Paul Among the Postliberals

Rating:
Summary: Fascinating Re-viewing of Pauline Thought
Review: Douglas Harink's "Paul Among the Postliberals: Pauline Theology Beyond Christendom and Modernity" is one of the growing number of books that are actually starting to do what theologians and biblical scholars have been squabling about for ages. That is, bringing the Bible into conversation with the culture of the day. Harink explores Pauline thought through five chapters, Justification, Apocalypse, Politics, Israel and Culture.

Harink's discussion of justification takes its que from contemporary Pauline scholars like Richard Hays, J. Louis Martyn and Michael Gorman. What follows is a sucinct treatment of the issue that is currently under major discussion in Pauline studies, that is whether the phrase 'pistis Christos' in Romans and Galatians means 'faith in Christ' or 'faithfulness of Christ.' Harink argues for the latter follwoing Hays et al. His discussion of this issue is not only well argued biblically, but also provides a good introduction to the debate itself.

In his discussion of Apacalypse, Harink shows that Paul and Stanley Hauerwas have more in common than has often been thought. The apocalyptice dimension of Paul's thought, which has long been neglected is now being re-discovered in Pauline Studies. Harink shows well the connection between this understanding of Paul and the work of Stanley Hauerwas.

In his chapter on Politics, Harink follows Yoder's extensive work on Paul in "The Politics of Jesus." Harink shows that the radical eschatological politics of nonviolence are consistent between Jesus and Paul, and the Paul's thought on this issue is profoundly derived from his being a disciple of Christ. Rejected is the notion that Paul was founding another religion that later came to be known as Christianity.

Harink then launches into a discussion of Israel. What follows is a critique of N.T. Wright's "supercessionism" and an attempt to close the "Jewish-Christian Schism" (a book by Yoder) through an affrimation of non-Messianic Judaisim in Paul's thought. This is certainly the weakest chapter in the book. Harink's engagement with Wright is, I think caricature and I also have questions about his use of Yoder. Most of all, though his reading of Paul is faulty. He does not seriously engage with many passages that have a bearing on this issue.

The finaly chapter attempts to bring Paul into conversation with current questions of Pluralism and culture. What follows is a good discussion of the church as culture in its own right, the issue of universality and a discussion of key Pauline phrases that capture different facets of his thought on "the world".

All in all this is a good book. It is not without its flaws, particuarly in chapter 4, but it is an excellent work in Pauline and contemporary theology. Most helpful is the overall thesis that the thought of Paul corresponds in many ways to that of the 'postliberal' research program, the implications of which are profound.

Rating:
Summary: Fascinating Re-viewing of Pauline Thought
Review: Douglas Harink's "Paul Among the Postliberals: Pauline Theology Beyond Christendom and Modernity" is one of the growing number of books that are actually starting to do what theologians and biblical scholars have been squabling about for ages. That is, bringing the Bible into conversation with the culture of the day. Harink explores Pauline thought through five chapters, Justification, Apocalypse, Politics, Israel and Culture.

Harink's discussion of justification takes its que from contemporary Pauline scholars like Richard Hays, J. Louis Martyn and Michael Gorman. What follows is a sucinct treatment of the issue that is currently under major discussion in Pauline studies, that is whether the phrase 'pistis Christos' in Romans and Galatians means 'faith in Christ' or 'faithfulness of Christ.' Harink argues for the latter follwoing Hays et al. His discussion of this issue is not only well argued biblically, but also provides a good introduction to the debate itself.

In his discussion of Apacalypse, Harink shows that Paul and Stanley Hauerwas have more in common than has often been thought. The apocalyptice dimension of Paul's thought, which has long been neglected is now being re-discovered in Pauline Studies. Harink shows well the connection between this understanding of Paul and the work of Stanley Hauerwas.

In his chapter on Politics, Harink follows Yoder's extensive work on Paul in "The Politics of Jesus." Harink shows that the radical eschatological politics of nonviolence are consistent between Jesus and Paul, and the Paul's thought on this issue is profoundly derived from his being a disciple of Christ. Rejected is the notion that Paul was founding another religion that later came to be known as Christianity.

Harink then launches into a discussion of Israel. What follows is a critique of N.T. Wright's "supercessionism" and an attempt to close the "Jewish-Christian Schism" (a book by Yoder) through an affrimation of non-Messianic Judaisim in Paul's thought. This is certainly the weakest chapter in the book. Harink's engagement with Wright is, I think caricature and I also have questions about his use of Yoder. Most of all, though his reading of Paul is faulty. He does not seriously engage with many passages that have a bearing on this issue.

The finaly chapter attempts to bring Paul into conversation with current questions of Pluralism and culture. What follows is a good discussion of the church as culture in its own right, the issue of universality and a discussion of key Pauline phrases that capture different facets of his thought on "the world".

All in all this is a good book. It is not without its flaws, particuarly in chapter 4, but it is an excellent work in Pauline and contemporary theology. Most helpful is the overall thesis that the thought of Paul corresponds in many ways to that of the 'postliberal' research program, the implications of which are profound.

Rating:
Summary: Paul the Postliberal or Paul through a Postliberal lens?
Review: It is hard to tell when reading this book. Paul sounds an awful lot like Barth, Hauerwas, and Yoder, or they look a lot like them. That said, it is a wonderful treatment of Pauline themes and postliberal theology. Each chapter alternates between the two poles. Harink treats justification as the work of God in Christ, as opposed to human work. The Apocalypse is a present reality in the cross and resurrection of Christ. Politics is about making the reign of God clear by communal living. God elects a group of people, Israel, onto which is grafted the church. This church is then a culture, which interacts with other cultures, calling them into the reign of God. If you are a postliberal thinker, chances are you will like this book. If you are not, you will have some significant reservations. All things considered, this is an excellent example of a Postliberal reading of Pauline themes.

Rating:
Summary: A thoughtful striving for insight that transcends millennia
Review: Paul Among The Postliberals: Pauline Theology Beyond Christendom And Modernity by Douglas Harink (Associate Professor of Theology at The King's University College, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada) seeks a dialogue between post-liberal theologians such as Yoder and Hauerwas and the testimony of the "original apocalyptic theologian", the apostle Paul himself. A thoughtful striving for insight that transcends millennia, and written with a close eye on the Scriptures and their impact on Christianity in the present and future, Paul Among The Postliberals is a welcome and recommended addition to Pauline Studies and New Testament Studies reading lists.

Rating:
Summary: The Apostle Paul from a Postliberal perspective
Review: There will be times when conservative evangelicals (like myself) need to expose themselves to literature that go beyond the usual comfortable theological zone. Douglas Harink's book is a book that qualifies for that. It will either make you re-think Paul's theology or make you go into a fit for turning upside-down the traditional evangelical understanding of Paul. Harink's book is basically a combination of his own thoughts on Pauline themes and an overview of how well-known postliberal theologians have understood Paul. The book contains five long chapters: 1) Justification; 2) Apocalypse; 3) Politics; 4) Israel; and 5) Culture. All of these chapters are stimulating to read (some more than others). Here is an evaluation of all five chapters:

Chapter One: Justification. Harink provides some provocative conclusions on regarding Paul's doctrine of justification. He overturns the traditional Protestant paradigm by calling into question things like the pessimistic anthropology of Lutheran and Reformed theology, the "faith IN Christ" interpretation (cf. Gal 2:16), the negative view of the law, and the highly forensic nature of justification (he believes that justification has more to do with "empowerment" than "acquittal" [p. 44]). He then goes over the doctrine as it is understood by Karl Barth, John Howard Yoder, and Stanley Hauerwas. This chapter was very interesting and may open the reader's eyes on how justification is understood by postliberal scholars.

Chapter Two: Apocalypse. This chapter was the most enjoyable and thought-provoking in the book. Harink discusses Paul's understanding of the "apocalypse" as presented in Galatians and Hauerwas' writings. Harink goes onto show that Paul's point in Galatians was not to contrast faith and works, but to affirm the "singularity of the gospel" over against all other loyalties (religious or political). According to Hauerwas, Paul's main concern was to create a new eschatological people which marks themselves off from the unbelieving world.

Chapter Three: Politics. This chapter deals with the political theology of Paul and Yoder. Harink tries to demonstrate - through Paul and Yoder - that the church is not only a religious body but also a political body that is supposed to act and live differently from the rest of the world. Harink's interpretation of Jesus' call for cross-bearing is very interesting. The cross-bearing did not deal with personal discipleship but for the community to mark themselves off from the opposing political authorities. Whether this reading is correct is debatable.

Chapter Four: Israel. This chapter deals with the highly controversial issue of physical Israel in the place of redemptive history. Harink compares the works of two scholars on this issue: N. T. Wright (a supersessionist) and Yoder (a non-supercessionist). Harink does a good job showing the errors of Wright's supersessionism and its disturbing consequences. For instance, Harink makes a good point that if Wright's supersessionism is true, then the God of Israel and the Church is a capricious and non-trustworthy God (p. 165).

Chapter Five: Culture. I found this chapter to be the least interesting and stimulating. I believe Harink here fails in trying to maintain the truthfulness of the gospel with cultural and religious toleration. The gospel, on the other hand, convicts people and tells them to turn to Christ alone for salvation. Paul would have no toleration for anything that waters-down the gospel for something that is more non-offensive (cf. Galatians 1:8-9).

Overall, the book is interesting to read. I would recommend other conservative evangelicals (especially those within the Lutheran or Reformed camps) to study this book with an open mind. One may not agree with many of Harink's conclusions (like me) but one should still read this book to get a good understanding of what postliberals believe about Paul and his concerns.




Rating:
Summary: A Nice Summary, but . . .
Review: This book is an excellent summary of several of the most important "postliberal" Pauline scholars and theologians. Harink is at his best when he focuses on Hauerwas and Yoder; he proves quite effectively that he understands each better than most critics (and critical readers). Unfortunately, when Harink turns to Wright, his examination falls apart and even turns into a vicous ad hominem attack at several points. Harink does not display a thorough understanding of Wright's work and, as one the previous reviewers on this page has noted, his summary is really a parody of Wright. Sadly, the weaknesses in the chapter on Wright betray further weaknesses in his scholastic aptitude, and his inability to comprehend the most important international "postliberal" Pauline scholar forces the reader to question whether he really has a grip on postliberalism (or Paul) at all.