Union with Christ in the New Testament

Written by Grant Macaskill Reviewed By Bobby Jamieson

How many works of NT scholarship combine discussions of contemporary Eastern Orthodox theology, church fathers such as Irenaeus and Origen, and competing interpretations of Luther and Calvin with perceptive exegesis ranging over most of the NT? Too few, though some are sprouting up as the divide between biblical studies and theology slowly thaws.

Grant Macaskill’s Union with Christ in the New Testament ranges over all this historical, theological, and exegetical territory, and it does so capably and convincingly. Macaskill, Senior Lecturer in New Testament Studies at the University of St. Andrews, argues that the NT offers “a remarkably cohesive portrayal of the union between human beings and God” that Christ effects (p. 1). In a concise summary that the entire volume unpacks, Macaskill argues that this union is covenantal, is realized by the indwelling Spirit, maintains “an essential distinction between God and his people,” is formed with a specific people who are characterized by faith and divinely revealed knowledge, is manifest in the new covenant community’s love for one another, and is formally ratified by the sacraments (pp. 1–2).

Those familiar with current NT scholarship will sense controversies clustering behind each of these statements. Macaskill is responding, though not exhaustively, to Douglas Campbell’s “apocalyptic” account of union with Christ in Paul and Michael Gorman’s description of the same in terms of “theosis.”

In the introduction, Macaskill highlights the “unavoidably theological nature of the object of study” and raises penetrating questions about how various theological accounts have been brought to bear on the relevant NT material (pp. 4–5). Accordingly, after a survey of NT scholarship on participation and union with Christ (ch. 1), Macaskill devotes a chapter to participation and union with Christ in the Patristic tradition and modern Orthodox theology (ch. 2), and then participation in Lutheran and Reformed theology (ch. 3). In the latter, Macaskill briefly critiques the Finnish School’s account of participation in Luther, surveys key aspects of Calvin’s theology, critiques accounts of Reformed theology which posit a sharp divide between Calvin and later Calvinism, and examines participatory aspects of Barth’s theology.

In chapter four, Macaskill explores several backgrounds to union with Christ: corporate personality and identity formation in the OT, the OT covenants, OT and early Jewish mystical and apocalyptic traditions, the participatory implications of messianism, and the Isaianic Servant’s messianic matrix. Chapter five examines the “Adamic backgrounds” of union with Christ, critiquing the notion that traditions of an original “Adamic glory” were widespread in early Judaism.

In the introduction Macaskill quips, “There is a vast amount of literature that reads Paul in the light of Qumran; there is rather less that reads Paul in the light of Peter” (p. 2). In response, the second half of this volume pursues a wide-ranging synthesis of the NT’s teaching on union with Christ. Chapter six examines the image of the church as the temple and the body of the Messiah, beginning with Ephesians and tracing these themes “back” through 1 and 2 Corinthians, 1 Peter, and the Synoptic Gospels and Acts. Macaskill argues that Ps 118:22, which frequently appears in the NT, provides a key to the NT’s conception of union with Christ: the church is a temple in which the Messiah himself is the cornerstone (p. 169). It is not so different, then, for Paul to say that the church is the body of which Christ is the head; nor is it strange for him to slip seamlessly between these two conceptions, as he does in Eph 2:20–22.

Chapter seven explores other images of the temple in the NT, surveying John, Hebrews, and Revelation. Chapter eight discusses the sacraments and union with Christ, highlighting their covenantal character, specifically “the ways in which covenant conceptuality allows participants to identify themselves with one another and with a representative, whose story becomes theirs” (p. 192). Chapter nine explores other participatory elements in Paul, focusing on, among other things, the relationship between being “in Christ” and being indwelt by the Spirit.

Chapter ten returns to the Johannine literature, focusing in part on the programmatic predicated “I am” sayings. Chapter eleven explores grammars and narratives of participation in the rest of the NT, including the key text of 2 Pet 1:4. Chapter twelve closes the book with conclusions on a range of topics, among which are covenant, solidarity and exchange, sacrament and presence, the NT’s incipient Christology and Trinitarianism, and the use of “theosis” to describe NT teaching.

On that last point, Macaskill concludes that “theosis” is not a “valid and helpful term to employ in scholarship on participation in the New Testament” because it is a complex synthesis of various strands of soteriology and philosophy, and can be deployed along radically divergent theological trajectories (p. 306). Another of this work’s important conclusions is that the NT’s “covenantal framework must serve as the starting point for reflection on participation or union with Christ.” This has important implications for soteriology: “For all the contemporary unease about legal concepts of ‘righteousness’ and particularly that of the imputation of righteousness, the fact is that the concept is linked to covenant fidelity,” and hence is woven into the fabric of the NT (p. 298).

My critiques are few and minor. First, the total absence of the Pastoral Epistles is disappointing. If James’s sole reference to the new birth is enough to merit attention (p. 284), then 2 Timothy’s repeated participatory depictions of suffering should too (2 Tim 1:8; 2:3, 11ff.), popular qualms about authorship notwithstanding. Also, minor errors occasionally scuff the otherwise gleaming quality of the work; for instance, verse reference (Heb 9:21 instead of 9:23; p. 182), parsing (labeling an aorist participle a perfect; p. 185), and a missing “of” (p. 191). Finally, the lack of engagement with Ben Blackwell’s 2011 WUNT monograph Christosis: Pauline Soteriology in Light of Deification in Irenaeus and Cyril of Alexandria was surprising given its thematic affinity.

These slight flaws hardly detract from the book’s value. The volume’s ambitious scope is more than matched by its capable exegetical and theological analysis. Macaskill ranges broadly without losing sight of his main argument. He compresses complex debates into concise summaries without falling into caricature. And, most important, he paints a portrait of the NT’s teaching on union with Christ that is both cogent and compelling.

Some readers may wonder how Macaskill’s volume compares to Constantine Campbell’s recent work Paul and Union with Christ, with which Macaskill interacts occasionally and favorably. (Editor’s note: See Mark A. Seifrid’s review of Campbell’s book in Themelios 38:2 [2013], available at http://thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/review/paul_and_union_with_christ_an_exegetical_and_theological_study). The narrower scope of Campbell’s volume accommodates detailed analysis of the relevant prepositional phrases in Paul, whereas the broader scope of Macaskill’s gives rise to sustained efforts at synthesis. Campbell mines lexical depths; Macaskill maps the theological whole. Their conclusions are generally complementary, though Macaskill stresses the “covenantal shape of Paul’s account of participation” (p. 220) more than Campbell, who discusses covenant only in connection with justification. I would also suggest that Macaskill’s rich definition and discussion of union with Christ evidence somewhat greater theological insight than the results of Campbell’s more strictly inductive approach.

I hope Macaskill’s conclusions persuade many. Yet Macaskill reaches the conclusions he does, in part, because he is not afraid to treat the NT as a theological document, and consequently to attend to its theological heirs, from Cyril to Calvin. So to say that I recommend the book is to put it too weakly. Instead, I recommend that students and scholars of the NT not only read it, but also take its methods to heart, and go and do likewise.


Bobby Jamieson

Bobby Jamieson
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
Louisville, Kentucky, USA

Other Articles in this Issue

Too often people think of the Reformation in terms of an abstract theological debate...

Abstract: Evangelical Faith and the Challenge of Historical Criticism, edited by Christopher Hays and Christopher Ansberry, argues that evangelical scholars have failed to embrace historical criticism to the extent that they could and should...

Thomas Prince, editor of The Christian History—the first religious periodical in American history—could hardly have invented the Great Awakening, as Frank Lambert argues...

Theology is first and foremost about who God is and then about what he has done...

I would like to consider several elements in reviewing Bray’s work...