Was Paul Within Judaism, Within Israel or Within Israel’s Messiah?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See notes in file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Fine

Author Response

Thank you for the comments and suggestions. Since the rating of the various categories in the review were generally positive, I was not always sure if certain comments on the manuscript was intended for improvement. I nevertheless appreciated them and changed the manuscript in the following ways:

• Additional clarifying statements regarding the relevance and significance have been added to the “Jew”-“Judaean” discussion, the “Judaeans”-“Israel” discussion, as well as the discussion on the “works of the law”. In respect of the “Jew”-“Judaean” section, the suggestion about “sufficient grounds to make a single use of the Ἰουδαι-vocabulary across different epochs problematic” has been incorporated.
• Further engagement with PwJ scholars has been incorporated within the discussions of the Pauline texts: Gal 2:15-21 (Novenson 2022), Phil 3:3-9 (Frederiksen 2022), Gal 3:28 (Frederiksen 2022), Romans 14 (Nanos 2009, in fn 13), Gal 5:3 (Nanos 2009) and Romans 2:17-29 (Thiessen 2016, in fn 18).
• A statement regarding Christ as the single seed of the promise (Gal 3:16) has been added.

I have highlighted all changes in yellow on the attached file.

I hope these changes are in order.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article discusses Paul’s identity, taking as the point of departure the Paul within Judaism (PwJ) perspective while problematizing the terms “Judaism,” “Judean” and “Israel.” It argues that, in contrast to the claims by PwJ scholars, Paul did leave his Jewish identity behind in favor of an identity focused on Jesus as the Messiah, an identity that may be said to be “within Israel” but not “within Judaism.” The author dismisses the PwJ perspective and largely restates the traditional scholarly view on Paul while taking recent scholarly debates about the meaning of “Judaism,” “Jew” and “Judean” into account. 

 

A problem with the essay is that the line of argument is not always clear, and the implications and significance that the scholarly debates cited have for the argument that the author wants to make are not readily apparent. For instance, the author concludes that the term ioudaioi should be translated as “Judaean” rather than “Jew” (53–193), but the relevance of this for the claim that Paul did not remain within Judaism is not made clear. There is a similar problem with the discussion of the difference between the designation “Judeans” and “Israel” (194–253), and likewise, it is not apparent how the discussion on the “works of the law” (308–326) contributes to the author’s argument.

 

Another problem is that the author does not engage with the arguments of the PwJ scholars beyond a brief summary of the main points. It is, of course, perfectly fine to argue for a traditional understanding of Paul, but in order for the dismissal of the PwJ perspective to be persuasive, a more detailed engagement with the specific arguments made by PwJ scholars would be required. For instance, the author repeats the traditional understanding of passages such as Gal 3:28, 1 Cor 7:17–24, Phil 3:3–9 and Mark 7:15–23 without engaging with the arguments that PwJ scholars (and other recent scholarship) have put forward. Two important recent works by PwJ scholars are missing entirely, namely Matthew Thiessen’s Paul and the Gentile Problem (2016) (which has an interesting discussion on 1 Cor 7:17–24) and Matthew Novenson’s Paul, Then and Now (2022).

 

The author argues that Paul can possibly be understood to be “within Israel” but not “within Judaism.” The same could be said of Justin Martyr, so a clarification as to how Paul differs in this regard (or not) to gentile Christian authors would be good.

 

A final minor point is the question of what the author means by “Christian fringe writings” (219).

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English needs minor corrections.

Author Response

Thank you, your critical comments and suggestions are much appreciated.

To address the concerns mentioned, the following changes have been made to the proposed article:

• The works of Thiessen 2016 and Novenson 2022 have been incorporated.
• Clarifying statements about its relevance and significance have been added to the “Jew”-“Judaean” discussion, the “Judaeans”-“Israel” discussion, as well as the discussion on the “works of the law”.
• Further engagement with PwJ scholars has been incorporated within the discussions of the Pauline texts: Gal 2:15-21 (Novenson 2022), Phil 3:3-9 (Frederiksen 2022), Gal 3:28 (Frederiksen 2022), Romans 14 (Nanos 2009, in fn 13), Gal 5:3 (Nanos 2009) and Romans 2:17-29 (Thiessen 2016, in fn 18). Since I have a separate publication on 1 Cor 7:17-24 (there is a reference in the proposed article), I did not focus on that here.
• A clarifying statement regarding Justin Martyr’s position has been added.
• “Christian fringe writings” has been changed to Christian writings.

I have indicated changes by yellow highlighting in the attached file.

I hope you find these changes in order.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Some things are clearer now thanks to the revisions, but it is still unclear what the author means with the expression "within Israel." And contrary to what the author claims, understanding Paul "within Judaism" does not imply that Judaism is seen as "a stable ethno-religious category that did not change over time or that the definition of contemporary Judaism can be superimposed onto Paul" (195-196). Reading Paul "within Judaism" means placing him within first-century Judaism. Naturally, he cannot be understood to be within Judaism of all time periods, as Judaism evolves and its boundaries change over time.

Note 18 revelas that the author has not understood the argument, originally made by Runar Thorsteinsson (not Thiessen), that the interlocutor in Rom 2:17 is a gentile.

The revisions need to be checked again. There are some issues with the English language and instances where sentences are not complete. I have marked a few of them. Moreover, Paula Fredriksen’s name is misspelled three times in three different ways.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The revisions need to be checked again. There are some issues with the English language and instances where sentences are not complete. Paula Fredriksen’s name is misspelled three times in three different ways. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thanks for your further comments and suggestions. The following additional changes have been made:

• The expression "within Israel" has been clarified.
• The statement regarding whether the PwJ position sees Judaism as a stable ethno-religious category etc. has been modified.
• Note 18 about the interlocutor in Rom 2 has been reformulated.
• The spelling of Fredriksen has been corrected.
• The manuscript has been proof-read for other errors and changed when necessary.

I hope these changes are in order.