What is the New Perspective on Paul?

featuring Dr. Robert Cara #WisdomWednesday

For more #Wisdom Wednesday videos-

. I shudder to think if I had to come before the Lord for my own works and not His everlasting mercy

[dmmusicmusic]

Hey Dr. Cara, good to see you, one thing that jumps out at me is the parable Jesus told contrasting the pharisee/ tax collector where it seems obvious the contrast is ALL ABOUT WORKS vs faith in mercy/ grace. and interesting that Jesus also uses the word translated justified( dikaioo).

[cjimmerson]

Can’t imagine a more intentional manipulative attempt at describing the new perspective.

[brucebishop]

Understanding the dispensations in the Bible and the difference between Israel and the church, prophecy and mystery, salvation by grace, the purpose of the law(moral and ceremonial) and believing what words say as opposed to what "theologians" imagine clears up the "problem".

[benhartzell]

I’m sorry, but this is a poor attempt at fairly defining and describing what NPP proponents actually believe. I can’t imagine many people watching this and learning something they can apply to their understanding of salvation. Rather I see them watching this and saying, “Good, Dr. Cara thinks this is ridiculous, so I am safe!”

[vrager]

So all those Protestants who claimed that we are clothed in the righteousness of Christ got it wrong? Galatians 3:23-29; Isaiah 61:10 say otherwise. Works follow a desire to do / obey what the Word says every disciple should try to achieve, but works without faith get you nowhere... We are justified by faith in Christ - "whoever confesses with his lips and believes in his heart that Jesus is Lord and believes he was raised from the dead shall be saved" and there is no condition added that works are needed for salvation for we are saved by grace. This "new perspective" is theological gobbledegook.

[ammizimmerman]

Man, this sounds like great Protestant theology, the problem is so much of Protestantism and modern understandings of the Biblical narrative have been so skewed by Hellenistic philosophy and modern caricatured understandings of the 1st century. As a born-Jewish follower of Jesus, it aches me when I hear mainline Christianity’s views on eschatology, it’s just so far off from the message we receive from the Gospel accounts. As far as I’ve studied, the New Perspective is much MUCH more historically accurate than modern reformed understandings.

[ajindp]

I used his book in my thesis..it was discussed dconstuctively

[ecuador]

Just curious, who is promoting this “new perspective” on Paul and Justification?

[Kenoticrunner]

The video grossly misrepresents both Paul and the New Perspective, clinging to Reformation-era categories that Paul himself never operated within. It butchers Second Temple Judaism, falsely claiming that the New Perspective denies all legalism, while ignoring that Paul’s primary concern was Jewish-Gentile inclusion, not abstract forensic salvation. The speaker blindly assumes Paul held later Christian doctrines (virgin birth, eternal hell, Trinitarianism) despite zero evidence for these in Paul’s own writings. Rather than a serious historical-critical engagement, this is theological propaganda masquerading as scholarship, forcing Paul into a Protestant box he never belonged in.

[JacobVashchenko]

Whoever told you to read the teleprompter was pranking you... the new perspective is right and the teleprompter is wrong.

[James-vo]

The so-called "New Perspective" is not really new. It's just the work's righteous of the old Adam who clothed himself in fig leaves all the way back in the garden after the fall.

[ThembaMaselane]

Have been listening to a variety of reformed calvinists for years and benefited from their teaching even though I found calvinism problematic, the thing that I appreciated was the reformers moto, reformed always reforming which to me being willing to challenge and change my understanding when knowledge demands it. One of the standard principles I learned from the reformers is being faithful to the authority of the Bible specifically each text in context. Now man like NT Wright whom John MacArthur called a false teacher because he was unwilling to engage his writings because he refused to accept the fact that somethings are not black and white in scripture, that reading the Bible as a Jewish document challanges many of the the 17th and 18th century conclusions that are the bedrock of their theological stances, Having said that, you don't have to take everything man like Wright or Walton or Hayes one who revolutionized how we read The O, T the other pointing out the echoes of the OT in the NT in a eye opening way challenging how we read the Bible. This is not a denial of the fact that there are those who twist the Bible calling themselves pioneers of better perspectives Now this word is as misleading as the word anabaptist giving license to silence descenting positions even with force by calling them heresy or falsehood.

[TruthHasSpoken]

Some Protestants have a found and read all the books of the bible, James 2 included. The new perspective on Paul is now 2000 years old.

14 What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? *Can his faith save him? [NO]* 5 If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled, ” without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 *So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.*

18 But some one will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. *Even the demons believe—and shudder.* 20 Do you want to be shown, you foolish fellow, that faith apart from works is barren? 21 *Was not Abraham our father justified by works, * when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and *faith was completed by works, [100% Catholic]* 23 and the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”; and he was called the friend of God. 24 *You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. [Can scripture be any more explicit]* 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so *faith apart from works is dead*

[Freightman-HillFarm]

Galatians. Especially Gal. 3. Not by works. That was the Judaizers

[eltonron]

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE NEW COVENANT, (ten commandments written on the heart), to be WORKS.
Not even rest, is works.
Mt. 4:4, is the ten commandments for humanity, without debate, unless you want to lose a debate.
Christian scholarship stinks so bad, it can't discern the difference between what came from the mouth of Moses..
Mt. 4:4, even Satan knew they didn't come from the mouth of Moses, so Christianity has a bigger problem than the faith works frikassee. It must come to grips with the way, truth, and life declaring the ten commandments as how humanity will live.
Christianity being humanity, possibly debatable.

[MonicaSLM]

Not sure I understood anything. This video sounds like an intentional attempt to obfuscate the NP ...

[billblanchette]

Thanks for that explanation. Sounds like progressive/liberal reimagining of justification. Error at best...

[TxKyCoCaNy]

You uphold a 16th century perspective which was reactive an erroneous

[davidsayers]

Gawd, I love God and God loves me but listening to this guy makes me want to be an atheist. The fact that he needs to describe a division of Truth makes his whole rant very disturbing and pointless. Wears my spirit out. Too much hubris knowledge