Frank Thielman, Paul Apostle of Grace (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2025)

Thielman’s goal in this work is to compose a biography of Paul, in the same vein as F. F. Bruce’s magisterial Paul Apostle of the Heart Set Free, that helps the general reader to understand what motivated St. Paul’s extraordinary life and ministry.^[i] 

In short, this volume asks the question: what made the apostle tick? Thielman’s answer is that St. Paul’s experience of the Risen Messiah and his subsequent relationship with the Resurrected Jesus fundamentally changed him so much that the apostle spent the rest of his life doing everything he could for the gospel’s sake. 

To accomplish this work’s goal, Thielman reconstructs St. Paul’s life from all thirteen canonical Pauline letters, which he considers to be authentic, Acts of the Apostles, other early Christian works, pagan literary sources, and archaeological evidence, attempting to present the most probable portrait of the apostle. This biography consists of twenty-six chapters with three helpful appendices and six maps interspersed throughout the work (for a list of these and their page numbers, see below). Instead of footnotes, Thielman has placed his copious references, mainly to secondary sources, in endnotes, while leaving most primary source references in the body of the text. 

In the preface, Thielman lays out some of his distinctive assumptions about St. Paul and his life that the reader will meet in the volume. The first is Thielman’s use of the abovementioned sources, including all thirteen of the apostle’s letters and Acts. He notes that he has laid out his case for accepting these letters as Pauline and the historical reliability of Acts in appendix 1. 

The second assumption is that Thielman considers Galatians 2:1–10 and the Apostolic Council of Acts 15 to refer to the same event. Thus, he does not accept the view common among more “conservative” leaning scholars that Galatians 2:1–10 refers to St. Paul’s and St. Barnabas’s visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:27–30. However, unlike other scholars who equate Acts 15 with Galatians 2:1–10, Thielman believes Galatians is Paul’s earliest canonical letter and that he composed it to the churches in southern Galatia. Therefore, he holds to what is known as the Southern Galatia Hypothesis for the destination of Galatians, which means that Thielman believes that the apostle composed the letter to the churches in the province of Galatia that did not consist of ethnic Galatians and that he and St. Barnabas missionized in Acts 13:13–28. It is noteworthy that many scholars who accept the identification of Galatians 2:1–10 with Acts 15 posit that Galatians is not St. Paul’s earliest canonical letter and they tend to subscribe to the Northern Galatia Hypothesis vis-à-vis the destination of Galatians, which means that they propose that the apostle addressed Galatians not to the people in southern Galatia but to ethnic Galatians who lived in the province’s northern portion. 

The third assumption of Thielman’s is that St. Paul composed the Pastorals in the timeframe that Acts narrates. Consequently, unlike many scholars who accept Pauline authorship of the Pastorals and have a habit of placing one or more of these letters in the life of St. Paul after the events recorded in Acts, Thielman perceptively finds space for them in Luke’s narrative, and he lays out his arguments for this in appendices 2 and 3.  

Overall, this work is thoughtful, clear, concise, engaging, and historically informed. Thielman’s primary source driven volume does a masterful job of contextualizing St. Paul’s world of Second Temple Judaism, early Christianity, and Greco-Roman society and positioning the apostle in it. His work is too vast for me to comment adequately on it so I will discuss two important points that Thielman makes that influence his reconstruction of St. Paul. First, in his discussion of the revelation of Jesus to the apostle on the Damascus Road, Thielman rightly and convincingly argues that St. Paul was converted, not just commissioned or called as an apostle. From St. Paul’s letters, he stresses the discontinuity between the apostle’s pre-Christian and Christian life, noting that what happened to St. Paul—his life being transferred into the Resurrected Messiah (2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 2:20; 6:15; Romans 6:4–11; Philippians 1:21)—is so “radical” that only the term conversion is appropriate (22–25). 

Second, his appendix in which he defends Pauline authorship of all thirteen canonical letters of the apostle is well informed not only concerning the phenomenon of pseudepigraphy (or false writings in the name of someone) in Greco-Roman antiquity but also related to the discussion of the authenticity of these letters among prominent Church Fathers. For example, Thielman notes the difficulty in determining the authenticity of any document from antiquity, quoting St. Augustine who asked how people of his day knew that Plato, Aristotle, etc. composed the works attributed to them. St. Augustine’s answer: these writings have been passed down through the ages as genuine and thus they should be accepted as such. Similarly, St. Augustine argues that we can know that canonical books are genuine because “they have been handed down as genuine from one generation to another in the church from the time of their composition” (344).^[ii] Thielman notes that this is not a “bad argument” and 

“If no other arguments for or against a particular Pauline letter’s genuineness are decisive, and if the ancient world was awash in forgeries, then it made, and makes, sense to consider the antiquity of the document itself and the antiquity and reliability of those who testify to its authorial claims. The disputed Pauline letters fare reasonably well under those considerations, and so it seems intellectually justifiable to use them as sources to construct the apostle’s career and thought” (344–45).

In my opinion, this argument for Pauline authorship of all thirteen letters is not a bad one, either. It is honest, well thought out, humble, and, at the end of the day after the dust clouds of grammar, theology, and vocabulary have settled, presents the best defense of Pauline authorship of all epistles in the Pauline corpus. I am grateful for Thielman for expressing it so eloquently. 

For this, and for many more reasons that space and time prohibit me from discussing, I highly recommend this work to any interested student of St. Paul, layperson, clergy, or scholar.

I am grateful to Eerdmans for a gratis copy of this work, which in no way influenced my review of it. 

List of the content of Thielman’s Paul Apostle of Grace:

1. Paul before His Encounter with Christ (1–16)
2. A Revelation from God (17–26)
3. Following Christ in Damascus and Arabia (27–37)
4. Return to Jerusalem (38–52)
5. Ministry in Syria and Cilicia (53–66)
6. Forming and Expanding the Multiethnic Church of God (67–78)
7. Advancement and Opposition in Southern Galatia (79–87)
8. Resistance to the Multiethnic Church (88–103)
9. Advancing Westward with the Gospel (104–113)
10. Church Planting and Suffering in Macedonia (114–127)
11. A Cool Reception in Athens and Laying a Foundation in Corinth (128–142)
12. An Urgent Letter from Corinth to Christians in Galatia (143–154)
13. Urgent Letters to Thessalonica and Overcoming Opposition in Corinth (155–166)
14. A Visit to Jerusalem, a Collection for Its Needy Christians, and a New Beginning in Ephesus (167–77)
15. Ministry in Ephesus and a Letter to Christians in Corinth (178–192)
16. Trouble in Corinth and Strange Teaching in Ephesus (193–205)
17. “Fighting Without and Fear Within” (206–219)
18. A Turning Point (220–232)
19. Back to Jerusalem with the Collection Delegation (233–246)
20. Violence and Arrest in the Jerusalem Temple (247–262)
21. A Taste of Roman Justice in Caesarea-by-the-Sea (263–270)
22. A Turbulent Journey West and Respite on Malta (271–285)
23. House Arrest in Rome (286–298)
24. Visitors from Philippi and the Lycus River Valley (299–313)
25. Fighting from Prison against Discouragement in Ephesus (314–322)
26. Paul Finishes the Race (323–335)

Appendix 1: The Evidence for Paul (337–352)
Appendix 2: The Historical Setting of Paul’s Imprisonment Letters (353–362)
Appendix 3: The Place, Manner, and Time of Paul’s Death (363–370)

Map 1: The Roman World in the First Century AD (xviiii)
Map 2: From Syrian Antioch to Cyprus to Southern Galatia and Back to Syrian Antioch (72)
Map 3: From Syrian Antioch to Southern Galatia to the Aegean Region to Jerusalem and Back to Syrian Antioch (105)
Map 4: From Jerusalem to Syrian Antioch to Southern Galatia to Ephesus to Macedonia, Illyricum, Achaia, and Back to Jerusalem (173)
Map 5: The Temple (253)
Map 6: From Caesarea to Rome (272)

---

^[i] While his main audience is general, Thielman notes that those with a knowledge of Roman history and geography will benefit most from his work.

^[ii] “You are so hardened in your errors against the testimonies of Scripture, that nothing can be made of you; for whenever anything is quoted against you, you have the boldness to say that it is written not by the apostle, but by some pretender under his name. The doctrine of demons which you preach is so opposed to Christian doctrine, that you could not continue, as professing Christians, to maintain it, unless you denied the truth of the apostolic writings. How can you thus do injury to your own souls? Where will you find any authority, if not in the Gospel and apostolic writings? How can we be sure of the authorship of any book, if we doubt the apostolic origin of those books which are attributed to the apostles by the Church which the apostles themselves founded, and which occupies so conspicuous a place in all lands, and if at the same time we acknowledge as the undoubted production of the apostles what is brought forward by heretics in opposition to the Church, whose authors, from whom they derive their name, lived long after the apostles? And do we not see in profane literature that there are well-known authors under whose names many things have been published after their time which have been rejected, either from inconsistency with their ascertained writings, or from their not having been known in the lifetime of the authors, so as to be banded down with the confirmatory statement of the authors themselves, or of their friends? To give a single example, were not some books published lately under the name of the distinguished physician Hippocrates, which were not received as authoritative by physicians? And this decision remained unaltered in spite of some similarity in style and matter: for, when compared to the genuine writings of Hippocrates, these books were found to be inferior; besides that they were not recognized as his at the time when his authorship of his genuine productions was ascertained. Those books, again, from a comparison with which the productions of questionable origin were rejected, are with certainty attributed to Hippocrates; and any one who denies their authorship is answered only by ridicule, simply because there is a succession of testimonies to the books from the time of Hippocrates to the present day, which makes it unreasonable either now or hereafter to have any doubt on the subject. How do we know the authorship of the works of Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Varro, and other similar writers, but by the unbroken chain of evidence? So also with the numerous commentaries on the ecclesiastical books, which have no canonical authority, and yet show a desire of usefulness and a spirit of inquiry. How is the authorship ascertained in each case, except by the author’s having brought his work into public notice as much as possible in his own lifetime, and, by the transmission of the information from one to another in continuous order, the belief becoming more certain as it becomes more general, up to our own day; so that, when we are questioned as to the authorship of any book, we have no difficulty in answering? But why speak of old books? Take the books now before us: should any one, after some years, deny that this book was written by me, or that Faustus’ was written by him, where is evidence for the fact to be found but in the information possessed by some at the present time, and transmitted by them through successive generations even to distant times? From all this it follows, that no one who has not yielded to the malicious and deceitful suggestions of lying devils, can be so blinded by passion as to deny the ability of the Church of the apostles— a community of brethren as numerous as they were faithful — to transmit their writings unaltered to posterity, as the original seats of the apostles have been occupied by a continuous succession of bishops to the present day, especially when we are accustomed to see this happen in the case of ordinary writings both in the Church and out of I”t (St. Augustine, Contra Faustus 33.6; translation taken from https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/140633.htm).

---

Stephen J Chester, Paul through the Eyes of the Reformers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2025)

This work is an adaption of Chester’s earlier volume, Reading Paul with the Reformers: Reconciling Old and New Perspective (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2017), that is “sharper and more succinct” (xiii) and is, at the same time, an expansion in places.

Chester’s main goal is to demonstrate that the New Perspective on Paul’s (abbreviated NPP, hereafter) outright dismissal of and refusal to interact with the Reformers’ interpretations of the apostle and his letters is “misguided” for two main reasons. The first is that most of what NPP scholars assume about the Reformers’ views of St. Paul is incorrect and the second is that NPP interpreters unknowingly rely on the Reformers for some of their fundamental conclusions about the apostle’s theology (xiii). 

To accomplish this goal, Chester divides his work into four parts in which there are sixteen chapters.  

Part 1 consists of two chapters focusing on “The New Perspective on Paul and the Reformation” and contains material that did not appear in Chester’s 2017 work. In chapter 1 (“The New Perspective on Paul: Context,” 3–8), Chester provides the modern context for the development of the NPP, Pauline exegetes coming to terms with the events of the Holocaust. The second chapter (“Parallel Disciplines: Pauline Theology and Luther Studies,” 9–25) examines the theological developments of Pauline and Luther studies in the mid-twentieth century that led to the NPP and fresh readings of Martin Luther’s theology, which track and resemble each other closely, e.g., interpreting St. Paul and Luther as apocalyptic theologians.

Part 2 is made up of seven chapters examining the shifts in the interpretation of St. Paul’s letters during the Reformation with an eye to how NPP scholars unknowingly interact with them: “Reformation Interpretation and the New Perspective on Paul as Paradigm Shifts.” In chapter 3 (“Perspectives on Paul before the Reformers: Augustine,” 29–37), Chester explores the groundwork for the exegetical grammar of St. Paul’s understanding of grace, human will, and righteousness—especially how the former transforms the believer initially and then throughout his or her lifetime in cooperation with goods works and the Eucharist—that St. Augustine laid.

Chapter 4 (“Perspectives on Paul before the Reformers: The Medieval Era,” 38–48) probes how medieval theologians such as Thomas Aquinas accepted and interpreted St. Augustine’s exegetical grammar of grace, human will, and righteousness because it was against these interpretations of that exegetical grammar that the Reformers reacted. In chapter 5 (“The Reformers’ New Pauline Exegetical Grammar: Context and Emergence,” 49–57), Chester provides the historical and interpretative context for Luther’s call for reform. 

Chapter 6 (“The Reformers’ New Pauline Exegetical Grammar: The Human Plight,” 58–75) delves into the Reformers’ view of the plight of humanity apart from Christ, which can be summarized with two words, original sin. However, in adopting Augustinian terminology, the Reformers rejected his understanding of original sin in two ways. The first is that original sin is the loss of “the supernatural gift that before the fall enabled human nature to will what God wills,” which makes original sin “the absence of something good.” For the Reformers, this view could not capture what they stressed about sin and its all-corrupting nature. The second aspect of the Augustine understanding of original sin is his interpretation of “flesh” as “misdirected desires” that disorder “the whole person.” For the Reformers, “flesh” must be the whole human being, not one portion of him or her, because sin captures the whole person, making him or her act against God’s will (59). This leads the Reformers to conclude that God’s purpose in giving the Law was to reveal our sin and need for his grace (Romans 3:20; Galatians 3:19; 66). Most surprising in this chapter (and something that is taken up again in chapter 9) is Chester’s conclusions about St. Paul’s conscience, which contradict Krister Stendahl’s (1921–2008) 1963 article on the subject that many modern Pauline scholars have accepted without reservation. In the article, Stendahl (a Bishop in the Lutheran Church of Sweden) claims that Luther projected his own troubled conscience into his reading of St. Paul.^[1] To the contrary, Chester demonstrates that Luther held similar interpretations of Pauline texts that Stendahl used to show that the apostle had a robust conscience before he became a Christian (71–75).

In chapter 7 (“The Context of the Reformers’ Pauline Exegetical Grammar: Salvation in Christ,” 76–93), Chester explores the Reformers’ understanding of salvation in Christ. With their belief in what they considered original sin, the Reformers’ concluded that salvation was the result only of God’s abundant mercy and grace apart from human works or works of the Law (the Reformers interpreted the Law as the whole Law), even after baptism. The Christian is justified “solely through Christ’s person and work” (76). To this end, the Reformers rejected St. Augustine’s understanding of grace as initially infused upon conversion and the later interpretation of medieval theologians of grace as creating habits that cooperated with the believer resulting in an increase of their righteousness through good works (77). Nevertheless, grace changes the Christian in the gift of faith, which is most fundamentally trusting in God’s promises. At that time, the believer receives Christ’s saving benefits. This type of faith/trust is active and justifies the Christian because with it he or she receives Christ’s righteousness apart from any work/merit (77).

Chapter 8 (“Setting the Record Straight: The Reformers’ Contributions to the New Perspective on Paul,” 94–105) demonstrates that NPP scholars depend on the Reformers’ understanding of Pauline anthropology, especially their interpretation of “flesh” as denoting the entire person and its relationship to “sin.” Moreover, NPP interpreters and those who hold to the Apocalyptic Paul intensify the Reformers’ view of salvation in Christ as only a divine initiative, while those who espouse a Covenantal Paul develop the Reformers’ notion of God’s saving activity in the world as having a single divine plan. 

In chapter 9 (“Setting the Record Straight: The Reformers and the New Perspective on Paul in Tension,” 106–19), Chester delves deeper into the NPP’s and its precursor Stendahl’s error in claiming that the Reformers understood St. Paul to have an introspective conscience as well as the NPP’s inadequacy in its dealing with the Reformers’ understanding of works of the Law. 

Part 3 (“Justification by Faith and Union with Christ in the Reformers’ Exegesis”) is the longest portion of the work and delves into the disagreements and nuances of Christ’s role in justification of three main Reformers, Luther, Melanchthon, and Calvin. It begins with chapter 10 (“Martin Luther: Alien Righteousness and Life in Christ,” 123–41), which probes Luther’s understanding of the essentiality of believers’ union with Christ. Luther held that the Christian is united with Christ because of his or her faith/trust in God’s promises. This act makes faith present and imputes Christ’s righteousness to the believer. It is living life in the Victorious Christ, not anything natural in the Christian, that makes a faithful life and good works possible. 

In chapter 11 (“Philip Melanchthon: Justification on Account of Christ,” 142–55), Chester examines Melanchthon’s understanding of justification as a forensic, relational term that results in everlasting life because of Christ’s propitiating sacrifice and role as mediator between God and humanity. 

Chapter 12 (“Luther and Melanchthon on Justification: Continuity or Contrast?,” 156–70) compares Luther’s and Melanchthon’s views of justification and concludes that while there are differences in their understanding of it, there are no contradictions: “Luther emphasizes the presence of Christ in faith and employs the motif of joyous exchange between the sinner and the incarnate Christ to help explain what Paul means by justification. This leads him to include the works of believers within justification even as he insists that such works are not in any sense the basis of justification. In contrast, Melanchthon asserts that justification means acceptance on account of Christ’s sacrificial death. The renewal of the believer expressed in works is consequent upon justification rather than part of it” (169). 

In chapter 13 (“John Calvin: The Double Grace of Union with Christ,” 171–89), Chester explores Calvin’s view of justification, which he summarizes as five points: (1) faith unites the believer with Christ, at which time “in him” he or she receives justification and sanctification; (2) justification is a forensic, yet participatory concept; (3) sanctification involves putting to death the pre-Christian self and sharing in Christ’s resurrection, which will eventually result in the believer’s resurrection, but in the meantime it manifests itself in good works; (4) Christ’s saving benefits are wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption; and finally (5) the bond that unites the Christian with Christ is the Holy Spirit (188–89).

Chapter 14 (“John Calvin: Human Response in Union with Christ,” 190–205) continues to explore Calvin’s theology of justification, focusing on his view of the believer’s union with Christ, which is the locus for the expectant good works of a Christian. 

Part 4 (“Reading Paul with the Reformers Today”) forms the last portion of the book and attempts to probe the modern exegetical implications of the differences among these Reformers’ views of justification. In chapter 15 (“Paul and the Reformers: Moving beyond the New Perspective on Paul,” 209–19), Chester discusses the NPP and the Paul within Judaism Perspective but focuses mainly on reading John Barclay, Paul and the Gift (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015), with the Reformers. For example, he notes that Barclay’s notion of the incongruity of God’s grace helps to resolve some of the Reformers’ issues like Calvin’s sharp distinction between justification and sanctification and Luther’s placement of good works as the spontaneous good fruit of good trees: “Barclay does not do either of these things but employes the structure of gift and response to produce a more unified vision. The saving gift is thoroughly incongruous: it goes to the unworthy, unfitting, and unsuitable, and nothing that results from it by way of holiness could provide a basis for the gift . . . Yet the recipients will be changed by the gift” (218). 

Chapter 16 (“Paul and the Reformers: Resources for Contemporary Pauline Theology,” 220–34) provides a test case, Romans 4, demonstrating the benefit that the Reformers have for modern Pauline interpreters. Chester shows that Calvin and Luther had reached some of the same insights, centuries earlier, on Romans 4 that NPP scholars have. However, the latter do not acknowledge the former, mainly because of their failure to read them. In short, Chester concludes that “the Reformers offer exegetical insights of continuing relevance for our efforts to interpret Paul’s theology for today” (234).

Finally, Chester provides a bibliography (“Bibliography,” 235–48) and three indices: one for modern authors (“Index of Authors,” 249–50), one for ancient texts including the Bible (“Index of Scripture and Other Ancient Texts,” 251–52), and one for medieval and Reformation texts (“Index of Medieval and Reformation Texts,” 253–54). 

Paul through the Eyes of the Reformers is an excellent volume and pairs well with Chester’s earlier work on the subject, Reading Paul with the Reformers. It was this earlier book that changed my perception of the Reformers. Up till that time and throughout my doctorate (which I finished in 2018), I had bought the caricature of them that I found in NPP scholars. Therefore, I concluded that the Reformers were not worth reading because they had nothing to offer modern Pauline studies. However, after reading Reading Paul with the Reformers, Chester changed my mind. Now, I find the Reformers (as well as the Church Fathers) to be a wellspring of insight into St. Paul’s theology. With this new work, however, Chester has demonstrated even more why modern Pauline scholars must pay attention to the Reformers, especially if they are going to make comments dismissing their work and insights. For these reasons, I highly recommend picking up a copy of Chester’s Paul through the Eyes of the Reformers from Eerdmans directly or from Amazon.

I appreciate the gratis copy of this work from Eerdmans, which in no way influenced my review of it. 

---

^[1] Krister Stendahl, “The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West,” Harvard Theological Review 56 (1963): 199–215.

David A. deSilva, Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul: A Visual Guide (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2025)

“The ruins of Rome are a constant reminder not only of Rome’s greatness but of the fact that no empire forged by human beings endures . . . The archaeological remains remind us—as Paul would remind his audiences—to look to the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ if we are ever to fine a truly stable homeland” (281–82).

The goal of this volume is to introduce students of St. Paul to pertinent archaeological discoveries in the Greek and Roman cities associated with him for the purpose of better understanding the apostle’s letters through contextualizing the situations that preempted him to compose them and his responses to these situations in the epistles in question (xii). To accomplish this goal, deSilva divides his work into four parts: (1) a short introduction, (2) chapters devoted to cities connected to St. Paul’s early life and ministry, (3) chapters focusing on the cities in which the apostle established Christian congregations on his missionary journeys, and (4) chapters examining the cities he visited on his final trip to Jerusalem and journey to Rome.  

In the “Introduction” (xi–xiv), deSilva lays out the above-mentioned goal, notes the temporal limitations of his work, for whom he has composed it, and summarizes the volume’s contents. Because deSilva desires to contextualize the letters of the Pauline corpus that were composed to congregations in which St. Paul planted churches, he mostly focuses on archaeological materials that the apostle would have seen and encountered, although sometimes he draws on materials that postdate St. Paul’s lifetime. To this end, the work is not a comprehensive introduction to the cities associated with the apostle, but only a snapshot of what they looked like in the mid-first century AD (xii). 

DeSilva’s intended audience are those who have yet or who are unable to visit the sites covered in the book or those who can and wish to learn more about these cities and their relation to the apostle before their trip (xii). He divides Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul into three unequal parts related to St. Paul’s life and ministry that generally follows his chronology and movements from Acts of the Apostles.

The first part focuses on sites associated with the beginnings of the apostle’s life and ministry, which covers his early life in “Tarsus” (3–6), his time in “Damascus and Arabia” (7–14) and “Antioch-On-The-Orontes” (15–20), and his trip to “Paphos” (21–26) with St. Barnabas. 

The second part, which is the longest, examines the cities in which St. Paul and his apostolic colleagues established congregations in various cities in modern-day Türkiye and Greece: “Perge and Pisidian Antioch” (29–50), “Roman Philippi” (51–77), “Thessalonica” (78–99), “Beroea” (100–7), “Athens” (108–25), “Roman Corinth” (126–56), “Roman Ephesus” (157–88), and “Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis” (189–205).

In the third and final part, deSilva treats the cities connected to the last years of the apostle’s life as recorded in Acts, his final trip to Jerusalem, his imprisonment, and his journey to Rome: “Miletus” (209–18), “Rhodes” (219–24), “Jerusalem” (225–30), “Caesarea Maritima” (231–42), “Malta” (243–48), “Puteoli” (249–53), and “Rome” (254–82).  

For the most part, deSilva begins each chapter by noting the connections of the city in question to St. Paul’s ministry. Then, he devotes the bulk of each chapter to discussing the archaeological and literary evidence of the site and how it illuminates the apostle’s letter(s) to the church in that city.

Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul is a welcomed addition to Pauline studies for three reasons. First, it is a thoroughly comprehensive treatment of the cities that St. Paul visited and missionized during his life and ministry bringing them together in a single volume. To this end, pastors and parish priests will find this work helpful as they prepare their homilies and Bible studies for their parishioners.

Second, deSilva mostly bases his work on up-to-date scholarship on the various sites from archaeologists and specialists who are working on them and students of the apostle can mine his bibliography to dig deeper, if they wish. This means that many incorrect assumptions that plague earlier studies about various archaeological data and St. Paul are not present in this volume. For example, deSilva has a balanced treatment of the Erastus Inscription from Corinth (147–48) (which is not the Erastus mentioned in Romans 16:23, if the latest archaeological findings are correct, see my podcast on the topic by clicking here) and of the Tiberius Inscription from Caesarea Maritima (242).

Third and finally, Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul fulfills its title as A Visual Guide, incorporating over 250 beautiful color pictures of the sites that St. Paul visited and their artifacts, which appear to be from deSilva’s own travels. To this end, not only does deSilva deserve praise but also Baker Academic for the layout of the book, the type of paper on which it was printed, and the high quality of its photographs: Bravo!  

In sum, I highly recommend Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul: A Visual Guide and you can purchase your copy directly from Baker Academic or from Amazon! 

Nijay K. Gupta, Erin M. Heim, and Scot McKnight, eds., The State of Pauline Studies: A Survey of Recent Research (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2024)

The purpose of this work is to provide readers with a “snapshot” of recent scholarship on St. Paul’s letters and some aspects of his theology. To accomplish this goal, the editors, Gupta, Heim, and McKnight, have divided this volume into two parts. The first consists of chapters 1–7 and explores various topics related to recent Pauline Studies and the second part, which encompasses chapters 8–17, examines current trends in scholarship on every letter of the Pauline corpus. 

In chapter 1, “Paul and the Messiah” (7–22), Joshua W. Jipp examines recent scholarship related to Jesus’s Royal Messiahship. Chapter 2, “Paul and Judaism” (23–41) by Kent L. Yinger, explores the state of the place of Judaism, Israel, and Torah and their connections to St. Paul’s congregations in the apostle’s thinking. In chapter 3, “Paul and Salvation” (42–60), Ben C. Blackwell lays out various approaches of salvation in St. Paul’s theology—the Reformational Perspective, the New Perspective, the Paul within Judaism Perspective, the Apocalyptic Perspective, and the Participationist Perspective—and “how these perspectives articulate forms of coherence in his theology” (42). 

Chapter 4, “Paul and the Spirit” (61–75) by Kris Song, examines key debates in Pauline studies as they relate to the Holy Spirit and then reviews recent studies in Pauline pneumatology. In chapter 5, “Paul and Gender” (76–102), Cynthia Long Westfall explores mostly evangelical Pauline studies “involved in the ongoing debate about the theology and practice of men and women in the home, the church, and society” (76). Chapter 6, “Paul and Empire” (103–19) by Peter Oakes, investigates recent scholarship on the place of empire in the apostle’s letters and theology. And in the last chapter of Part 1, chapter 7, “Feminist, Postcolonial, and Womanist Approaches to Paul” (120–35) by Angela N. Parker, lays out these current approaches to Paul and how they are “interested in evaluating uneven and complex power relations” in the ancient and modern world as it relates to racism, sexism, colonialism, and imperialism (120).

Chapters 8–17 examine recent interpretative trends in each letter of the Pauline corpus with Jennifer Strawbridge exploring Romans (“Romans,” 139–62), John K. Goodrich 1 Corinthians (“1 Corinthians,” 163–83), B. J. Oropeza 2 Corinthians (“2 Corinthians,” 184–202), Erin M. Heim Galatians (“Galatians,” 203–32), Timothy G. Gombis Ephesians (“Ephesians,” 233–48), Nijay K. Gupta Philippians (“Philippians,” 249–63), Scot McKnight Colossians (“Colossians,” 264–79), Sydney Tooth 1–2 Thessalonians (“1–2 Thessalonians,” 280–97), T. Christopher Hoklotubbe the Pastoral Epistles (“1–2 Timothy and Titus,” 298–316), Dennis R. Edwards reviewing the current state of scholarship on Philemon (“Philemon,” 317–30). 

This work is too large and diverse to discuss every contribution so I will limit myself to interacting with four observations that Gupta, Heim, and McKnight highlight about recent Pauline scholarship in the work’s introduction. First, the current state of scholarship on the apostle has moved away from its traditional roots in the Western Church to the point that the historical-critical method is “no longer . . . the default approach to studying Paul” (1) and the study of St. Paul has become a more global and diverse field (2). I am thrilled at the field’s recent diversification, a diversification that reminds me of the early Church, which witnessed the gathering together of peoples of all colors, nations, and languages in and outside the Roman Empire for God’s glory! I think that this variety of perspectives on the apostle will only increase if the Church continues her slow decay in the West and expansion in the Global South. 

Second, recent Pauline scholarship is trending away from the modern, and in my opinion false, categories of Pauline letters as authentic and pseudonymous (2). More and more scholars understand that our modern conception of an author was not operative in the first century AD and that most individuals in the Roman Empire, St. Paul included, employed the services of a scribe to compose most of their correspondences. This rightly calls for the need to reevaluate the supposed scholarly consensus that the so-called Disputed Letters—Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians—and the Pastoral Epistles—1–2 Timothy and Titus—are not Pauline and the premises on which the arguments supporting this so-called consensus are built, which is an enterprise that I am currently pursuing (when I have the time). 

Third, current Pauline scholarship realizes the complexity of St. Paul’s world. The editors note that based on our current knowledge “it is irresponsible to talk about Paul versus Judaism or Paul against empire” (3). I wholeheartedly agree. This is an area that my own research, the use of inscriptions and material culture to build contextual profiles of St. Paul’s letters and the theology within them, has underscored. Moreover, the more I study archaeological materials, inscriptions, and then read ancient literary sources in light of the former two datasets, the more I am convinced that St. Paul’s world was even more complex than we could ever hope to imagine. 

Finally, recent trends among scholars focusing on St. Paul has moved beyond the Reformation Protestant-Catholic debates and into more fruitful territories with the New Perspective on Paul, the Apocalyptic Paul, Paul within Judaism Perspective, modern Jewish interpretations of the apostle, and John Barclay’s “Gift” reading of St. Paul. These so-called schools have informed my own reading of the apostle to the point that I espouse an Apocalyptic “Gift” filled Paul with influences from the Old and New Perspectives and some nuances gleaned from the Paul within Judaism Perspective. However, I continue to see little to no evidence in St. Paul’s letters or in Acts of the Apostles supporting two of the major tenets of the Paul within Judaism Perspective: that the apostle conceived of two tracks of salvation, one for Jews, the Torah, and one for Gentiles, Jesus the Messiah, and that his letters are written exclusively to Gentiles. 

In sum, this work is an indispensable resource for any student of St. Paul who wants to familiarize himself or herself with the current state of Pauline scholarship on any letter in the corpus or on the seven areas of Pauline theology on which Part 1 of The State of Pauline Studies focuses. Therefore, I recommend purchasing your a copy! 

I am grateful to Baker Academic for providing me with a review copy of this book, which is no way influenced by review of it! 

Review of Crispin Fletcher-Louis, The Divine Heartset: Paul’s Philippians Christ Hymn, Metaphysical Affections, & Civic Virtues (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2023)

Divine Heartset is the largest book ever written on Phil 2:6–11, the so-called “Philippian Christ hymn,” just shy of half a million words. Because of that and Fletcher-Louis’s bold claims in it, this volume is too big to describe and discuss in detail, as is my habit in book reviews. Therefore, I will provide only a short summary of the work and interact with Fletcher-Louis’s main theses about the passage. 

Divine Heartset’s goal is to provide a “comprehensive interpretation” of Phil 2:6–11 (1), a goal that Fletcher-Louis attempts to accomplish by walking the reader through his intellectual journey of his interpretation of the passage (xix). In the first chapter, “Philippians 2:6–11 in Modern Scholarship: Agreements, Uncertainties, Questions and Possibilities” (1–59), he explores in detail the current state of scholarship on Phil 2:6–11 not only among English speaking scholars but also among those on continental Europe. The second chapter, “Christ the Ideal ‘Divine’ Ruler and Emperor?” (60–105), examines the argument, popular today, that the “hymn” draws on language from imperial divine honors, more commonly but erroneously known among New Testament scholars and clergy as “the imperial cult.” Fletcher-Louis concludes that Phil 2:6’s reference to Jesus having equality with God and his exaltation to the heavenly throne in Phil 2:9–11 do not reflect an adoption of divine honors for rulers.   

Chapters three–nine, “Popular Religion and the Hymn’s Primary Narrative: Divine and Human Transformation” (106–64), “Τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ “The Being (That Is) in a Manner Equal to God” (Phil 2:6c) (165–205), “The Divine Being That Has Become: Christ and Philosophy” (206–64), “Against the Behavior of Sexual Predators (Phil 2:6b: οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν) (265–316), “Divine Desire and Love after Christ (Phil 1:8–10, 23; 2:6–8; 3:12–14; and 4:1), including a long excursus on the interpretation of ἁρπαγμός (317–412), “The ‘Name above All Names’: Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς (Phil 2:9–11) (413–57), and “LORD Jesus Christ”: Divine Cult Name with ‘Biographical’ Epithets” (458–517), are the book’s load-bearing technical chapters in which Fletcher-Louis provides a comprehensive interpretation of Phil 2:6–11 focusing on its syntax and meaning and providing linguistic and historical evidence supporting his arguments. 

In these chapters, he sets forth three bold proposals. First, the language of equality with God (τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ) in Phil 2:6 is taken, not from the Bible or Hellenistic and Roman propaganda about kings and emperors, but from Greek and Roman philosophical language about the nature of the divine. To this end, Phil 2:6 speaks of the preincarnate Messiah’s equality with God in an absolute, ontological sense, demonstrating its true meaning by the Messiah becoming a fully human obedient slave who suffered death on the cross (Phil 2:7–8). 

Second, Fletcher-Louis translates the term ἁρπαγμός in Phil 2:6, which the NRSV renders, “as something to be exploited,” the NIV as “something to be grasped,” and the ESV as “a thing to be grasped,” as “erotic abduction,” “kidnap marriage,” or “bridenapping.” Thus, according to Fletcher-Louis, “Christ, before his self-transformation, reckons that the God-equal manner of being is not one defined by such an aggressive means to erotic satiation or conjugal union” (315). His justification for this translation is the lexical use of the term, ἁρπαγμός, in Greek texts. For Fletcher-Louis, it is the preincarnate Messiah’s rejection of bridenapping, which he contends was a popular pagan belief, that demonstrates his “servant-hearted disavowal of the usual mechanisms of power [of the pagan gods], in the gift of himself” (315). 

Third, the name that is above every name in Phil 2:9–11 is not “Lord” or “Jesus” as many scholars claim, but “Lord Jesus Messiah,” which identifies the human Jesus with the divine king of the cosmos, YHWH the Lord. 

Returning to the summary of Divine Heartset, in chapter ten, “Genre and Source: A Traditional, Para-Philippians, Hymn” (518–79), Fletcher-Louis explores the genre of Phil 2:6–11 and the issue of whether St. Paul is quoting some kind of liturgical text with which his audience is familiar. He concludes that Phil 2:6–11, along with Phil 3:20–21, is a “hymn” that dates to St. Paul’s Christian lifetime. He does not attempt to speculate on its origins, however.  

Chapters eleven–thirteen as well as nine, “Glory, Honor, and Praise: Celebrity Life in This Metaphysic” (580–751), “Incarnation and Empathy” (752–88), and “Persons: Divine and Human” (789–818), investigate the passage’s place and function in the letter to the Philippians and offers Fletcher-Louis’s own proposals about them as well as discussing the divine nature of the Messiah in Phil 2:6–11. In short, Fletcher-Louis argues that the “hymn” is didactic and provides believers in Philippi with a reminder of the true way of life grounded in the ontology of the empathetic incarnate, crucified, resurrected, and ascended Messiah Jesus. Moreover, St. Paul’s original audience would have understood the passage to reveal that the God of Israel exists in two divine persons, the Father and the Son. 

Chapter 14, “Conformity to Christ and Salvation” (819–55), serves as the capstone of Fletcher-Louis’s book contending that the “hymn’s” purpose is to explicate the divine identity of God as two persons, the Father and the Son, and it is this God to whom St. Paul and the Philippian Christians are being conformed. Hence, the letter’s purposes are to reveal the “complete formation” in the Philippians of an “identity,” a “spirituality,” and “virtuous mortal facilities” that are “conformed to the divine and human person who is (the incarnate, crucified, resurrected, and exalted) LORD Jesus Christ” (854; emphasis his). 

In the Postscript, “On the Origins of the Hymn,” (856–60), Fletcher-Louis argues that Phil 2:6–11 + 3:20–21 is not a pre-Pauline “hymn” but one that is most probably para-Pauline in that it was composed during St. Paul’s Christian lifetime. Fletcher-Louis sees its composition as arising from what he calls a “creative Christological development” from the engagement of Christians with Greco-Roman culture for the purpose of evangelism, what he refers to as a “missiological accommodation.” Thus, the “hymn” “tells an existing and settled story of Christ using language and concepts that its author was at home with and to which the [Christian] young movement found itself exposed, as it moved out from its birthplace in Palestine and Jerusalem . . . [and it exists because] some Greek-speaking Christ-follower(s) decided . . . to tell their Savior’s story in ways intelligible to family, friends, and neighbors” (858). 

Fletcher-Louis provides three appendices: one on translating the hymn “Translating the LORD Jesus Christ and God the Father Hymn” (861–62) (for his translation see the end of this review), one on the use of the concept of divine equality in ancient Greek texts, “An Inventory of Divine-Equality Texts, from Homer to the Third Century CE” (863–82), and one on statistics related to the second appendix, “Statistical Observations on the Six Syntactic Types of Divine-Equality Statement” (863–82). Finally, he provides a complete bibliography and indices, the latter of which is available in a downloadable PDF. 

This work is big and bold. Regardless of whether one agrees with Fletcher-Louis’s conclusions, it is clear that he has conducted a great deal of research and included it in this volume. For that alone, one should give thanks to him! 

Fletcher-Louis has convinced me that the name that God bestows upon the ascended Jesus is “LORD Jesus the Messiah” (Phil 2:9–11). Thanks for your hard work there and for pointing out that for ancient Greeks and Romans more names are better in that they demonstrate more honor!

I am sympathetic with his argument that the background of equality with God in Phil 2:6 is found in ancient Greek myths about the pagan gods. As readers can see, I agree with Fletcher-Louis that Phil 2:6’s framework cannot be divine honors for ancient Greek kings and Roman emperors.^[i] Therefore, this alternative is compelling and one that I will continue to think with and that scholars should explore. If Fletcher-Louis is correct about the concept of equality with God in Phil 2:6, then I see no way around the conclusion that Phil 2:6–11 presents the divinity of Jesus as ontological, not functional, as many scholars claim today. 

Fletcher-Louis makes a compelling case for the translation of ἁρπαγμός as “erotic abduction,” “kidnap marriage,” or “bridenapping.” To be honest, for some reason I find myself pushing back against this proposal. It may be my faith and my conservative Anglican theological perspective, or it may be my modern Western sensibilities. I don’t know. I will have to consider this point further. 

Finally, I too contend that Phil 2:6–11 is not Pauline, and I agree that it could easily be para-Pauline, or composed after the apostle was called to be a Christian. However, I am uncomfortable with the conclusion that the passage is a “hymn” because it does not look like any ancient Greek or Jewish hymn that we possess.^[ii]

In sum, this work is a necessary tool for anyone conducting research on Phil 2:6–11. My hope is that Fletcher-Louis will publish his findings in a shorter, abridged, and more accessible version so that non-scholars and clergy can read and interact with it!

Fletcher-Louis’s translation of Phil 2:5–11:

“Think this way among yourselves, which also you think in Christ Jesus, 

            who being in God’s form,

            considered not bridenapping

            the God-equal mode of being,

            but emptied himself,

            taking a slave’s form,

            in human likeness becoming

            and in human figure found,

            he humbled himself, 

            becoming obedient unto death

            –death, even, by a cross.

            Wherefore God also highly exalted him

            and gave him the name

            that is above every name, 

            that at the name of Jesus 

            every knee should bend

            in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

            and every tongue confess 

            ‘LORD Jesus Messiah!’

            for the glory of God, the Father” (Phil 2:5–11).

I am grateful to Cascade Books for this gratis copy of Divine Heartset, which in no way prejudiced my review of it.

---

^[i] D. Clint Burnett, Paul & Imperial Divine Honors: Christ, Caesar, and the Gospel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2024), 62–63.

^[ii] D. Clint Burnett, Christ’s Enthronement at God’s Right Hand and Its Greco-Roman Cultural Context, BZNW 242 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2021), 113–16.