Christianity is Jewish: On Salvation as Personal and Corporate (Justification Series Appendix)
Christianity is Jewish.
This is what Edith Schaeffer, the wife of popular 20th century author Francis Schaeffer, used as her book title[1] to remind us that we cannot fully understand Christianity without grasping its Jewish origins. The historical context of first-century Judaism gives us many rich, biblical insights gained into the person and work of Jesus Christ.
One of the most significant biblical insights, drawn from understanding the Jewish roots of Christianity, includes the corporate nature of the Christian faith in distinction from the way many think about Christianity as being primarily a very private “personal relationship with God.”
The bible presents the Christian faith in both broad terms, emphasizing the corporate nature of our salvation, and more narrow terms, emphasizing the highly individual nature of our salvation.
The error is pitting a corporate perspective toward salvation against a personal one or vice versa. If we reject the corporate perspective toward salvation we’re in danger of having a reductionistic understanding of the gospel that can lead to highly privatized individualism and superficial forms of unbiblical discipleship.
But if we reject the personal perspective toward salvation, we’re in danger of having a broad, corporate understanding of the gospel that can lead to religious externalism that minimizes, or even denies, the good news of personal salvation through individual faith in Jesus.[2] The bible never divorces our corporate identity from our personal faith.
With this necessary balance in mind, let’s take a brief look at how our Jewish origins, as followers of Jesus, help us deepen our understanding of Jesus, his gospel, and his church.
First century Jews of the Apostle Paul’s time were waiting for a Messiah to fulfill God’s covenant promises to them. God made these promises to them through Abraham, their spiritual father, through David, their greatest king, and through their prophets.
In the first century, their most recent covenant promise was called the New Covenant, given them by their prophets after they failed to keep God’s earlier covenants. In the New Covenant, God graciously promises to forgive them for breaking his covenants and put a new heart and new Spirit within them to obey him and fulfill his purposes on the earth.
The people of Israel received these gracious, New Covenant promises from God while still in Babylonian captivity for disobeying God’s covenant obligations. After their captivity, Israel returns to their land and rebuilds part of their earlier kingdom in Palestine.
It was a sad, pale shadow of what God promised to King David and his descendants many generations before. But the Jews of Paul’s day continued to believe in God’s steadfast faithfulness to keep all of his covenant promises to them.
When Jesus came, many of them saw him as the promised Messiah who came to fulfill God’s covenant promises. They rejoiced in the good news of God’s covenant faithfulness demonstrated in Jesus Christ as the promised, faithful, and true Israel of God.
They rejoiced in the good news that all who believe in Christ are the new covenant community, the recipients of God’s covenant promises of forgiveness, a new heart, and a new Spirit–and the first-fruits of God's project for transforming the entire universe into his glorious kingdom, as their prophets foretold.
The bible presents Jesus, the gospel, and the new community of Christ-followers as being deeply rooted in this historic, Jewish context. This is why the message of the gospel is that Jesus came first as the promised Jewish Messiah fulfilling God’s covenant promises to the Jews. When the Apostle Paul begins to explain the gospel to the mostly Gentile and Greek church in Rome, he writes:
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.” (Rom 1:16-17).”
When writing to mostly Greek-speaking Gentiles in Rome, Paul emphasizes the Jewish origins of the gospel by using the phrase “to the Jew first” and quoting from the Jewish prophet Habakkuk (Hab 2:4), “The righteous shall live by faith.”
In the first century church, there was much turmoil as Jews and Gentiles began learning how God was creating one new community, one new body, made up of people who were both Jew and Gentile and whose head was the ascended King Jesus.
In order for the new Gentile followers of Jesus to understand who he is, his gospel, and his church, they needed to learn new categories of Jewish thought very foreign to their Greek and Roman categories of thinking. And in order for new Jewish followers of Jesus to undersand Christianity, they, too, needed to learn new categories of thought very foreign to them
For the Jews, this included dramatic changes like replacing God’s covenant sign of admission to his covenant community, from the bloody rite of circumcision, applied only to Jewish males, to the cleansing rite of water baptism, applied to both males and females from all nations and ethnic groups. The Jewish believers also had to learn that God replaced their required covenant Passover meal with a new required covenant meal, the Lord’s Supper.
The Jews were no longer able to exclude Gentiles from full admission into God’s covenant community because the Gentile believers have the only credential required, namely faith in Jesus. They are saved, justified by faith alone, and so they have all the privileges of the kingdom. They are first-class citizens.
The Gentile followers of Jesus also needed to learn whole new ways of thinking about God, worshipping God, and living for God that are deeply rooted in many generations of Jewish thought and practice. This is why we must affirm the importance of understanding Jesus, the gospel, and the church in light of the historical context of first-century Judaism and its covenantal thought.
A Word of Warning
But we must offer a word of warning. There is a danger in both under-emphasizing and over-emphasizing the significance of the historical context of first century Judaism on the meaning of the gospel and justification.
A neglect or denial of the Judaistic, communal implications of the good news of justification can result in an unbiblical, self-centered understanding of justification that promotes unhealthy individualism that is a parody of true Christian discipleship. And an over-emphasis on the first-century, Judaistic, communal implications of justification can result in a neglect or denial of the necessity and instrumentality of personal faith in Jesus Christ for salvation.
So, we must be careful not to affirm the personal dimension of salvation and justification to the denial of the communal dimension. Likewise, we must be careful not to affirm the communal dimension of salvation and justification to the denial of the personal dimension.
What is often called The New Perspective on Paul[3] is a general term used to describe several streams of thought during the late 20th and early 21st centuries that strongly emphasize the communal nature of salvation and justification in distinction from its more personal nature.
The best forms of The New Perspective do not deny the personal nature of salvation but rightly contend against a harmful, personal and individualistic focus in much of Western Christianity. But the worst forms wrongly pit the corporate nature of salvation and justification against the personal nature of salvation and justification, calling into question the biblical necessity of personal faith in Christ for the salvation of individuals.
The problem with New Perspectives teaching on justification is not what it affirms, but what it denies. We should affirm the biblical teaching that justification includes a communal dimension and that justifying faith can be seen as “the badge of covenant membership.”
But this affirmation must never lead us to deny that an individual’s justifying faith in Jesus Christ is “the port of entry into the company of the saved.” The Scriptures teach that Christian baptism is the outward sign, the badge of covenant membership, that signifies the inward reality of Holy Spirit baptism that comes, like justification, only through personal, justifying faith.
We can affirm the communal implications of God’s gracious declaration that all who are justified are in union with Christ and his body, without denying the personal implications that all who have saving faith receive the personal gift of God’s righteousness through their faith in Christ.
The problem is that many who embrace the New Perspective, believe and teach that this understanding of personal justification by faith, promoted by the Reformers like Luther and Calvin, is not biblical. They believe that the historic, Protestant understandting of salvation and justification has misunderstood justification because it failed to grasp first-century Judaism and embraced Medieval thought categories.
The dangerous result of this teaching is that it often leads to the negect or denial of essential, biblical truths regarding the personal salvation of lost individuals. Instead of affirming that the Apostle Paul’s use of the biblical word for “faith” in reference to Christ means primarily an individual’s “faith in Christ,” they often refer to “faith” in reference to Christ as meaning primarily “Christ’s faithfulness.”
And, instead of affirming that the biblical word for justification refers primarily to the salvation of lost individuals from incurring God’s just wrath for their sin, as Paul describes in Romans 1-5, they often teach that the biblical word for “justification” refers primarily to God’s “covenant faithfulness” demonstrated in Jesus Christ.
When the Apostle Paul writes about justification, he refers to both the corporate and personal dimensions. For instance, in Romans 4:5 Paul writes, “And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness.” Paul is referring back to God’s promise to Abraham in Genesis 15 that Abraham will be the father of many nations, not just the nation of Israel.
When Paul refers to God as the one “who justifies the ungodly,” he is referring to the ungodly gentiles. But Paul makes clear in Romans that Abraham’s faith was much more than merely believing that one day God would justify the gentiles. Abraham’s faith was also personal. He believed that God would justify him personally, that his faith would be “counted as righteousness” (Romans 4).
We should affirm that Abraham believed God would justify the ungodly gentiles. But we must never deny, as some New Perspectives advocates do, that Abraham also believed in God’s promises to justify him and count his faith as righteousness apart from works.
In the next verses in Romans, Paul gives evidence that Abraham’s justifying faith is not merely a belief that God will justify the Gentiles by referring to the justifying faith of King David. Like Abraham before him, David received the grace of God’s personal forgiveness, having his sin’s covered, through his faith in God apart from good works.
Paul writes, “…just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin (Rom. 4:6-8).”
The problem is that many advocates of the New Perspective neglect or deny the biblical doctrine of personal justification. They argue that the Reformers and most of traditional Protestantism since the Reformation have misunderstood justification as personal because they failed to grasp first-century Judaism and wrongly embraced late Medieval thought categories.
As a result, a leading New Perspective advocate even mocks the traditional Protestant understanding of the righteousness of Christ being imputed to individuals, saying: “This is a late Medieval way of understanding righteousness as a thing…a sort of heavenly gas that sort of gets breathed around the place.”[4]
This leading New Perspective advocate publicly mocks the traditional Protestant interpretation of the Philippian jailer’s question to Paul and Silas “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:30) following an earthquake that set them free from the jail. This advocate denies the historic interpretation that the jailer is primarily asking how to be saved from God’s wrath, i.e. how to be justified. Instead, he says the proper translation is that the jailer is simply asking “’What must I do to get out of this mess that just happened?,” not “’how can I be justified?’”
Similarly, he has a different interpretation of the answer Paul and Silas give the jailer, when they say, ““Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household (Acts 16:31).” He rejects the primary meaning of their answer as referring to the jailer’s personal salvation from God’s wrath, along with his family’s salvation, through believing in Jesus. Instead, he says the proper translation is: “Believe in the Lord Jesus and all sorts of things will be put right, including you and your family.”
The rest of this passage in the book of Acts gives evidence that the primary meaning of their answer is referring to personal salvation.
“And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family. Then he brought them up into his house and set food before them. And he rejoiced along with his entire household that he had believed in God (Acts 16:32-34).”
Again, the problem with New Perspectives teaching is not what it affirms, but what it denies. We can and should affirm the legitimacy of the interpretation of the jailer’s question as including his very real desire to be saved from the wrath of the Roman officials for allowing a jail break under his watch. But we must never deny that the primary meaning, as clearly shown by the biblical context, is that the jailer and his family be saved personally, as indicated soon after by their baptism.
We must also be on our guard against those who do not believe in personal justification but still use biblical words that make them appear as if they do. It is not enough for someone merely to say that they believe the concept of “faith” in the biblical teaching on “justification by faith” is an unmerited, grace-given, true, and living faith that works. Neither is it enough for someone to affirm their belief that justification is by faith alone given by grace alone. Roman Catholics and Protestants alike affirm these statements.
The problem is that people can use the same words regarding the biblical doctrine of justification by faith but give the words different meaning. Roman Catholics and Protestants affirm that justification by faith teaches that sinful humans can receive Christ’s moral perfection and merit. But the Protestant Reformation was largely fought over the difference in the meaning of these words.
Since multiple meanings or nuances can be found in the biblical concept of justification, the issue is what you actually believe when you use certain words to describe the meaning of justification. But, with so many conflicting opinions and views today regarding the true meaning of justification, what are the parameters of biblical faithfulness and orthodoxy?
To help us navigate these sometimes complex theological waters, we’ve listed below some affirmations and denials we hope you’ll find helpful.[5]
We affirm the value of understanding justification in light of the historical context of first-century Judaism and its covenantal thought.
We deny that traditional Protestantism has misunderstood justification because it failed to grasp first-century Judaism and embraced Medieval thought categories.
We affirm that an implication of justification includes a communal (ecclesiological) and future (eschatological) dimension.
We deny a communal (ecclesiological) and future (eschatological) dimension of justification is more primary in Scripture than a saving (soteriological) dimension.
We affirm that the biblical word for justification refers primarily to the salvation of lost individuals from incurring God’s just wrath for their sin, e.g. Romans 1-5.
We deny that the biblical word for “justification,” and its many cognates, refers primarily to God’s “covenant faithfulness” demonstrated in Jesus Christ.
We affirm that the Apostle Paul’s use of the biblical word for “faith” in reference to Christ means an individual’s “faith in Christ.”
We deny that the Apostle Paul’s use of the biblical word for “faith” in reference to Christ means “Christ’s faithfulness.”
We affirm that the good news of justification is primarily the pronouncement that we are forgiven and accepted by God through Christ’s blood and righteousness.
We deny that the good news of justification is primarily the pronouncement that we are “in the covenant.”
We affirm that God considers (counts, imputes) the legal status of Christ’s righteousness to all individuals who have saving faith in Jesus.
We deny that God transfers (imparts, infuses) the righteousness of Christ to all who believe that God’s covenant faithfulness is demonstrated in Jesus.
We affirm that personal faith in Jesus Christ for justification is necessary for and instrumental in our salvation.
We deny that personal faith in Jesus Christ for justification causes or in any way merits our salvation.
We affirm the danger of a self-centered understanding of justification that can promote unhealthy individualism that is a parody of true Christian discipleship.
We deny that believing in the necessity and instrumentality of personal faith in Christ for salvation necessarily leads to individualism and shallow discipleship.
Footnotes:
[1] Schaeffer, Edith., & Middelmann, U. W. (2012). Christianity Is Jewish. Eugene, Or.: Wipf & Stock Pub.
[2] See John 1:11-12, 3:16, 36, Rom. 3:21-25
[3] The New Perspective was originally associated with Krister Stendahl, E. P. Sanders, and James Dunn. It has made it’s most significant influence on more theologically conservative Christians through the writings of Anglican Bishop N.T. Wright, who has written masterfully about the resurrection in his 2009 book Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church.
[4] N. T. Wright, this quote is from the video of his debate with Kevin Vanhoozer. Available on request.
[5] For scholarly arguments in support of these biblical affirmations and denials, see Barclay, J.M.G. (2015) 'N.T. Wright, Paul and the faithfulness of God (SPCK, 2013).', Scottish journal of theology. For popular articles available through Ligonier ministries see C.E. Hill, NT Wright on Justification https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/nt-wright-justification, and An Explanation of the New Perspective by Bryan Chapell, https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/explanation-new-perspective-paul/