The theme for the Tyndale Fellowship New Testament Study Group in 2026 is Paul within Judaism, and we are meeting from Wednesday 1st to Friday 3rd July 2026 at the excellent conference facility of High Leigh Conference Centre, Hoddesdon, UK. It is easily accessible by train from London in about 20 minutes (from Tottenham Hale).
We are focussing on the ‘Paul within Judaism’ movement, and we will use our time to wrestle with this movement together. To help us do so, Dr Matt Novenson of Princeton Theological Seminary (a major figure in the movement) will be offering the Tyndale lecture, and we also have invited papers from Prof John Barclay, Emeritus Professor at Durham University, and Dr Ben Blackwell, Principal of Westminster Theological Centre by way of debate and response. One of the sessions will again be given over to a book review panel, which this year will engage Dr Neil Martin’s Galatians Reconsidered (Apollos/IVP).
We invite proposals of up to 200 words for papers on topics relating to the theme, which could include (but are not limited to) engagement with either the issues or the argument of the ‘Paul within Judaism’ movement, questions of biblical theology, and the exegesis and interpretation of key texts in Paul that have a bearing on the issue. We also welcome proposals on the wider question of the New Testament and Judaism, including the gospels and other (non-Pauline) letters.
We are anticipating that, depending on the range of subjects covered, the papers might well form the core of a publication following the conference. We also welcome proposals for papers on any NT topic for an open session.
Paper titles and proposals should be sent to Paul Wilson ([email protected]), by Friday 5th December 2025.
We plan to publish the full programme mid-January 2026.
Topics for future years are planned as follows:
2027: Revelation and apocalyptic in the New Testament
Buy me a Coffee
Looking at the line-up, it is guaranteed to be a major conference, with the advertised speakers sure to excel both in nuance (on an already highly nuanced topic!) and in advancing the discussion. I am sure it will attract international and broad national interest. The fact that it is set amid an array of other simultaneous biblical/theological conferences and attendees just enriches the prospect.
I certainly hope so!
It is fascinating that there will be a collective review of Dr Martin’s book, Galatians Reconsidered. Will the review be published with panel members contributions set out, a bit like setting out a Supreme Court written judgement.
No it will be a panel discussion.
Ian, this sounds like a wonderful event. Please advise, for those who are not able to participate in person, would this be available on Zoom. ie, those of us living across the pond ? Please also advise, would there also be a cost to attend ?
Karen in Montreal
With many thanks for all that you do !
I have neither the time, nor sufficient knowledge of current debate, to prepare a ‘proposal’ for a paper. I do, however, feel that the overall topic is somewhat ‘question-begging’. A superficial glance at “Paul within Judaism”, “Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 507”, if anything, reinforced my concern/question.
Was there (ever?) a single coherent Judaism in (or against/within/alongside/’in debate with’) which we can place Paul [never mind other Jews/‘followers of the Way’ like Peter, James, Apollos…]?
Were the Masada suicides all Zealots, and if so celibate (like ‘Zelibat’, meaning ‘unmarried’ rather than ‘chaste’?) or married? What happened to all those who did not meet their end at Masada, surely they did not instantly join the ‘followers of soft things’? Might some of them have been drawn to ‘The Way’, where, after all, they already had their own apostle? [And might the celibate Zealots have been part of the later development of pillar-top-sitting ascetics who were prone to identifying any attractive female as the Devil himself?]
Can Flavius Josephus, who can change a date between different books, give interesting instructions on handling mandrakes, paint his own dubious activities in a self-excusing light, and clearly want to rehabilitate his own Pharisaic Judaism in Roman understanding (N.B. after the fall of Jerusalem), be trusted when he says there were only 4 parties in Judaism (one of which he does not even name). Perhaps he would not have ended up enjoying Roman patronage if he had not oversimplified (and caricatured) the religion he was excusing, but also escaping?
What happened to all the Greek(only)-speaking Jews, not just from Alexandria, who were significant enough even in Jerusalem itself to shatter the communal cohesion of the early church, gain their own ‘Greek’ leadership, cause fury, gnashing of teeth, and lynching by the Jerusalem Jews (plus their Cilician and Alexandrian allies). A disturbance witnessed by Saul, who followed up with his own, authorised, pogrom in Damascus. …
Later, after the destruction of the Temple, they (Greek-speaking Jews) would hardly have expected a warm welcome in Jamnia, where the Neo-Pharisee Masoretes were anathematising Christians, disavowing the LXX, and scrupulously copying (and therefore preserving) only those Hebrew texts, and oral traditions, that were closest to their theological/political position. Perhaps it was precisely the Greek-speaking Jews to whom the letter to the Hebrews was addressed?
I could add more, but to cut to the ‘question’: How can anyone prepare a paper on “Paul in Judaism” unless there is at least some clarity on which (of many changing possibilities) Judaism is meant? It would be great to read something comprehensive and comprehensible on ‘Judaism(s)’.
That’s a good question—and one I suspect we will be exploring!