(Part 1)
JBTM_13-2_Fall_2016
JBTM_13-2_Fall_2016
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
JBTM Book Reviews<br />
134<br />
Thornhill describes his purpose and methodology clearly in chapter 1. He positions himself<br />
within the “remnant-oriented and conditional” group. 1 Thornhill’s book is commendable in<br />
its vast research of the primary literature of Second Temple Judaism. He has been critiqued<br />
for omitting some key OT texts; such were outside the scope and purpose of his study. 2<br />
The author’s research affords the reader access to the topic of election in this vast body of<br />
intertestamental literature and shows how it intersects with primary Pauline texts.<br />
In chapter 2 Thornhill shows how Judaism understood election of the individual in<br />
relation to corporate responsibility. Though he admits the distinctions of individual and<br />
collective are artificial, this groundwork is necessary for grasping how Judaism viewed<br />
collective responsibility of each individual to the larger group. The author sees these<br />
categories reflected in Paul’s thought patterns (52). The revelatory work of God in Christ is<br />
an added dimension in Paul’s thought (57).<br />
Thornhill in chapter 3 moves from individual election to corporate perspectives on how<br />
Judaism defined the “people of God.” Judaism used corporate metaphors and motifs like the<br />
vine/plant motif, houses, remnants, and the like, to describe the collective nature of Israel’s<br />
election (70). These corporate metaphors like “first fruits,” plants, vineyard, and foundation<br />
imagery appear in Paul’s discussions on the people of God. A collective emphasis demands<br />
individual “right behavior” (94) and separation from the world. Thus, there is “continuity<br />
between Israel as God’s chosen people and those who are his people through the Messiahfrom-Israel”<br />
(94, emphasis his). Paul uses similar terms like “elect,” “called,” “beloved,” and<br />
“election,” which all refer to God’s people as they are defined by God’s Messiah (98).<br />
In chapter 4 Thornhill examines the criteria in Judaism for who was “in” and who was<br />
“out.” All writers in Judaism viewed the Torah as central (146), but the implicit and/or<br />
explicit criteria varied among writers. Although Judaism displayed a wide variance in criteria<br />
for determining who was “in” or “out,” Thornhill argues for strong agreement among them<br />
that “being Jewish did not mean one belonged among the people of God” (135). Contra<br />
Sanders, a large portion of ethnic Jews were thought to be “out.” Thornhill views Paul’s<br />
argument in Galatians on who was “in” and who was “out” as the apostle’s way of “joining in<br />
the same theological soiree as he lays out his own understanding of what defines the people<br />
of God” (135). Though Paul obviously diverges significantly from his contemporaries, he was<br />
¹The other two “camps” are: G. F. Moore’s “national and unconditional view” in Judaism in the<br />
First Centuries of the Christian Era (1927–1930; reprinted, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997). E. P.<br />
Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1985) also holds this view; and Joseph<br />
Bonsirven’s “national and cooperative” view in Palestinian Judaism in the Time of Jesus Christ (New<br />
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1984). Thornhill believes Sanders pushed the pendulum too far. The<br />
“camp” designations are Thornhill’s.<br />
²Thornhill entertains key OT texts as they appear in the NT text and when appropriate for the<br />
study. Full treatment of OT theology on election and/or the treatment of how the NT uses the OT are<br />
beyond Thornhill’s purposes here.