Mark Siefried, roughly a decade ago, in an article published in
Themelios (I can't quite remember it, and thought that I had it at home, any help would be appreciated) said that the NPP, like communism, would die down with time. It would look lke Siefried is going back to the fifties, comparing the NPP with communism. Sounds like a witch hunt was on order.
In the latest Trinity Journal, G. K. Beale, in his review of
Justification and Variegated Nomism, Vol. 2: The Paradoxes of Paul, writes in the last paragrah of his review: "The New Perspective is now thirty years old. There have been so many qualifications of it over theyears it should now be seen to be outdated as the primary default lens through which to understand Judaism or Paul." I don't get it. So outdated, then why write two volumes to try to knock it down? It would
seem to me that Beale, who I admire a lot, has shot himself on the foot by saying what he is saying.
Finally, what sparked me from lurking to writing, was what Don Carson
said at the latest CLARUS Conference, where he said at the end that the
NPP has lost interest among theologians. What? Why write so much
against it then?
Today I was reading part of the article by Wright, "Redemption from the
New Perspective? Towards a Multi-Layered Pauline Theology of the Cross
", where Wright mentions that there are many grave diggers, wanting to
bury the NPP, and along with it him as well.
It would seem to me that by not being able to knock down the NPP by
writing and scholarly exchange, the new tactic is to down play the NPP.
At least, this is my take on this issue.
You can follow this conversation on the Wright Yahoo List
Luis A. Jovel.
