5

To be honest, I'd never heard about the New Perspective on Paul before today. Does anyone know of denominations that subscribe to the NPP interpretation, in part or in full?

Specifically, the following concepts, taken from this article:

Covenantal Nomism

Briefly put, covenantal nomism is the view that one’s place in God’s plan is established on the basis of the covenant and that the covenant requires as the proper response of man his obedience to its commandments, while providing means of atonement for transgression

I read this to mean "God saves us by providing atonement, so long as we keep up our end of the bargain."

This of course, would be different than Sola Fide.

The righteousness of God

Proponents of New Perspectivism argue that the righteousness of God, spoken of by Paul in Romans, is refering to God’s faithfulness rather than the positive imputation of Christ’s righteousness.

Justification

According to Wright, justification isn’t merely an initial means by which someone is right with God, but rather a mark of who already is.

Denial of imputed righteousness

N.T. Wright reinterprets texts classically used as prooftexts for imputed righteousness. He understands 2 Corinthians 5:21, for example, to refer to God’s covenant faithfulness. While many still profess agreement with the substance of the doctrine of imputed righteousness, the classic (or traditional) interpretations of texts relating to imputation have more or less been removed

Improve this question
6
  • 1
    N. T. Wright is the former Bishop of Durham of the Church of England, so one would want to start looking there. But I don't know if any particular denomination adhere's to the new perspective or even if it's a significant departure from orthodox belief.
    – Jon Ericson
    Commented Nov 26, 2011 at 2:20
  • @Bruce Alderman - I saw that in the articles on NPP, but the subtle differences that the new perspective takes do put a brand new meaning to so many of Paul's writings that doctrine is absolutely affected/altered. That is, unless there are already denominations out there that already subscribe to the doctrine as interpreted through the NPP lens. So far, aceinthehole seems to be thinking along the same lines as me, but I was looking for specific denominations with supporting references.
    – David Stratton
    Commented Nov 29, 2011 at 3:40
  • @Bruce Alderman - would you be willing to post that as an answer? It's the best answer I expect to get, and I'd like to accept it.
    – David Stratton
    Commented Dec 6, 2011 at 5:09
  • What is "new" in the New Perspective on Paul?
    – Caleb
    Commented Sep 12, 2012 at 10:38
  • It is interesting that they call it the New Perspective on Paul, what it really is, is the New Protestant prospective on Paul. His perspective is founded on looking at the world through the eyes of a first century Christian, wether Jewish Christian, Gentile Christian, Roman, Greek or Jew. He takes into consideration all these realities of early Christianity while performing exegesis. It is no wonder that the Catholic Church, who has always done this, is just waiting in silence as his work brings more and more back to the Church. The teachings of NPP,is very much in line with Rome.
    – Marc
    Commented Apr 8, 2015 at 12:30

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
2

N. T. Wright in this speech (near the end) given in 2003 claims that the new perspective is still compatible with reformed theology. So if you accept Wright's conclusion, then Calvinism, and any denomination that accepts 'reformed like' theology, at least should be okay with the new perspective.

Improve this answer
4
  • 2
    Claiming people should find your view compatible and people actually finding it to be so are not equivalent. In this case many and maybe a majority of reformed circles reject his view. One I saw yesterday (OPC) requires all ministry candidates to submit a written refutation as part of the exam process.
    – Caleb
    Commented Nov 26, 2011 at 23:43
  • Also, you doubting denominations have a stand on this doesn't make a good answers and us a bad hunch. Even as a "new" issue very many denominations have staked out a side to take. Justification is something churches (I think justifiably) take seriously. And sorry I couldn't resist.
    – Caleb
    Commented Nov 26, 2011 at 23:46
  • @caleb what is funny is he makes a similar pun in the same speech.
    – aceinthehole
    Commented Dec 5, 2011 at 0:26
  • @caleb of course I did use the clause "if you accept that conclution...
    – aceinthehole
    Commented Dec 26, 2011 at 22:59
2

The jury is still out on this one.

As a doctrinal perspective that is relatively new on the scene, theologians are still busy hashing out where they fall on the matter and denominations are examining how it compares to their established teachings. I know of no denominations that have officially embrassed it as their standard teaching. In fact I don't know of any yet who officially allow even partially, however there are quite a few thinkers these days that have gone this direction and many of the churches

While there may not be official adherence, there is certainly official rejection. Several denominations* have made statements against the teachings, and several have gone so far as to require all new ordination candidates to write their own refutations as part of their examination process.

* The OPC and several other Reformed / Presbyterian denominations.

Improve this answer
-1

NPP is more an academic movement than a denominational teaching. To the extent that any denominations use it, it would be only to help inform their understanding of Paul's teachings, and not as a denominational doctrine itself.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .