that they can only participate in it by “becoming” Jews. N. T. Wright proceeded on the same path as Sanders and Dunn. He agrees that Paul’s critique of Judaism has nothing to do with legalism but rather addresses Jewish national pride, on the basis of which to belong to Abraham’s seed was deemed sufficient to be part of the covenant (N. T. Wright, “The Paul of History and the Apostle of Faith”, Tyndale Bulletin 29 (1978) 61–88). 1

156

RECENSIONI E SEGNALAZIONI

sides with the group of scholars led by Francis Watson, John Barclay, Stephen Westerholm, and Simon J. Gathercole. Although admitting that the Lutheran description of first century Judaism was rather caricatural, these interpreters of Paul reaffirm the centrality of soteriology in Paul’s thought and propose an explicitly “Lutheran” reading of the apostle.2 Sprinkle aligns himself with this view, arguing expressly against the claims of the NPP, especially Dunn’s interpretation of “the works of the law” (pp. 150–155). While Lutheran theologians understood Paul and Judaism as radically antithetical, the NPP highlighted their numerous elements of continuity, shifting the tension from legalism to ethnic segregation. The critics of the NPP, and among them Sprinkle, take a middle course. The points of contact between Pauline and Jewish soteriologies are undeniable, but the traits of discontinuity exist and are so weighty that they easily justify the bitter tone of Paul’s letters. Sprinkle analyzes the Pauline corpus and the texts of Qumran in order to explore and compare their soteriological views. In doing this, he is well aware that speaking of “soteriology” in Paul and at Qumran can be an unwarranted imposition of modern categories upon ancient texts that reason in a substantially different manner. For this reason, Sprinkle takes care to define what he means by soteriology in terms of “the restoration God brings to those who belong to his covenant community,” that is, “the restoration promised in the Scriptures” (p. 34). Sprinkle invariably employs the term “restoration” as his fundamental soteriological category, although not fully clarifying its scope. If restoration indicates a return to a preceding condition–according to the models of exclusion–inclusion into the covenant community or paradise lost–paradise restored–it appears to be a rather limitative notion. Apparently, Paul’s soteriology comprises elements of elevation and perfection of the protological state (for instance, 1 Corinthians 15:45). After introducing his study in the first chapter, Sprinkle dedicates the second to the soteriological “paradigms” of the Old Testa-

For a synthetic yet complete exposition of the NPP, see Kent L. Yinger, The New Perspective on Paul. An Introduction, Cascade, Eugene, OR 2011. 2 Stephen Westerholm, Perspective Old and New on Paul: The “Lutheran” Paul and His Critics, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI 2003; Francis Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, T&T Clark, London 2004; John M. G. Barclay–Simon J. Gathercole (eds.), Divine and Human Agency in Paul and His Cultural Environment, T&T Clark, London 2006; Stephen Westerholm, Justification Reconsidered: Rethinking a Pauline Theme, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI 2013.

RECENSIONI E SEGNALAZIONI

157

ment, which will be the basis of his interpretation of the Pauline corpus and the Dead Sea scrolls. In the Deuteronomic model, human agency initiates the dynamic of restoration through repentance and conversion. Conversely, in the Prophetic pattern, divine agency is totally unconditional, with no precondition on the human side (p. 38; hereafter, the italicized terms Deuteronomic and Prophetic refer to these two paradigms). In both systems, human obedience to the law is sustained by divine grace, but in the Deuteronomic perspective, the structure of the covenant is conditional and has a retributive dynamic, according to which God blesses the righteous and curses the wicked. In the Prophetic model, only divine agency enables Israel to repent and live in righteousness. As the terms suggest, Sprinkle detects predominance of Deuteronomic soteriology primarily in Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic history (Joshua–2 Kings), but also in Ezra, Nehemiah, and 1–2 Chronicles (pp. 39–46). The Prophetic perspective is instead typical of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel (pp. 48–66). The connection of Jeremiah to the Prophetic paradigm is especially interesting in light of the many linguistic and theological contacts that link the oeuvre of this prophet to Deuteronomy and Deuteronomistic texts. According to Sprinkle, what identifies Jeremiah as Prophetic is his pessimistic vision of Israel, terminally ill and without the ability to return to God (p. 55). Sprinkle concludes that in employing expressions that are typical of Deuteronomy, Jeremiah inverts their soteriological meaning. What was an exhortation to conversion in Deuteronomy becomes in Jeremiah a divine promise of restoration (p. 58). In the following five chapters (3–7), Sprinkle undertakes to recognize Deuteronomic and/or Prophetic features in the soteriological thought of Paul and Qumran examining them from five discrete but in some way complementary points of view: “(1) the curse of the old covenant and how God will rescue his people from it; (2) the nature of the eschatological spirit’s work among the community; (3) the view of human condition, which among Paul and Qumran amounts to a degree of anthropological pessimism; (4) justification—how the community members attain the status of righteous before God; and (5) the relationship between future judgment and works” (p. 34). In Paul’s writings, Sprinkle detects a constant Prophetic attitude. He believes that for Paul, restoration belongs exclusively to God, whereas humans are fatally unable to obey without the help of grace. Paul is and remains a Jew, but his encounter with the risen Messiah trans-

158

RECENSIONI E SEGNALAZIONI

forms his theology, shifting it from Deuteronomic conventions to the Prophetic references of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel (p. 249). The situation at Qumran is more nuanced. Sprinkle observes a certain predominance of Deuteronomic soteriology, but he emphasizes the clearly Prophetic character of some texts, especially those of hymnic nature (Hodaiot, Words of the Luminaries, the final hymn of Manual of Discipline, and the Barki Nafshi hymns) (p. 239–243). In the eighth chapter, Sprinkle extends the scope of his analysis to other Jewish texts that are not connected to Qumran. While most of them present the usual Deuteronomic framework, Sprinkle demonstrates that two texts are surprisingly similar to Pauline theology. Although essentially retributive in its perspective, the pseudoPhilonic Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum stresses God’s fidelity to his covenantal commitment to Israel. God punishes the transgressors of the law but “will not forget them forever” (p. 230). Similarly, the Testament of Moses, a Jewish text probably from the beginning of the first century CE, interprets the Sinaitic covenant through the lenses of God’s promise to Abraham and his descedants (p. 235). These texts associate both exhortation to obedience and unconditional fidelity with God’s promise of restoration. In the last chapter, Sprinkle recapitulates his analysis. The survey of the Dead Sea scrolls is highly diverse and exhibits both Deuteronomic and Prophetic traits, as does more generally first century Judaism. The uniformly Prophetic perspective of Paul, on the other hand, demonstrates the continuity of his writings with part of the soteriological thought that preceded him. His emphasis on divine agency in restoration is not unparalleled in the cultural environment from which it derives, but within the fundamental continuity, there is a clear break. Sprinkle reveals that the constancy, resolution, and intensity with which Paul insists on the absolute priority of God’s soteriological intervention over human agency are unequaled in the Jewish world at the time of Paul (p. 238). One of the merits of Sprinkle’s study is no doubt his approach to the soteriological core of Paul’s thought as a composite structure whose various elements contribute in defining the overall picture. The subdivision of soteriology into five subordinate angles enables Sprinkle to examine several texts in a certain detail, providing a reading of the theme both accurate and comprehensive. The impression one receives from reading his book is that the soteriology of the literary corpora examined is both very composite and nonetheless

RECENSIONI E SEGNALAZIONI

159

extremely consistent. The views of the law, the spirit, human condition, justification, and the final judgment articulated by the authors demonstrate different, sometimes contrasting, connections and correlations, but together they succeed in producing essentially coherent understandings of restoration. Sprinkle is very attentive to provide an authentic portrayal of the soteriologies of Paul and Qumran also in the choice of the texts he examines. This is particularly evident in his analysis of the Dead Sea scrolls, where Sprinkle constantly seeks to detect the presence of both Deuteronomic and Prophetic soteriology, albeit with differences in emphasis and frequency. Nor does Sprinkle omit the examination of “difficult” Pauline texts that might challenge his fundamental thesis. Some doubts, however, arise from the way Sprinkle treats the Deuteronomic and Prophetic perspectives. Although useful qua interpretive categories, these models appear to be like two parallel souls of soteriology, with virtually no interaction with one another either in the biblical text or at Qumran. Sprinkle acknowledges that no Old Testament book is “purely” Deuteronomic or Prophetic but, at the most, “predominantly” so (p. 39). However, when elements of dissimilarity from the main tendency appear in a text, they are regarded as mere anomalies (p. 53). Such a polarization of soteriological perspectives does not seem to be a reliable interpretation of the plurality of points of view in the texts but rather the reflection of denominational presuppositions of the author. The radicalization of the two paradigms becomes extremely evident in Sprinkle’s endeavor to expunge any Deuteronomic trace from the Pauline texts. This effort sometimes leads him to questionable interpretations as, for instance, in the case of the final judgment based on works (Romans 2; 1 Corinthians 3–4; 2 Corinthians 5:10) (pp. 180–191), statements that Sprinkle downplays by accentuating other texts more in line with his Prophetic reading of Paul, which ultimately proves too monodimensional. A second point of perplexity concerns the rhetoric dimension of the texts. Sprinkle observes that at Qumran, the Prophetic paradigm is witnessed almost exclusively by text of hymnic character. At the end of the fifth chapter, Sprinkle contemplates the possible correlation between soteriological vision and literary genre (pp. 138–143). Nevertheless, he believes that it is not the literary genre to determine the theology of a text but its topic. Sprinkle argues that at Qumran, the Prophetic perspective arises when a text focuses on the contrast

160

RECENSIONI E SEGNALAZIONI

between God and humans, a theme “which often (though not always) occurs in hymns” (p. 139). When humans are compared to their fellow humans, then the Deuteronomic view prevails, and the literary genre is mostly didactic (p. 140). On the other hand, Pauline literature, albeit didactic from the literary point of view, constantly presents Prophetic soteriology (p. 141). It should nonetheless be noticed that thematically, Paul’s letters are analogous to the hymnic literature of Qumran inasmuch as they treat of the relationship between humans and God, in particular when they address soteriological motifs. Sprinkle does not seem to go to the bottom of the profound interconnections existing between literary genres, theological motifs, rhetorical intents, and addressees of the texts, thereby losing opportunities to account for the plurality of theological perspectives of the biblical text, the Dead Sea scrolls, and, most likely, the Pauline corpus. On the whole, Sprinkle’s book is a solid and well-founded attempt to contribute with new data to a debate, i.e., the reappraisal of Paul’s relation to his Jewish matrix initiated with the NPP, which is decades-long and nonetheless appears far from exhausted. Sprinkle approaches the soteriologies of Paul and Qumran with well-defined and coherent categories. The interpretation of the texts is clear and convincing, although it sometimes loses sight of the complexity of articulation and interaction of the diverse theological visions, which are discrete and yet coexisting. Sprinkle brings to the fore Paul’s soteriology both in the web of interconnections that links it to the wider context of the Jewish thought contemporaneous with Paul and in its absolute exceptionality. Georges Massinelli Istituto Teologico di Assisi *** PATRIZIA MANGANARO – FRANCESCA NODARI, Ripartire da Edith Stein. La scoperta di alcuni manoscritti inediti, Morcelliana, Brescia 2014, pp. 491. La forma della miscellanea scelta per questo testo non è dettata soltanto da motivazioni estrinseche, ma conserva profonde ragioni,