Covenantal nomism

The author of this report has been charged with exploring the topic of what is known as covenantal nomism. To be a little more specific, the thesis offered and argued by J.D.G. Dunn is that the book of Galatians is Paul's first "sustained attempt" to address the subject of nomism as mentioned above. Essentially, the idea of nomism is that one has to be born into grace and into God's people. It is the opposite of legalism, which is the idea that one can choose to obey God's commandments and join others in being among other people that are likewise choosing to be among the throng. While it is perhaps a bit controversial to discuss and think about the subject, the idea of who can be among God's people and how it can be gained or lost is a real question.

The general subject under review in this report is specific to Judaism circa the first century. It basically holds that the Jews of that day were the chosen people. However, protestants and others over the years have asserted that is specious, or at least unproven one way or the other. Even with that all being the case, the emergence of Jesus as the Son of God on Earth created a bit of a challenge in some ways. After all, the time of Jesus was chronologically after the Torah. In looking at Dunn's treatise on this general subject, it is noteworthy to point out that Paul, formerly Saul, was himself a persecutor of men before his reform. Even with that, Dunn points out that Paul made it a point and a priority to make righteousness a "prerogative" of Israel and Israel alone. Further, Dunn asserts that Paul was clearly trying to have a clear demarcation between the Jews and the Gentiles, with the latter being of the "sinner" variety. When it comes to Paul's ostensibly segue from being a horrible man to an apostle, he refers to it as a "commissioning" rather than a conversion. Obviously, Protestants look at all of this a little differently in that Paul was clearly among the sort of man that would lose his righteousness even if it could or should be presumed that he was among the chosen people of God. Dunn also makes a lot of the topics of food laws and circumcision. Dunn's ultimate review of Paul involves a drawing of parallels between what Jesus and Paul said on the subject. Jesus, of course, was quick to say that the Pharisaic way of labeling non-sectarians as being sinners was similar to Paul objecting to the Jewish ideal that Gentiles were the same sort of sinners by definition. In doing so, Paul seems to have undermined the Third Pillar of Judaism. He did so by saying that the laws surrounding Judaism at the time (e.g. those about circumcision, food, etc.) were not relevant in determining who received treatment as God's people and who did not. This represented a clear break in beliefs and patterns between Judaism and Christianity [footnoteRef:1]. [1: Dunn, James D. G. The Partings Of The Ways. London: SCM, 2006.]

Hagner speaks about much the same topic but takes his own approach. He echoes the general idea of what nomism represents when he says "Judaism was not and is not a religion where acceptance with God is earned through the merit of righteousness based on works." In other words, no one can do good deeds as a means to become part of God's people, as mentioned before. Hagner goes a bit further when saying that the subject of "justification by faith" was seen as a way to "facilitate" and help the mission of the Gentiles. Hagner touches on the same vexing question that was brought up before and that was how Saul the Pharisee and Paul the Christian can be reconciled when looking at Judaism and their self-directed view of being God's chosen people. Of course, the two concepts don't jive. Further, Paul was ostensibly called to bring the word of God to the Gentiles. Indeed, Hagner also uses the word "commissioned" when touching upon this subject, as was mentioned by Dunn as well. Hagner goes on to make a conclusion, as mentioned in section 3.6 of the relevant chapter, that "if Judaism is a religion of grace, and there is nothing wrong with its nomism in Paul's view, and if Paul's message therefore concerns the Gentiles rather than the Jews, a natural conclusion is that the covenantal nomism of the Old Testament is God's way of salvation for the Gentiles." In other words, the Jews have their path but the Gentiles have one of their own and the two are not mutually exclusive. This obviously runs counter to those that say that the Jews are indeed the only and selected chosen people but the duality just mentioned makes sense when assessing the words and deeds of Paul after his commissioning [footnoteRef:2]. [2: Stuhlmacher, Peter. Revisiting Paul's Doctrine Of Justification. Downers Grove, Ill.: Intervarsity Press, 2001.]

As far as what all of the above means to Judaism and Christianity, the overall lesson to be learned is indeed a little concerning. Meaning, while the Jews and Christians share a lot of parallels and corollaries, there are also some marked differences. They include how much of the New and Old Testaments are included in general teachings, how those same books are perceived, what Jesus was (or was not) in general and beyond. Fast forward about five or six centuries and one can throw Islam into that mix as well. There is often a rejection of faiths that are exclusionary and separatist in nature. Indeed, any sect or group that says that they alone are God's chosen people leads to people guffawing and arguing. At the same time, the palpable and major differences between Judaism and Christianity (not to mention Islam), despite their major similarities, cannot be ignored. It remains to be seen how these theories and ideas will ebb and flow in the generations and centuries to come. One could argue that only one religion or sect of a given branch of religion "gets it right." However, there are those, including Hagner, that assert that it is entirely possible that there is more than one "right answer." Even with their differences, there are many that say that both Jews and Christians are to be saved when judgment comes. Surely, we will know the answer to that question someday.