What do you think?
Rate this book
To the Jew First: The Case for Jewish Evangelism in Scripture and History
Notable scholars contribute to this comprehensive look at the biblical mandate that Christians take the gospel "to the Jew first."
352 pages, Kindle Edition
First published February 1, 2008
12 people are currently reading
59 people want to read
About the author
Darrell L. Bock
112 books71 followersDarrell L. Bock is a New Testament scholar and research professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas, Texas, United States. Bock received his PhD from Scotland's University of Aberdeen.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
Read
August 23, 2012This book is a collection of essays gathered from two conferences on Jewish evangelism. Though published under Kregel's academic imprint, the essays are accessible rather than technical. I picked up the volume in connection with studies on the relation between the church and Israel. Coming with that aspect of study in mind I found the following essays the most helpful: Walter Kaiser's essay on Romans 9-11, Craig Blaising's essay on "The Future of Israel as a Theological Question" (also available in JETS 44.2, pp. 435-50), and Richard Pratt's article on a Reformed perspective of the relation between Israel and the church. Michael Rydelnik's essay on messianic prophecy was also informative.
Kaiser provided a helpful overview of Romans 9-11. I especially found his discussion of the olive tree imagery stimulating.
Blaising begins his discussion with a survey of various types of supersessionism. He then surveys Romans 9-11 briefly as the key problem passage for the supersessionist. He also examines recent scholarship that argues Jesus's mission involved the restoration of Israel. This point can support Blaising's non-supersessionist approach, but he should have noted that some of the scholars who make this point are supersessionists.
Blaising then turns to "Two-Covenant Theology." Though anti-supersessionist, Blaising rejects two-covenant theology as incompatible with the New Testament's teaching that salvation involves faith in Jesus, whom God has made both Lord and Christ. Blaising calls on evangelical scholars to develop an approach to Israel that says "yes" to the theological significance of its future while rejecting the errors of two-covenant theology.
He concludes by examining the significance of his approach to Israel's future for theology proper, anthropology, Christology, ecclesiology, and eschatology.
Theology proper: Blaising argues that discussions of God and his attributes should not be abstract but should be rooted in God's historical dealings with Israel. He argues that Yahweh's revelation of himself to Moses on Sinai should be the starting point for theology proper.
Anthropology: Blaising believes that his view gives impetus for seeing the significance of ethnic diversity in God's plan. Furthermore, the bringing in of the Gentiles in the NT should be viewed not as universalizing OT particulars but as the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant's promise the Israel will be a blessing to the nations.
Christology: Blaising believes that Jesus's Jewishness, his Davidic descent—the fact that he is the David Messiah—should play a larger role in our Christology. Specifically, the Davidic covenant background to the "Son of God" title needs further acknowledgement.
Ecclesiology: Blaising emphases here that the church is not a Gentile entity. It is a Jewish and Gentile entity. Therefore, the church should not insist that Jewish Christians give up their Jewishness. Blaising also argues that rabbinic Torah observance is not the only kind, and that there is a legitimate way for Christian Jews to observe the Torah. Blaising, however, needs to reckon with the movement from the Mosaic to the New Covenant and its implications. This movement happened for Jews and not for Gentiles only.
Eschatology: Blaising argues that a driving force behind supersessionism is a "spiritual-vision" eschatology that emphasizes the beatific vision. In this eschatology there is little place for physicality and as a nation Israel must be reduced to a symbol. Blaising argues to the contrary for a physical new earth, which provides a place for peoples and nations in the eschaton.
Pratt argued that adherents to Reformed theology are wrongly characterized as supersessionist or replacement theologians. While Reformed theologians object to the older dispensational division of the people of God into an earthly people and a heavenly people, Pratt says they do not claim the church has replaced Israel. Rather, the church and Israel are a unity. Israel is the Old Testament church. Pratt went on to affirm that the land promises would be fulfilled for ethnic Israel on the new earth. He also affirmed the end-time conversion of ethnic Israel.
Pratt's position is an intriguing one, but a few issues should be raised. First, there seems to be greater diversity among Reformed theologians than Pratt concedes. For instance, it seems fair to characterize O. Palmer Robertson as a replacement theologian. Robertson also rejects any fulfillment of the land promises for ethnic Israel and even the future conversion of ethnic Israel. At present, it seems that Robertson is in the minority position on the last point, but it seems that Pratt is probably in the minority position on seeing the land promises fulfilled for Israel in the future. Pratt would have been better off arguing that his position is consistent with Reformed theology than that it the Reformed position. More substantively, for Pratt's position to work he must affirm that the church like Israel is a mixed group in terms of regeneration. This seems to ignore the changes brought about by the New Covenant. The church as a New Covenant institution should be comprised of a regenerated membership insofar as fallible humans are able to determine this.
Rydelink's essay contained a fascinating survey of the reception history of messianic prophecy from the apostles through to the present.
Kaiser provided a helpful overview of Romans 9-11. I especially found his discussion of the olive tree imagery stimulating.
Blaising begins his discussion with a survey of various types of supersessionism. He then surveys Romans 9-11 briefly as the key problem passage for the supersessionist. He also examines recent scholarship that argues Jesus's mission involved the restoration of Israel. This point can support Blaising's non-supersessionist approach, but he should have noted that some of the scholars who make this point are supersessionists.
Blaising then turns to "Two-Covenant Theology." Though anti-supersessionist, Blaising rejects two-covenant theology as incompatible with the New Testament's teaching that salvation involves faith in Jesus, whom God has made both Lord and Christ. Blaising calls on evangelical scholars to develop an approach to Israel that says "yes" to the theological significance of its future while rejecting the errors of two-covenant theology.
He concludes by examining the significance of his approach to Israel's future for theology proper, anthropology, Christology, ecclesiology, and eschatology.
Theology proper: Blaising argues that discussions of God and his attributes should not be abstract but should be rooted in God's historical dealings with Israel. He argues that Yahweh's revelation of himself to Moses on Sinai should be the starting point for theology proper.
Anthropology: Blaising believes that his view gives impetus for seeing the significance of ethnic diversity in God's plan. Furthermore, the bringing in of the Gentiles in the NT should be viewed not as universalizing OT particulars but as the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant's promise the Israel will be a blessing to the nations.
Christology: Blaising believes that Jesus's Jewishness, his Davidic descent—the fact that he is the David Messiah—should play a larger role in our Christology. Specifically, the Davidic covenant background to the "Son of God" title needs further acknowledgement.
Ecclesiology: Blaising emphases here that the church is not a Gentile entity. It is a Jewish and Gentile entity. Therefore, the church should not insist that Jewish Christians give up their Jewishness. Blaising also argues that rabbinic Torah observance is not the only kind, and that there is a legitimate way for Christian Jews to observe the Torah. Blaising, however, needs to reckon with the movement from the Mosaic to the New Covenant and its implications. This movement happened for Jews and not for Gentiles only.
Eschatology: Blaising argues that a driving force behind supersessionism is a "spiritual-vision" eschatology that emphasizes the beatific vision. In this eschatology there is little place for physicality and as a nation Israel must be reduced to a symbol. Blaising argues to the contrary for a physical new earth, which provides a place for peoples and nations in the eschaton.
Pratt argued that adherents to Reformed theology are wrongly characterized as supersessionist or replacement theologians. While Reformed theologians object to the older dispensational division of the people of God into an earthly people and a heavenly people, Pratt says they do not claim the church has replaced Israel. Rather, the church and Israel are a unity. Israel is the Old Testament church. Pratt went on to affirm that the land promises would be fulfilled for ethnic Israel on the new earth. He also affirmed the end-time conversion of ethnic Israel.
Pratt's position is an intriguing one, but a few issues should be raised. First, there seems to be greater diversity among Reformed theologians than Pratt concedes. For instance, it seems fair to characterize O. Palmer Robertson as a replacement theologian. Robertson also rejects any fulfillment of the land promises for ethnic Israel and even the future conversion of ethnic Israel. At present, it seems that Robertson is in the minority position on the last point, but it seems that Pratt is probably in the minority position on seeing the land promises fulfilled for Israel in the future. Pratt would have been better off arguing that his position is consistent with Reformed theology than that it the Reformed position. More substantively, for Pratt's position to work he must affirm that the church like Israel is a mixed group in terms of regeneration. This seems to ignore the changes brought about by the New Covenant. The church as a New Covenant institution should be comprised of a regenerated membership insofar as fallible humans are able to determine this.
Rydelink's essay contained a fascinating survey of the reception history of messianic prophecy from the apostles through to the present.
November 18, 2020
Helpful treatments by a selection of evangelical authors.
October 6, 2013
So you think eschatology doesn't matter? Well, you're wrong. Most of my readers are not surprised that Dispensationalism yields weird fruit in the area of Jewish evangelism. However, even our (Presbyterian's) friends the Reformed Baptists go a little of the deep end in this volume. I cannot pretend this is a fair and balanced review -- given how deeply I feel about this topic. I was shocked to see how much I disagree with authors whom I otherwise trust and admire, men like Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Darrell L. Bock, and Mark Seifrid. While this entire book is chalked full of slams on Two Covenant theology (the idea that there are two ways of salvation, one for Jews one for Gentiles), the author's nonetheless affirm two different "lives of the Church" for Jewish and Gentile-background Christians. I don't just mean that they think there are separate ways to handle a worship service. I mean, they think Jews should keep the Torah and Gentiles don't need to. This is a really confused mess.
The three chapters I would advice you to read from this book are #12 -- the missiology of Jewish evangelism, #11 "Lessons from Jewish Evangelism from the Past Century", and -- far and away the best and brightest -- #9 Richard L. Pratt Jr.'s Reformed Perspective. "The Church" did not supersede or replace Israel and it does not exist alongside Israel as a wholly owned subsidiary of Adonai Enterprises. The Church is the *extension* or expansion of Israel. There are eschatological realities that have not happened yet in the history of God's dealing with the Jewish people, as described in Romans 9-11. The hall of heroes in Hebrews 11 were saved the same way we are, by faith in the only God who is, the same One who has revealed Himself in the His son Jesus Christ.
As an aside, if Jer. 31 (and hence Gal 3, 2 Cor 3, and Hebrews) are talking about the Mosaic covenant, then David (a member of that covenant) went to Hell and is not talking about our common faith in the Psalms. Clearly that is not the case. We are free to speak anachronistically or retrospectively, and say that Abraham was a Christian, and/or the Church today is the Israel of God.
Jewish missions is VERY hard and requires a lot of thought and energy. Jews have a beautiful culture and heritage and we should fight to preserve, better, and fulfill it. Inasmuch as it has wrong theology in it, we should attempt to correct them in love and respect. Like Muslims, converts will face an extremely difficult battle of identity, and we should not judge someone who temporarily needs a halfway-house like an Insider Movement. Jesus's Church should not be a homogenizing melting pot where cultures are obliterated. That isn't what we see in the book of Revelation. It should not be anymore difficult to be Jewish and Christian than it is to be Arab and Christian!
Pratt's chapter will help you start thinking about this from the right beginning. The other two chapters are good for history and practical lessons. Skip the rest of the book.
The three chapters I would advice you to read from this book are #12 -- the missiology of Jewish evangelism, #11 "Lessons from Jewish Evangelism from the Past Century", and -- far and away the best and brightest -- #9 Richard L. Pratt Jr.'s Reformed Perspective. "The Church" did not supersede or replace Israel and it does not exist alongside Israel as a wholly owned subsidiary of Adonai Enterprises. The Church is the *extension* or expansion of Israel. There are eschatological realities that have not happened yet in the history of God's dealing with the Jewish people, as described in Romans 9-11. The hall of heroes in Hebrews 11 were saved the same way we are, by faith in the only God who is, the same One who has revealed Himself in the His son Jesus Christ.
As an aside, if Jer. 31 (and hence Gal 3, 2 Cor 3, and Hebrews) are talking about the Mosaic covenant, then David (a member of that covenant) went to Hell and is not talking about our common faith in the Psalms. Clearly that is not the case. We are free to speak anachronistically or retrospectively, and say that Abraham was a Christian, and/or the Church today is the Israel of God.
Jewish missions is VERY hard and requires a lot of thought and energy. Jews have a beautiful culture and heritage and we should fight to preserve, better, and fulfill it. Inasmuch as it has wrong theology in it, we should attempt to correct them in love and respect. Like Muslims, converts will face an extremely difficult battle of identity, and we should not judge someone who temporarily needs a halfway-house like an Insider Movement. Jesus's Church should not be a homogenizing melting pot where cultures are obliterated. That isn't what we see in the book of Revelation. It should not be anymore difficult to be Jewish and Christian than it is to be Arab and Christian!
Pratt's chapter will help you start thinking about this from the right beginning. The other two chapters are good for history and practical lessons. Skip the rest of the book.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews